Yes, how bizarre for the president to react so to humorous things.

Now, watch this drive!

obama shouldn't chuckle, really, as he has to realize that the level of journalism is about the same as the level of financial services in this country, and contains a very similar intelligence, skill, and concern about the world, others, or anything.

When Politico started promoting the piece at 7:04 p.m., I hadn't seen the interview.

Who had seen the interview at 7:04? The NCAA basketball games didn't end until about 7:45, so 60 minutes didn't start televising the interview until about 7:50.

Punch drunk? I thought the question was highly inappropriate. Why would he use that term?

Joe Scarborough-- completely and totally predictably-- ran a tape of clips of Obama laughing. He tried to get everyone sitting around the table to talk about how outrageous it is and no one agreed. The worst criticism that was leveled was that it was "strange."

Entrepenuer Johnny Deutch was on and said Obama was doing EXACTLY the right thing, that all of his recent performances and the 60 minutes interview should inspire confidence-- because Obama is clearly a guy that is comfortably in control. Obama's laughter is far better than Obama appearing sullen, worried or angry. Not to mention the real reason the GOP/Scarborough/rightwing is all over this is because he's laughing at the opposition, which is actually the most belittling thing he can do.

This is HUGE! If the Special Olympics thing doesn't bring on an impeachment, this should. When will they apologize for laughing at those who suffer from DP. Oh the humanity!

obama shouldn't chuckle

If you watched the show, Croft is carrying on a serious interview on the economic issues. Then they cut to Croft and Obama walking outdoors for a few seconds, while Croft does a voiceover. Then they cut back to the indoor interview, where Obama immediately jokes about the relative absurdity of the unpopularity of the auto bailout. This is where Croft goes into the "you're sitting here...punch drunk" quote from the politico post. I'd say CBS cut out the context to create this controversy.

Steve Croft. Steeeeeve.. Makin' news.

Laughing too much can be a sign insecurity or nervousness, just sayin...

Well, gosh, who could have predicted that a Politico piece co-written by a former National Review flak could have possibly been misleading? Never saw that one coming.

Michael7843853,

Did you watch the interview because if you did you wouldn't have written that comment.

I'm with Danp on this one - until the entire unedited interview is shown, revealing the context, no one has the right to second guess.
They love the "gotcha" Kind of like Faux and the Joe Biden "Fundamentels of the econonomy clip".

Politico and Steve Croft are not writing "news." They are simply writing soap opera scripts to attract readers and viewers. The rhetorical question followed by wild speculation based on out-of-context comments is the formula for The Perils of Pauline. Nothing these people write or say is to be taken seriously. It's simply "entertainment."

Kroft is a pretentious, offensive ass.

Croft isn't the worst of the 60 Minutes hacks. Pelley is. But Croft is, like most Villager media whores, primarily interested in promoting his own career. And he has done so successfully here.

Also, Politico is a Republican rag.

I love reading the latest meme the Right is trying to push, that Obama can't talk without a teleprompter. This from the party that brought us Bush, McCain, Palin, Jindal, and Joe the Ho.

Politico flaps its' gums, Drudge puts up sirens and Steve Benen takes the bait.

With all the things to talk about this is your lead post monday morning? Good grief.

...the Politico's piece didn't exactly capture the context.

I can clarify that statement in three words: DO THEY EVER?

Why does anyone bother with the Politico? Seriously this is the worse journalism - if you want to call it that.

The Today Show also pursued this line today. It's totally Roveian to try to say Obama's ability to laugh at the absurdity of some situations somehow shows lack of empathy or understanding. The right wing is so desperate to find a chink.
And I did see the entire interview after watching pointless basketball. 60 Minutes should have advertized that it would start an hour late.

Isn't it appalling how Obama doesn't take himself or the presidency seriously enough . . . and that he has no sense of humor and regards himself as a messiah . . . and that he is addicted to vacuous soaring rhetoric . . . and that he is a policy nerd who has forgotten about the need to inspire the American people . . . and that he is an elitist who couldn't care less about the average person . . . and that he is stoking the fires of class warfare by his attacks on the corporate elite . . . and that he is talking down the economy to make himself look heroic . . . and that he is hiding how bad the economy is because he just doesn't get it . . .

Well, anyway, there's SOMETHING terrible about Obama.

Perhaps Obama was laughing at Kroft's hairstyle, which hasn't changed since 1985.

Just trying to help.

Steve Kroft is the schmuck who asked Hillary Clinton whether she thought Barack Obama was a Muslim.

She totally fumbled the answer ("as far as I know") but it was a stupid question.

Why's everyone so down on Kroft, for heaven's sake? As an interviewer he's far more serious and objective than the average, and last night he was perfectly OK. Give him a break!

It will be hard to erase from memory the perpetual smirk on the face of that last president we had.

Sometimes laughing is the only alternative to crying.

I thought he looked a little *high*.

Old take on Obama: He's such a party pooper. Can't even take a few hours out of his busy schedule to yuk it up at the Gridiron Club

New take on Obama: He's out of control! Yukking it up on TV at the expense of ordinary Americans!

"Well then, let them eat cake," Steve.

Karl Weber, that is one of the best summaries of media mindlessness that I've read.

Oh yes, it looks like MSM is trying to craft Obama as a heartless soul. First the Special Olympics comment and now laughing for a mere minute on such a serious topic of conversation on 60 Minutes. Geez what's next, reneging on the puppy? What a callous man!
Much ado about nothing.

Politico has become one giant tabloid joke. The night of the Leno interview the TOP THREE stories on Politico 44 were about the Special Olympics joke.

They've become pointless and the MSM that pick up every word they type is just as bad.

If anyone was "off" in the interview it was Steve Kroft.

The right will take whatever non-issue it can and make it one. I watched the entire interview and while, yes, the president smiled and laughed at serious issues, considering the absurdity of it all, I think his response was reasonable and honest. It's better than tearing one's hair out, one of the alternatives. Or mock anger or smirking as W would do. The situation the president finds himself and the country in so over the top, so dire, had someone predicted it ten years ago, no one would have believed it.

If you recall, Obama also laughed and smiled a lot in the one debate (last one? they were sitting) that I found appropriate considering the absurdity of the questions and McCain's rhetoric.

Anyhow, I thought many of Steve Kroft's questions were foolish and ill-informed, unless he was playing devil's advocate. Since I don't usually watch 60 Minutes I have no idea if this is his style.

I found the second 60 Minutes story on the mentally ill musician tragic (being a musician myself) and wish he would try one of the newer therapies. But I can't say I blame him for not, considering what he's been through. That whole situation is nothing to laugh at.

This is obviously an absurd story, but if you want to be scared, read the comments attached to it.

There are people, a lot of them, who watched the same interview we watched, and came away with "Obama is an idiot", "drunk with power", "totally incompetent", blah blah blah, and almost ALL the comments, as least as many as I could tolerate reading, are like that. That told me a lot about Politico's readership. The Drudge and freeper crowd.

This is just further evidence that (1) the right is grasping at straws and (2) the essential goal of broadcast news is to sell advertising. Broadcast news needs to create a tempest in a teapot in order to get people to tune in and watch the commercials, and the right wing is willing to say anything and do anything to distract us from the fact that they have completely run out of leadership and ideas. It suits them both to undermine Obama no matter how damaging to the nation's future.

In a related story, Politico asks, "Is Obama the Oprah of Politics?"

In the midst of a severe recession, with two wars overseas, a new president is unavoidably going to be at the center of the news universe. Obama has taken this intense public interest to a new level - encouraging a highly personalized, uncommonly intimate presidential image.

As communications strategy, the idea seems to be that Obama is the Oprah of politics: People will buy his policies because he is on the cover. But a personality-driven presidency does have its risks.

Yes, Drudge really does rule their world.

politico shares office space with cheney, they were the first organ he spoke to after wheeling out of office. krofft is just as tawdry as the pinhead from the new york times who asked The President if he were a socialist.

Also in the interview, Obama said that dealing with the realities of the economic and financial rescue is more complex than dealing with Afghanistan!

Think about this: he isn't making light of the situation at all, he is placing the economy in proper context, above even war, at least in complexity.

Now we have Republicans on record saying that Obama should devote all his time to the economy, they cannot criticize his priorities or his assessment of difficulty.

He also made another distinction on tough decision-making: sending more troops to war before a review has been completed. Decisions of war are tough, but not necessarily complex. We know how to send more troops.

yup... a very funny situation...sort of like all the foreign diplomacy gaffes and insults, cozying up to our enemies... lowballing trillion dollar deficits for decades... hiring lobbyists and tax cheats to his administration and making fun of special olympics... when is this humor going to stop???? Perhaps when there is chaos on the streets because China has come to foreclose on America.

I'm sorry I've been out of town and trying to catch up. My talking points memo from Steele says: "Obama is too seroius, takes himself too seriously."

Did I miss something?

Don't expect the truth to slow down the talking points for a second. Remember when Hillary Clinton's voice cracked slightly during an interview just before the NH primaries? Her eyes may have misted up slightly, but she certainly wasn't crying -- although if you listened to the pundits the next day, you'd think she'd burst into tears and sobbed her way through ten boxes of Kleenex. After she won NH, it immediately became conventional wisdom that she'd "cried her way to victory," that she had won only because her gales and buckets and gallons of tears had shown her softer side. Watch the video and see if you can even SEE any tears! ANY!

How ridiculous that anyone should focus on those few seconds of laughter and make a claim that the president is unserious or "punch drunk".

Those were far more serious questions than were ever asked of Bush. and btw...could you imagine the same questions being asked of McCain or Palin???

In what respect Charlie. All this little episode managed to do was make Politico and others look ridiculous and petty. Easy to see why these Goobers are the minority. Kroft's attributing the motivation behind Obama's laughter as making fun of the hardships being endured by others showed a complete bias and an attempt at a "gotcha" moment.

What kind of thinking would cause Kroft to jump to that conclusion, "are you punch drunk". It was really an out of place comment in very poor taste...an attempt to make the president look bad...but only to his detractors who were already looking for any reason to badmouth him. I thought Obama looked pretty good and had the right answers, honest, sincere and truthful.

"No, no. There's gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day," Obama said, [...]

"Gallows humor"? "Gallows humor"??? When he said his name was "Baruch Obama", I knew he wasn't joking; I just knew it!

The problem, of course, is that most Americans know zero about *any* sense of humour, never mind the self-deprecating, "gallows", kind. Y'all take yourselves waaaay too seriously...

Obama's Laugh???

What most people are not discerning is, is that Pres. Obama is somehow aiding us in facing this "shadow" or darkness of greed in our society. He is not trying to Hide it or Cover it up! Ironically, he is being blamed for not trying to Fix it in a hurry, so it will not be Exposed..... But to truly fix it, we must face it, identify it and generate enough public consensus so that it can be changed. That is how change is made. That is why I see Pres. Obama as really a true change agent. True and lasting change can only come from the people, demanding change. That is why Obama can laugh, he knows that the fat cats' days of unchecked greed and speculation are numbered!

Now GOP's new buzz word is "unsustainable", however, what was really "unsustainable" as the recent events so adequately portray is that George Bush's Iraq War, tax cuts to the wealthy, jobs going over seas, tax breaks to companies that shipped jobs over seas, deregulation of banks and insurance companies, and more (which I will leave to the experts to flush out), is the really true Unsustainable and break down and collapse of our economic system, fabric of society (bridges, roads, jobs, education), you name it, he failed in all aspects of this society. There are "tent" cities popping up all over United States because families can no longer sustain to live in a house because they no longer have a job!

This new buzz word "unsustainable" is a hoax, disingenous and hypocritical. Remember, they want Pres. Obama to Fail!

And lastly, let's be Clear, George W. Bush's first year in office was spent more at the Ranch then in Washington. Where was the Party of No's outrage then? May be if George had spent more time in D.C. working, they would have been more alert about the signs leading to 9/11, just a thought.....