Obama plays BrickBreaker ... on a military-grade smartphone
by Randy Nelson 
{ Feb 21st 2009 at 6:00AM }
Bastion of hard news, Star Magazine, reports that President Obama may have an ulterior motive for wanting his (very fancy) smartphone: gaming. The article quotes a "confidante" who reveals Obama plays BrickBreaker on the device "to unwind," and that the freshly inaugurated leader does so "every night before bed."
The President made news on the gaming front by bringing a Wii into the White House. Obama's high score in BrickBreaker is "around 15,000," according to Star Magazine's source. We hail to the chief, but he's got nothing on this guy.
[Via GameCulture]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
_thumbnail.jpg "Lunar: Silver Star Harmony")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
The Baron @ Feb 21st 2009 6:13AM
I predict at least two "Oh yeah, play BrickBreaker to distract yourself from what an awful job you're doing" comments.
Even if the man worked 24/7, he can't fulfill the impossible criteria you set for him if you're determined to hate him.
Linkario @ Feb 21st 2009 7:29AM
You have it backwards...
Even if the man worked 24/7, he can't fulfill the impossible criteria that was set for him by his supporters.
I didn't vote for Obama but I will always support the president but the expectations set for him rival Jesus master 5000 status.
I can haz blackberry secret services?
Bowser Rogozhin @ Feb 21st 2009 7:31AM
To criticise doesn't mean you hate. If there's a contradiction between rhetoric and action then it must be pointed out.
If the Bush policy to this banking failure was to shove money into the hands of bankers, and if Obama continues this policy, then it must be pointed out.
If the Bush policy was to deny Afghan inmates the right to a free and fair trial, and if Obama continues this policy, then it must be pointed out.
If the Bush policy was to turn a blind eye to the systematic human rights abuse in Tibet, and if Obama continues this policy, then it must be pointed out.
We live in Democratic nations, nations built on the ideals of accountability. If we cannot question, due to hypothetical silencing methods, as displayed by yourself, then we must question our ideals.
TheKarmaPolice @ Feb 21st 2009 7:42AM
Christ you americans are impatient, it's been a month and you expect him to fix everything and cure cancer and aids combined, no wonder you are disappointed
The Baron @ Feb 21st 2009 8:13AM
Oh no, I'm not saying we shouldn't have the right to question and evaluate authority - I'm an anarchist so that's a pretty big principle - due to some notion that politicians know best (e.g. video game laws and the illegality of cannabis).
But every time Obama gets a mention here or anywhere with a comment section there's always people saying stuff like "I heard Obama wasted 5 minutes taking a dump today, that's 5 minutes that he could have spent reversing his policy so that it agrees with mine"
vidGuy @ Feb 21st 2009 10:17AM
You mean, "Even if the man worked 24/7, he can't fulfill the impossible criteria he set for himself." Ridiculously impossible promises are typical of a presidential campaign, but when a guy puts banners of HOPE and CHANGE next to his podium suddenly everyone believes him. I personally don't buy this guy's doublespeak.
Henry E. @ Feb 21st 2009 12:16PM
@TheKarmaPolice
The problem is he put up high expectation that many people were suckered into. Now, for those who understand economics and history, a good amount of us have already figured out most of his plan won't work and his bailout is not really going to make a difference.
US has always been about short term goals, it's not different for many of our presidents. Short term goals like bailouts and huge stimulus don't work. It didn't work for us in the past, and didn't work for other countries. What does work are tighter and better regulations. Ultimately, the bailout/stimulus plan are going to lead to even bigger inflation than it already is. I know many Democrats goes on about how Republican aren't doing anything. How can they? The congress is dominated by Democrats and Republicans are likely to lean over towards, riding out economic recession/depression and just tightening up regulations.
In short, I believe his plan is flawed. Obama is trying to eat his cake and have his cake at the same time so to say. It's either he's going to try and create all these social programs/changes or drive the economy down even further.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 12:59PM
@ vidGuy, HenryE
Except that within a single month he has done quite a bit to fulfill expectations his campaign set up. He has ordered the shuttering of Guantanamo, a campaign promise, put stiff (though not as harsh as had originally been considered) restrictions on the influence of lobbyists, a campaign promise, sent more troops to Afghanistan to focus more attention there, a campaign promise, expanded shady military operations against Al Queda in Pakistan, a campaign promise, has started taking some steps (though far from done) to leverage the internet to increase government transparency, a campaign promise, has cleared the way for California (and eventually all states) to enforce stricter emission standards on carmakers, and has just signed a GIGANTIC bill which is intended to enact large portions of his other campaign promises, (including a whole heap of not-very-stimulative tax cuts for the middle class he probably should have just worked into the budget -_-). In fact, as noted in his latest address, the White House has *already* sent notice of tax adjustments to employers.
Beyond that, saying "What does work are tighter and better regulations" implies that hasn't also been endlessly touted as part of Obama's agenda, and a critical facet of the stimulus bill and the currently stumbling market rescue.
The charge that Americans are impatient, once you factor in the sheer speed of this Administration, becomes doubly harsh. The pace also seems to be the primary reason for the media-saturation so many commenters here have been complaining about. It's like people who grew up with Bush aren't used to this level of activity coming out of the White House.
offday @ Feb 21st 2009 4:05PM
I don't care if the man plays brickbreaker, nor do I think it distracts him from his job. I do, however, wonder why this gaming news? Who freaking cares?
Uncontrol @ Feb 21st 2009 6:15AM
I thought he ended up with a BlackBerry ...?
Abuzar Baloach @ Feb 21st 2009 7:15AM
All Blackberries com pre-loaded with Brickbreaker. How do you not know this?
Uncontrol @ Feb 21st 2009 7:16AM
The article says it's not a BlackBerry. And I don't know shit about BlackBerrys. (BlackBerries?)
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 1:21PM
I think it's supposed to be a Blackberry at base, but it's a special one augmented by the NSA to meet legal requirements for security and documentation (ie. to ensure that he couldn't, for example, use the blackberry to issue secret orders without proper disclosure).
Ethan @ Feb 21st 2009 6:40AM
He's skilled in a very rare manner but so grounded in all the right ways.
Scooter @ Feb 21st 2009 7:11AM
But can it play Doom?
Uncontrol @ Feb 21st 2009 7:18AM
do you actually think this is funny
Scooter @ Feb 21st 2009 7:30AM
No.
Maybe.
Yes,
Markez @ Feb 21st 2009 1:14PM
I think I thought it was funny...
Yeah, I did.
And everyone else plz keep your politics out of my cocoa puffs.
Er, gaming blog, I mean. kthx
Killiam XXIII (aka Fanboy #23) @ Feb 21st 2009 7:54AM
Anything we do, Obama can do it 10x better.
Nick8708 @ Feb 23rd 2009 4:27AM
The success of the stock market relies on many factors, but confidence plays a major role that could well overshadow otherwise reasonable circumstances. A volatile market is a dangerous one and major legislation that is analagous to a hail mary pass is far from a guarantee - I can't speak from experience, but I doubt most traders are willing to take risks based on hope. It may well be that the spending bill will turn out to help the economy (which I personally doubt), but in the short term the uncertainty of its effectiveness is likely to be the cause of the losses since its passing and the time period before when it was first introduced to the public.
The tax cuts may seem nice in that it could be considered a bipartisan move since tax cuts are typically the want of Republicans, but tax cuts are only effective if done right. It's nonsensical to think the government can jump start an economy - Keynesian economics have never worked, not even in the time of John Maynard Keynes - so I think this bill is more about a social agenda than actually helping the economy. Maybe I'm mistaken; it might be a sincere attempt, but the economics of it are still wrong.
Nick8708 @ Feb 23rd 2009 5:17AM
Sorry Killiam, apparently I clicked your name by accident when trying to respond to a different poster.
Gareson @ Feb 21st 2009 9:22AM
His score on Brickbreaker is 15,000, but the stockmarket has crashed 25% in value since he introduced his socialist agenda....yippeeeeee! Wow...what a mastermind he is!
Bowser Rogozhin @ Feb 21st 2009 9:32AM
No.
HighFiveJesus @ Feb 21st 2009 9:47AM
yeah that damn muslim lover!
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 9:57AM
[citation needed]
Really? 25%? "The stockmarket"? What are you talking about? Do you mean the Dow? You would sound to an economist like that Penny Arcade comic about Die Hard 4. "Our webs are down!" "Which webs?" "All of them" - "We'll need to hack all IPs simultanerously!"
Assuming you aren't just pulling numbers out of the talk radio you have shoved up your ass, did you mean that it (whatever specific measure you are referring to) has dropped 25% since Obama signed the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, 25% since he took office on January 20th 2009, or 25% since the recession that Obama inherited began, in 2007?
Yeesh, it's like the children of the 28% of Americans that disapprove of the guy all manage to wash ashore here.
RankHypocrisy @ Feb 21st 2009 11:42AM
@Robert Maynard
Nice deflection by acting superior about his use of the incorrect term "stockmarket" but the fact of the matter is that the markets have given a clear NO CONFIDENCE vote in the God-Man's economic recovery plan.
S&P down 30% in two weeks = economy is not getting better
stevenrafaelmercadoguillermo @ Feb 21st 2009 11:57AM
"Yeesh, it's like the children of the 28% of Americans that disapprove of the guy all manage to wash ashore here."
It's really not just that. This is a gaming blog, so it's accessible to a younger audience. There must be tons of kids and teens on this website who don't bother checking their sources, which most likely consist of poorly-translated hearsay from al over the local neighborhood.
I'm only in my twenties, but that last statement makes me sound like a grumpy old man. I'll have to add that there are probably tons of adults here (and most gaming blogs) that have childhood mentalities and repeat the same "leap before you look" manner of speaking.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 12:04PM
No shit the economy is not getting better. I was actually more interested in a citation about the implementation of his "socialist agenda" and its alleged correlation to the continuing recession, hence the beginning and the rest of the comment after that little jab. The market has been tanking since 2007, remember?
Was anyone expecting the market to instantly reverse on a dime as a show of confidence in a politician? Can anybody cite a historical precedent of such a dramatic turnaround? Can anybody cite an economist that set this expectation for Geithner's plan? In other words, was "complete reversal of the global financial market within one month of the US President's inauguration" a literal expectation of anyone who knows what they're talking about? I'd love some evidence is all, because otherwise this just stinks of goalpost-moving.
HippoHero @ Feb 21st 2009 1:26PM
Contrary to what you think, an economic recovery plan is not a magic cure-all. In most plans it takes years before the effects are felt.
Think inertia. The economy is going down and the government, no matter what they do, cannot turn it around overnight. It would be like trying to instantaneously stop a truck from barreling downhill.
The American economy is worth about 14 trillion. Obama's 700 billion recovery plan is small potatoes. The economic cycle will run it's course; the best that any economist can do is to try and make this recession not suck so hard.
If there were a magic "stop recession pill", we would never have had to deal with this kind of shit. It doesn't exist. The economy will always get worse before it gets better.
You cannot determine so quickly whether or not the plan is working.
ryan @ Feb 21st 2009 2:43PM
The plan looks like it's a recipe for disaster, or just a really awful cake.
Gareson @ Feb 21st 2009 6:52PM
@ Hippo, I agree that an economic recovery plan cannot have an instant impact but market reaction to the passage of such legislation is an indicator of its effectiveness. There is indeed an economic recovery plan with immediate and sustained effect...TAX CUTS. They worked for JFK, Reagan in 81 and Bush in 2002 following the post 9-11 economic meltdown. However, obviously funding highways and education, in Obama's crazy mind, will generate a thriving economy...ridiculous.
zuburi @ Feb 21st 2009 5:17PM
Goddammit ryan, be fair.
There's no such thing as a really awful cake.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 11:46PM
You will be pleased to hear then Gareson, seeing you obviously haven't been paying attention, that effectively 288 BILLION DOLLARS in the stimulus package is considered to be tax relief and that, as promised, the White House has already notified employers to adjust income taxes, such that 95% of Americans will see a tax decrease before the budget is released. This is one of the largest and fastest and broadest tax cuts the US has seen.
Assuming you are old enough to pay taxes, and have a job, (not entirely clear in this economy, or from the fact you're posting nonsense on a gaming blog), it's very likely you will be getting taxed less sometime this or next week. On top of that there will be a bunch of people eligible for tax credits - ie. some shush money stuffed into their account. :P
So ...uh.. maybe you hadn't heard about that part.
Secondly, the recessions you mentioned were tiny babies compared to the current situation, they were speed humps in terms of unemployment, such that targeted tax decreases could easily sooth the discomfort. Income tax decreases won't help you if you have no income, tax incentives for hiring won't help your business if it already can't keep up with loan payments because the banks are disintegrating. In other words, tax cuts at this point will mostly only help people that aren't drowning. On the other hand, a recession of similar scope, the one everyone keeps comparing this to, WAS eased by a massive public works program, along with a regulations overhaul.
Far worse than those who admire Obama with a singular zeal, people such as yourself give the man way too much credit, speaking as if you think this plan was the product of a single deranged, fevered, evil mastermind. This neglects to regard all of the professional economists, some of them Nobel laureates, who advised him during his campaign and his transition. It is they who have sculpted the details of his agenda at his behest, and it is they who have had to present the hard realities that will cap some of his ambitions.
Obama is not an expert economist, and he knows it - he has the power to gather experts who know far better, and he listens to what they have to say. You are not an economist, but you do not seem to know it, nor do the people you trust to absorb psuedohistory from.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 22nd 2009 12:11AM
Furthermore Gareson, the bad market reaction you seem to be referring to was to Secretary Geithner's vague press conference on how the Administration planned to handle the bank bailout, and the strict regulations on businesses accepting bailout money, not the stimulus bill specifically. This is especially damning to your case, because they were not waiting to hear "tax cuts for failing banks" - they WANT large cash injections. They're begging to be saved by the government, and they reacted poorly because details on how that would be happening were not forthcoming. Tax cuts won't do anything if they run out of operating capital.
Gareson @ Feb 22nd 2009 7:30AM
@Robert Maynard
Umm, "tax cuts" for banks? What are you talking about? I am talking about tax cuts for business and inividuals in general.
As for the "25%" of Obama's plan that are tax cuts...they go to EVERYONE...and they are piddly($13 a week)...wow, that will really revive things- I can buy a 12 pack of soda and loaf of bread now. Oh, wait, with the coming inflation due to deficit spending that might just buy me the loaf of bread. Furthermore, why are those who don't pay any Federal income tax receiving "tax rebates" too- actually its just a disguised welfare check.
Now for Geithner...he is part of the administration. If he makes a key presentation error that lies at Obama's doorstep, as he is his appointee. I should say, that tax cheat, who is essentially CFO of our nation now, is his appointee.
We all come to this site because we are gamers, so back to the point. If you think the gaming industry under Obama will be better off than under the more free-market oriented Bush, you are crazy. There is more to life than gaming, but I hate to think how the industry, and gamers, will suffer through the unnecessarily protracted hard times ahead due to the Economic Porkulus Package of Pelosi, Reid and Obama.
I
Robert Maynard @ Feb 22nd 2009 8:18AM
"As for the "25%" of Obama's plan that are tax cuts...they go to EVERYONE...and they are piddly($13 a week)...wow, that will really revive things"
I don't like how much was put into tax relief either, but you mentioned it, so I figured you might like it. But it seems we're in agreement, along with most economists. Tax cuts aren't actually very stimulative.
So, let me see, you've now said that tax cuts *are* stimulative, but not if they're just handed out to EVERYONE. So.. let me guess, you recommend tax cuts for a specific group of people? Now who could that be? Hey, I know who would benefit the most from even marginal tax cuts - rich people! And they already have big tax cuts from the Bush administration, so imagine how stimulative lowering them even more could be! In other words, let's just keep doing what we were doing before.. before.. um.. before the financial market collapsed. Awesome plan, dude. You should be President! 2012, my friend. 2012.
To attempt to regroup these diverging arguments: You have asserted that a) the market doesn't like Obama's agenda, and b) what would fix the recession are tax cuts. In other words, you were implying that the market would have reacted positively to plans centred solely around tax cuts.
I countered that the bad press coming from the market had mainly been kept to the announcement for the new bank bailout plans, because Geithner's press conference was a shambles (and I agree, that does fall at Obama's feet). The banks want government money. The banks need government money to stay afloat. They reacted badly because Geithner wasn't clear enough on how that would be proceeding. The bottom line is that tax cuts won't keep the banks afloat, and if the US doesn't shoulder the results of its terrible hands-off regulatory system, it will fall apart. The credit problem is a separate issue, one the US wouldn't be able to fix at all if its government was as small as Norquist would like in order to satisfy his baby-drowning fetish.
Frankly how much anyone *likes* the free market doesn't change the fact that it's currently disintegrating, and needs to be temporarily commandeered, not just by the US but by all nations with a stake in it. If that upsets your dogmas, too bad.
Sarge @ Feb 23rd 2009 12:08PM
Why does everyone seem to think that taking money from the rich fixes ANYTHING? Oh, they can afford it, let's take even more from them. I remember a recent poll that had a majority of Americans saying they would steal from someone if they wouldn't miss it. And that is what the government is doing. They are taking from people who ostensibly "won't miss it".
Problem is, they DO miss it. Less money means less investment, less R&D, and less money to pay to workers. Tax them too heavily, and business stagnates. And where does the government get the majority of its money? Oh, right. Business. Rich people. Kill their wealth, and you kill everyone else's, including the government's. After all, their taking wealth that was _created_ and redistributing it.
Now, anyone that is corrupt should be taken down, and harshly. Systemic abuses of power anywhere should be punished. That is a valid role for government. That being said, it stands to reason that there's quite a few in government that could stand to be punished for their role in this economic crisis, including Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. But I don't see that happening in this current political climate.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 24th 2009 2:20AM
Sarge, you're basically only describing business taxes. How would it hurt R&D or payrolls to put higher taxes on people being given ridiculously huge bonuses that they'll otherwise just stash away in offshore accounts? It's hoarding, plain and simple - they don't need the money, they aren't investing the money (or if they are it's usually not in America's economy), they're just hoarding it, like dragons (I wanted to say Nazi gold, but we've been doing so well here steering clear of Godwin's Law :P).
"Oh, they can afford it, let's take even more from them."
You would be surprised at how little taxes corporations already pay thanks to tax loopholes, and as otzdag pointed out, lower business taxes doesn't necessarily equate to higher wages, it only amounts to higher profit margins, as they scale the wages back down. They're not exactly humanitarians.
Closing those "creative accounting" loopholes is on the agenda, meaning the US will likely see a massive increase in tax revenue even before taxes on businesses are increased. That's how slimy these businesses are.
Furthermore the tax "increases" that are planned for individuals making over 250k will not even come until 2010, when Obama allows the Bush cuts to expire. The Republicans are claiming, as McCain did during the campaign, that this will negatively effect a majority of small businesses that report their business income as individual taxpayers. McCain said of the plan "[i]f you are one of the 23 million small business owners in America who files as an individual rate payer, Senator Obama is going to raise your tax rates." The true number of small businesses that would be hit by this increase, according to tax figures from 2007? About 480,000. 2%. Now imagine how much fewer will be hit in the midst of this recession.
The depths to which these liars will sink knows no limit, and that's part of the whole problem. The only reason that Republicans were able to maintain the fantasy that tax cuts = prosperity has been by deceptive accounting, in corporations, in their manipulation of interest rates and the stock market, and in the federal budget. I hope the US is never be stupid enough to trust those dinosaurs with power again.
tkAshur @ Feb 21st 2009 9:35AM
LOL, love the pic. Anywho, this guys got such a freakin mess to fix here in america, that I wouldn't blame him for doing a gaming all nighter. Crap, everyone needs a break, and he is on call 24/7. So the president taking time off to unwind? I'd only expect it of him. Unwinding is a huge necessity, and with the job he has ahead of him, he needs it.
xgarryx @ Feb 21st 2009 10:28AM
''mr Gorbachev tear down this wall''
joke understood.
but please,please never ever put another ronald reagan quote in the mouth of obama ever again.
obama willl never equal the greatness of Ronaldus Magnus.
not in this lifetime ever, not ever.
Michael @ Feb 21st 2009 1:48PM
Yeah you're right he won't equal reagan's greatness, he'll easily surpass it.
WINterfang @ Feb 21st 2009 10:32AM
It will be funny if Barack Obama is a really big Sonic the Hedgehog fan.
Bowser Rogozhin @ Feb 21st 2009 10:41AM
They both build up extraordinary expectations only to dash them at the last minute?
xgarryx @ Feb 21st 2009 10:56AM
obama would redistribute sonics gold rings to all the animals in the forest.
Kogen @ Feb 21st 2009 10:40AM
It is a lot easier to hate someone when no one shuts up about them.
Like really, no one cares or gives a shite. I did not think this was some crappy entertainment show about what [insert popular american] is doing.
Robert Maynard @ Feb 21st 2009 10:58AM
Backlash hipster = confirmed.
j.howlett @ Feb 21st 2009 10:45AM
i was addicted to the brick breaker game on this disconnected blackberry i got but the controls made me to mad to keep going. getting distracted by the version in ps3 home for awhile helped me forget
ThraX @ Feb 21st 2009 11:08AM
[I've been banned - also, I misspelled "writing" as "witting" twice.]
Pimliconite @ Feb 21st 2009 11:28AM
Awesome satire, but probably a little on the nose. Next time try to come off a little less pigheaded and self-delusional. Try to make "your" hatred of Obama look less like that of a hand-flapping cartoon and more like an exaggerated human being. But not bad overall. B-.
stevenrafaelmercadoguillermo @ Feb 21st 2009 11:57AM
ThraX, are you prepared to receive a big middle finger from the Gamedaily mangagement?
I'm sure they won't give a rats ass about your whining. This is a gaming blog, where all things gaming related (even loosely related) can be shared and discussed. I can't even believe you're offended. You're responding quite irrationally to "seeing this man get shoved down your throat." If you've worked in the past covering news, you should know that part of the job is knowing what people want to see. The world wants to see Obama, vaguely speaking, as he's attained somewhat of a celebrity status among the common populace. That's clearly reinforced by the demand for Obama related stories on the news.
You are in control of what you read, and how you respond to what you see. No one forced you to read this article or throw a tantrum.