# Obama vs. Fox **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 20, 2009, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497 "2009-10-20T16:57:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/501 "2009-11-02T21:08:38Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > Richard Nixon. Establishing diplomatic relations with Communist China. Wage and price controls. Abolition of the gold standard. That whole Watergate thing. > > Can you name one thing Obama has done that is more radical than any one of those things? > > Just because the right is freaking out about every single thing the President does does not make him radical. It’s the teabaggers who are radical. Doing “radical” things does not make one a radical, at least as the word is commonly used. It is generally used (and I certainly was using it) to indicate the far left of the US political spectrum, out towards the socialist/maoist/marxist weather underground part of the left. And certainly, that is the meaning of the word when used by conservative commentators … Under that meaning, neither GWB nor Nixon were radicals. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/502 "2009-11-02T21:09:47Z")
> [@intention](#): > > And whether the Panthers “managed to affect the outcome” or not is immaterial. Intimidating voters is a crime. The Panthers were found guilty of that crime. The “Justice” Department decided to let them off. Are you truly defending that? That’s much, much more than “liberal” … No they weren’t. They never stood trial for criminal charges; the Justice Department sought and received an injunction against the one who was a designated poll-watcher. As far as whether or not they were actually intimidating voters, I don’t know, and neither do you. In the absence of any motive for foul play on their part, the accusations sound _extremely_ fishy. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/503 "2009-11-02T21:17:55Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Bullshit. Fox has never come close enough to the truth to recognize it when they see it. Oh, please. You just don’t like some of the truths that they publicise. Like all news organizations, some of their claims are total bullshit … see Dan Rather et. al. as one example among many. Certainly what they publicized about Anita Dunn and Van Jones was true. This kind of blanket attack is very foolish, it only helps Fox. If I said “CBS has never come close enough to the truth to recognize it when they see it” because of the Dan Rather episode, it would just inflame people. We don’t need more fires set, we don’t need more antagonism. Obama was supposed to be the great uniter, and I support him in that. Divisiveness through blatant exaggeration, whether by Fox or by you, is not in anyone’s interest. Yes, Fox definitely does this kind of exaggeration … but when you follow them down that path, you destroy the credibility of the left (as well as your own). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/504 "2009-11-02T21:24:31Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Liberal? I thought we were talking about radical. Which to me is quite different from liberal, but YMMV. > > And whether the Panthers “managed to affect the outcome” or not is immaterial. Intimidating voters is a crime. The Panthers were found guilty of that crime. The “Justice” Department decided to let them off. Are you truly defending that? That’s much, much more than “liberal” … Google “Black Panther voter intimidation” and you get results. With a decided preponderance of _Washington Times_, Fox News, and Michelle Malkin sort of “sources”. By comparison, a source I trust, _Talking Points Memo_, has a very different take on the matter at hand, offered here: [http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/obama\_volunteer\_on\_scene\_dispu.php](http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/obama_volunteer_on_scene_dispu.php) By their reckoning, much ado about not much. Since I have yet to be burned by trusting them, I think I shall. But that’s not quite my point. My point is that this issue, while trivial, is at best controversial, solid fact is not available, we have only interpretations. But you, without so much as blinking, offer us the most damaging interpretation possible, without so much as hinting that the matter is far from certain. With bland certainty, you offer the most negative possible interpretation of Obama’s actions (or inactions). The same applies to your assertion that Obama’s Communications Director is a “Mao groupie”, an assertion I find laughable, but you offer as though you had an affidavit from God Almighty, countersigned by Archangel Gabriel. You offer a puzzlement. You loudly declaim your faithful loyalty, and yet seem eager to believe any slander offered to Obama without so much as a blink. We must not dismiss our opponents “out of hand”, you claim, and that is as may be. But why are you required to swallow any spoonful of horseshit with a big smile and an “Mmmmmm-good!”? You are watching my back? Perhaps you could watch my back from well in front of me, about twenty yards or so? Because, to be perfectly frank, I don’t trust you. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/505 "2009-11-02T21:31:48Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > No they weren’t. They never stood trial for criminal charges; the Justice Department sought and received an injunction against the one who was a designated poll-watcher. > > As far as whether or not they were actually intimidating voters, I don’t know, and neither do you. In the absence of any motive for foul play on their part, the accusations sound _extremely_ fishy. It wasn’t a criminal case, it was a civil case. They were found guilty in a “default judgement”. > [@](#): > > Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews. > > The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms. > > Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as “the most blatant form of voter intimidation” that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago. > > The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times. > > The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20. [SOURCE](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/) > [@](#): > > President Obama’s Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. > > The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen”—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube. \<[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU>](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU>)) > > One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!” > > In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice’s request to support its lawsuit. > > When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default. Instead, the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that’s already illegal under existing law. [SOURCE](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203550604574361071968458430.html) Guys in uniforms carrying a nightstick stand out side a polling place to intimidate voters … you are defending this? They lost the case by default, because they didn’t even show up to try to defend themselves. Still think that they were oh-so-innocent? The publisher of the Village Voice, hardly a right-wing news organization, begs to differ … ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/506 "2009-11-02T21:42:58Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Doing “radical” things does not make one a radical, at least as the word is commonly used. It is generally used (and I certainly was using it) to indicate the far left of the US political spectrum, out towards the socialist/maoist/marxist weather underground part of the left. > > And certainly, that is the meaning of the word when used by conservative commentators … > > Under that meaning, neither GWB nor Nixon were radicals. Where in the world do you get this definition? Ever heard of radical anti-abortion protestors? > [@](#): > > Doing “radical” things does not make one a radical I can’t believe you even wrote that. What you’ve done is invented a definition of “radical” that says it’s someone who acts like Barack Obama does. That’s a tautology. [Nowhere is this more evident than with respect to Nixon’s radical domestic proposal for reforming the welfare system of the United States.](http://www.nixonera.com/library/domestic.asp) [First, Obama must establish a program of national health insurance that is comparable to Richard Nixon’s own radical proposals](http://www.petroleumworld.com/lag09090901.htm) [In August 1969, Nixon appeared before the nation with a radical scheme, …](http://books.google.com/books?id=aXYqkGLKJOYC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=radical+proposals+nixon&source=bl&ots=vdewiYyrC4&sig=7WCWX5K0c4lZX_CRNc8UvGX8vkw&hl=en&ei=9FHvSv36EI-wswOPufH1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBUQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=radical%20proposals%20nixon&f=false) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/507 "2009-11-02T21:48:02Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > My favorite bit is this: > [@](#): > > What Beck naturally neglected to tell his credulous viewers is that politicians of all stripes have been quoting Mao for years. Such as: ‘In the words of Chairman Mao, it’s always darkest before it’s totally black.’ (That was John McCain) No it wasn’t - Mao never said that. [Cite](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong). So your favorite bit is that part where they lied in its allegations against FoxNews. Imagine that. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/508 "2009-11-02T21:49:02Z")
[pedantic sniff] To be strictly correct, “radical” means that one asserts the necessity of addressing “root causes”, that change must take place at a fundamental level, at the very foundations of the political system. [/pedantic sniff] By comparison, a wishy-washy liberal wuss believes that we can tinker and adjust the capitalist death machine and, eventually, transform it into a solar-powered rainbow extruder. Speaking as a non-revolutionary radical, I do not agree. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/509 "2009-11-02T21:59:18Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No it wasn’t - Mao never said that. [Cite](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong). > > So your favorite bit is that part where they lied in its allegations against FoxNews. Imagine that. > > Regards, > Shodan The quote was not attributed to Mao, it was attributed to John McCain, and he did say it. [Cite](http://www.google.com/search?q=%27In+the+words+of+Chairman+Mao%2C+it%E2%80%99s+always+darkest+before+it%E2%80%99s+totally+black.%27&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLR) Nice try at sleight of hand there. Better luck next time. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/510 "2009-11-02T22:01:41Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Guys in uniforms carrying a nightstick stand out side a polling place to intimidate voters … you are defending this? They lost the case by default, because they didn’t even show up to try to defend themselves. Still think that they were oh-so-innocent? The publisher of the Village Voice, hardly a right-wing news organization, begs to differ … Think about this for a second. Why would the Black Panthers be preventing black voters from accessing their polling station? ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/511 "2009-11-02T22:27:07Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Think about this for a second. Why would the Black Panthers be preventing black voters from accessing their polling station? I give up … why? Perhaps to intimidate the white voters at the polling station? Perhaps to intimidate black voters who might have voted for McCain? I don’t know why the Black Panthers want to intimidate voters … but what does it matter? Or perhaps this unidentified man has it right … > [@](#): > > LEVENTHAL: the person with the nightstick was escorted away, which i just confirmed inside. but the implication is that you were telling me that the black panthers were there to intimidate white voters from coming to this location? > > CITIZEN: anyone who is not going their way, i do not know. someone in front of a polling place with a nightstick, that is intimidating for all voters. [SOURCE](http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjMzMDZhMmJlZjA5NTI5NTYxYTNiMTYzZWE4YTE5ZmM=) ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/512 "2009-11-02T22:30:03Z")
> [@Really Not All That Bright](#): > > Think about this for a second. Why would the Black Panthers be preventing black voters from accessing their polling station? You’re suggesting that NO white voters voted there? How do you explain the eyewitness testimony that they called someone a ‘cracker’? Do you know a lot of black crackers? ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/513 "2009-11-02T22:40:08Z")
As I have mentioned many times, I don’t like or watch Fox News. But I still think we need them. The issue of the Justice Department sweeping the Black Panther case under the rug is a great example of why. I did a Google search on “black panthers polling place” on each of the news sites. The results were: Fox News, 86 hits CBS News, 28 hits CNN News, 27 hits ABC News, 6 hits MSNBC News … 0 hits For a free press to work, you need to have news people on both sides of the political aisle. If all we had was MSNBC, we would know nothing of the egregious actions of the Justice Department. In this particular case, I find the actions of MSNBC to be as reprehensible as those of Fox News in other cases … but I would not say that because of this, MSNBC is not a news organization. In this instance, they are just the mirror image of Fox. Which is a good thing. This is why we need both sides. Muckrakers are valuable no matter whether they are conservative or liberal. Fox digs up dirt on the White House. MSNBC ignores dirt on the White House … are we surprised? On the other hand, for the White House to attack Fox for muckraking merely makes them look like they are afraid of what might be dug up … which is definitely not a good tactic. ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/514 "2009-11-02T22:41:41Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Doing “radical” things does not make one a radical, at least as the word is commonly used. If doing “radical” things does not make one “a radical”, what kinds of things can one do to earn such a label? > [@intention](#): > > It is generally used (and I certainly was using it) to indicate the far left of the US political spectrum, out towards the socialist/maoist/marxist weather underground part of the left. Ah, so doing leftist (liberal) things makes one “a radical”, right? Oh, wait: > [@intention](#): > > Liberal? I thought we were talking about radical. Which to me is quite different from liberal, but YMMV. So, doing radical things does not make one a radical - being on the “far left” of the political spectrum of the US makes one radical. But it’s quite different than “liberal”. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/515 "2009-11-02T22:50:23Z")
Here’s how Fox “News” covered the news in NY-23 yesterday afternoon. No spin in those early reports. No sir. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/vrzlM-uZrrs/hqdefault.jpg "Let's Go To the Videotape! Fox News Blows the Call on NY-23") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrzlM-uZrrs) ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/516 "2009-11-02T22:58:27Z")
> [@intention](#): > > I give up … why? Perhaps to intimidate the white voters at the polling station? Perhaps to intimidate black voters who might have voted for McCain? I don’t know why the Black Panthers want to intimidate voters … but what does it matter? > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > You’re suggesting that NO white voters voted there? 13 votes were cast there by white voters. Doesn’t seem like a very effective use of their time, does it? Especially considering that if they were doing what they’re accused of it would probably have scared away more than 13 black voters. > [@intention](#): > > As I have mentioned many times, I don’t like or watch Fox News. But I still think we need them. The issue of the Justice Department sweeping the Black Panther case under the rug is a great example of why. > > I did a Google search on “black panthers polling place” on each of the news sites. The results were: > > Fox News, 86 hits > > CBS News, 28 hits > > CNN News, 27 hits > > ABC News, 6 hits > > MSNBC News … 0 hits Searching for “black panthers polling station” on MSNBC’s own search engine returns 30 hits. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/517 "2009-11-02T23:08:02Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You think the Black Panthers actually managed to affect the outcome of polling in an _all-black neighborhood?_ I’d like a cite for the statement that the pollice place was in an ‘all black neighborhood’, please. The polling station was in in Philadelphia’s 4th Ward. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/518 "2009-11-02T23:10:33Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > Here’s how Fox “News” covered the news in NY-23 yesterday afternoon. No spin in those early reports. No sir. > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrzlM-uZrrs](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrzlM-uZrrs) Out of curiousity, I watched Glen Beck today for the second time. My stomach couldn’t stand more than a few minutes, but I was surprised to see that he spent most of his time attacking the GOP … I didn’t expect that. Shows what I know … ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/519 "2009-11-02T23:13:47Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Usual caveats about internet polls apply. Was this poll taken on Fox News’ website? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2009, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497/520 "2009-11-02T23:16:08Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] I’d like a cite for the statement that the pollice place was in an ‘all black neighborhood’, please. The polling station was in in Philadelphia’s 4th Ward. [/QUOTE] From [here](http://washingtonindependent.com/56918/civil-rights-commission-may-target-doj-over-new-black-panthers): > [@](#): > > One problem with comparing the Philadelphia incident to the infamous crimes of the 1960s is that it didn’t effectively target potential McCain voters. Rather than targeting white voters, or going to a predominantly Republican district, the NBP went to a largely African-American precinct close to downtown Philadelphia. Obama carried the precinct by a landslide, with 596 votes to only 13 votes for McCain. The Republican candidate fared worse than George W. Bush in 2004, when he won 24 votes there, but better than Bush in 2000, when he won only eight votes. In a race that Obama won by 620,478 votes statewide, the New Black Panther incident was a blip. ETA: Look, I’m not saying nothing untoward happened. I am saying that it doesn’t make sense for the Black Panthers to attempt to intimidate black voters. The injunction which the Justice Department sought - while still under _Bush_ - also suggests a lack of evidence. The Panthers were barred from “brandishing a weapon outside a polling station in Philadelphia”. Shockingly enough, brandishing a weapon outside a polling station is _already illegal._ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-vs-fox/514497.md?page=27)