Around here? The SDMB is hardly the only place that particular label is used.
Thanks for the explanation, it was not a whoosh. Unlike many of you, I guess, I’ve never listened to Rush. I try to avoid news about him, and I know nothing about the people that follow him. Why would I waste time with any of that? Which would make it quite unlikely that I’m a dittohead …
As a result of this thread, I did watch about ten minutes of Glenn Beck to see his take on the Fox vs Obama fight, which was interesting in a clinical sense. Other than that, I have managed to successfully avoid any of the Fox commentators. Oh, wait, I did look in on Nancy Grace once to make sense of a Saturday Night Live skit, not sure if that counts. I found her even funnier than the SNL skit …
Once this story gets it’s 15 minutes on the Sunday talk shows, I’m positive we won’t be seeing more of it from Obama’s people. The tactic got trounced on Meet the Press, as I suspect will happen on the other shows as well. The news cycle will be over on this one Monday AM, except Fox will probably continue to exploit it as much as they can since it’s great for ratings
Indeed it’s not. (See paragraph 8, and even though I don’t agree with Rush on most things, I do about the Leukemia and Lymphoma Cancer Society).
The latest Newsweek has a page on this. Their position is that Fox News is full of dicks.
Gosh, there’s a surprise … but did they also take a position on whether it is wise for the White House to pick a public fight with a box full of dicks?
It was an editorial by one person, not “they”.
Which must have made it tough to swallow when the White House was forced to back down. Blaming it on a young Treasury Department staffer just adds fuel to dying fire.
I said from day one that Rahm Emanuel was nothing but a pit-bull. In less than a year he’s managed to get all the news agencies to rally against the White House on behalf of Fox.
That is Rush’s own term for his followers. It is not a made up word by liberals. I heard him use it many years ago on air. I thought his listeners should have been insulted.
We clearly need a governmental entity to decide what is legitimate news and what is not. I think most of us trust the government to make these calls for us. Maybe someday we won’t even have to trouble ourselves with the first amendment and the indignities politicians must suffer because of it. I would hate to see a politician have to explain themselves. Obama is spot on with this. Fox news just stands in the way of progress and needs to be censored.
Yes, Rush came up with “dittos” as verbal shorthand for callers instead of going on about how much they agreed with him or the previous caller, which gets monotonous after a while and uses up valuable air time.
Try not to choke on all that straw. The White House has not made the slightest suggestion that Fox or anyone else should be censored, or that any government action should be taken whatsoever. I realize you think you’re being satirical, but satire only works if it has some basis in truth. Your post does not.
Yeah, that takes away from the time he needs to praise himself.
Satire? You mean that was sarcasm? So, doesn’t really mean it? Well, shit. I can take the name off the list for the newsletter, but the invitations to the next Hive Mind Orgy already went out.
Helen Thomas just thinks fighting with Fox will demean the president, not that Fox does not deserve it. It is lowering him to their level. He should just ignore them.
That wasn’t the *exact *wording.
More’s the pity…
How are Obama’s statements different than past conservative politicians using the term “liberal media” to delegitamize news organizations. Obama was just more specific.
Because, afaik, none of those conservative politicians stated that ‘liberal media’ does not equal ‘news’. Their use of ‘liberal media’ was to point out that the news was skewed to the left…not that they was no news at all. So, this is substantially different.
Um, no. Obama is ratcheting things up to a new level of hostility.
-XT
Not to mention, correct.