*nochannel
*news
*politics
*money
*talks
*controversey

For it to be in fail, Bernanke would have had to have done something horrifyingly embarrassing, like accidentally light himself on fire while trying to answer the question.

I don't think mere pandering and spin quite qualifies it for lies. We usually reserve lies for blatant falsehoods (Palin was against the bridge to nowhere, CO2 is harmless because it's natural, John Yoo stood up for human rights, etc.).

I don't know that Bernanke was all that mad about this, but I find it plausible that he came to the conclusion that it was necessary, and even plausible that this is contrary to his ideological leanings.

Ok ok.... I really didn't think this would spark that much controversey. If this is really an emotionally scarring event in this childs life, then I'd say he's got it pretty good. I really doubt this will come up in therapy later in life. I mean, its funny, because you can see that the kid is scared by the pop fizzing unexpectedly. I remember being this age and you cry when when anything little happens and you're fine a minute and a half later. It's not like the dad is physically abusing his kid, and he even hugs the kid afterwards, clearly showing that he is an affectionate father.