Obama isn’t fighting the news. Fox is not the news.
Change WHAT course, by the way? There isn’t any course. The White House proposed to do anything. What are they supposed to do, lie and say Fox really is a news organization? Fuck that. Everybody knows what Fox is. There isn’t going to be any political backlash.
If Fox is a news channel, then Lord of the Rings is a history book.
The repercussions of those smear jobs became minor stories, but the smears themselves were never newsworthy, and did not reveal a thing about Obama.
Van Jones shouldn’t have resigned, though, and Obama should never have disavowed Wright. That kind of caving into bullshit is disappointing to me. Now we finally have a sign that he’s going to stop. Fox was not going to smear him any less, or be any more fair if he didn’t call them out as if he did, so there is no net loss here. A few whiny cable hate show fascists get a little butthurt. Who cares?
Sometimes it seems as if you are posting in the wrong thread, because you like to attack points no one in this thread have made.
I am curious, though-do you rehearse these speeches out loud, and if so, what voice do you use for the "EVIL LIBRUL?
I take it at face value. He appears to me to be a toad hired to spread lies about your Administration because losing last November makes Republicans whine and cry, so I assume that’s what he is; I take him at face value. that Republicans try to put their propaganda above accountability by calling their propaganda merchants “entertainers” means nothing to me.
I seem to recall people trying to place prominent Republican Rush Limbaugh’s statements in support of racism and torture above reproach by calling him an ‘entertainer’ too. I don’t think it worked then either.
Astrid, is that you…?
-XT
Perspective from Media Matters: Fox News: A 24/7 Political Operation (YouTube link)
Fox News is not biased; it is actively partisan. World Net Daily is not biased; it is actively partisan. The degree is veritably invisible, the rhetoric is veritably the same.
Both should be recognized as naked emperors and treated as such.
If Obama is able to substantively alter the landscape such that corporate tabloid journalism does not hold as much sway over politics as it does today, then he deserves a second Nobel. And a Pulitzer.
He doesn’t have to squelch dissent – just return conservative thinking and rational conservative arguments to the fore, and let the rabid out-do-you-in-craziness bullshit recede.
The Administration is foolishly violating three basic rules of politics in this dispute.
The first rule is from Mark Twain (and also repeated by Bill Clinton), who said “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.” Heck, these days, they don’t even have to buy ink. The White House gets a few moments of air time on the evening news, and Fox can reply to them 24/7 with a much larger audience. A few minutes versus twenty-four hours is very bad odds.
The second rule is “Never fight down.” There is no way for the Administration to benefit from this fight. “Fighting down” means like the world champion fighting the home-town hero. If the champion wins, everyone says “Well, of course he won”, and looks on him as a big bully for winning. And if the champion loses …
The third rule is “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.” And Fox, of course, is loving this. They can read the rating numbers, they want the Administration to keep it up. The Government vs. The Fox, it’s bigger than the Thrilla in Manila or the Rumble in the Jungle, it’s the very best boxing match that Fox could imagine. While many Democrats are congratulating themselves at finally standing up to the nasty Republican liars, Fox News and Glenn Beck are laughing all the way to the bank.
Dear friends, you do understand that the result of this idiocy is that Beck’s ratings, and Fox News ratings in general, have risen because of the White House’s foolishness? Or as Helen Thomas put it:
This fight is all downside and no upside. It is very depressing to hear Democrats pounding their chests and saying things on the order of ‘Let’s get in their faces! Let’s tell them off for the lying assholes that they are! It’s high time we gave them a dose of their own medicine! We’ve learned from the Swiftboating, we’ll show them!’ and the like.
Don’t you see that, far from proving that you are noble he-men standing up to the forces of evil, you are being suckered into playing exactly the part that the Republicans want you to play?
For the very first time in my life, I turned on Glenn Beck this evening. I’d never heard the man before, I never wanted to (and I don’t want to again).
And guess what?
He was strutting about the stage and crowing and laughing about the fight with the White House, basically saying ‘Bring it on, fools! Turn up the heat on me!’ … and despite that, people still think that attacking him was a good plan? He wants us to attack him, and a bunch of you are boasting about doing exactly what he wants? … like I said, depressing political naiveté on the part of many Democrats.
Including, unfortunately, some in the White House. Obama needs to take Helen Thomas’s advice, right now, yesterday. This is a fight he cannot win.
I don’t think that matters, and believing it does is part of Fox’s spin on this.
Fox’s enrichment via their gullible base is irrelevant.
The White House isn’t trying to quash free speech.
The White House isn’t trying to put Fox out of business.
The White House isn’t trying to reinstate the fairness doctrine.
The White House isn’t trying to [del]piss in the wind[/del] convince Beckians to [del]come back to[/del] come within a thousand light years of reality.
The White House is trying to give legitimate journalism (not Fox- or WND-like veneers) a resurgence by taking a stand to declare that Fox has no clothes.
Treating Fox like a real organization, supporting it with administration time, etc., gives its lie credence. Ending or lessening the Yellow Tyranny is good for America, good for political discourse – even if it only nudges rational conservative discussion to the fore.
The White House is doing what it thinks is in its own best interests. That’s to be expected, but it’s not about a principled stand on the purpose of journalism.
The White House isn’t doing anything.
That’s the beauty of it.
Okay, they are saying something because that’s in their best interests. It’s about getting their message out, not about trying to improve the quality of journalism.
I think it’s about calling a spade a spade.
Gee, and here I thought Obama et al (a.k.a. The White House) had a different job description…
Let us all know how that works out for them, ehe? I’m sure it will be a smashing success…probably take down Fox and all the other right wing news outlets, talk radio and possibly the entire Republican party too boot!
(Have fun storming the castle boys…)
(Think they have a chance?)
(It would take a miracle…)
-XT
When did they ever intimate that they wanted to “take down Fox?”
All they did was state the obvious – that Fox isn’t really a news organization. They’re still going to go on it. They’re still going to engage with it. They’re not going to do anything to it, but they are publicly recognizing what everybody already knows – that Fox’s agenda is political, not journalistic.
I’d still like to know what horrible thing anyone thinks is going to happen. What is Fox going to do to Obama that it wasn’t already doing?
It’s funny…everyone said the White House taking on Limbaugh was a mistake, too, but the meme spread but FAST that Limbaugh was actually in charge of the GOP (amply proven by the constant stream of Congressional Repubs who repudiated then groveled before Rushbo soon after).
This could be just the thing the McCain campaign needs!
Wow! NPR sided with Fox? I’m stunned, but that sure does give credence to those suggesting it’s a bad idea to confront Fox News if a liberal organization like NPR says so.
Did the NPR story get the opinions of Mara Liaisson or Juan Williams for that piece? You know the two NPR commentators who are also Fox commentators?
I think this is very like the Swiftboat business, and I stopped supporting NPR when they described John Kerry’s war record as “controversial.”
If it’s not apparent, my first paragraph above is sarcasm. NPR can go stuff it - their opinion on this matter is as a grunt from a pig, in my opinion. What else would you expect them to say?