White House Official Fox News A Wing of the Republican Party

[Kulindahr]

My beliefs? I am not a racist or a homophobe and have enough intelligence to know when people lie and exagerrate and push ridiculous conspiracies and question the President's citizenship and attack him relentlessly. These aren't about preferences or beliefs....they're about lies and what they are reporting there as facts.

I wouldn't take issue with them if they were labeled "The Comedy Channel"...I do take issue when they call themselves a "news" channel and claim they are fair and balanced.

Have you caught the lies of ABC, CBS, and MSNBC? Do you despise them as much as you despise Fox?

What Fox News does is just slanted journalism, like the channels I named. It's the commentary and opinion and talk show stuff that dredges the gutters.

 

[Kulindahr]

Ah, see your blind hatred of Fox isn't letting you see how truly dangerous what Obama is doing is. You don't have to agree with Fox's opinion programming (lord knows I don't), but anytime the president actively encourages the censorship of a press organization that would be dangerous. Why do you think that every other network has REFUSED to be a party to the president's desire to censor Fox?

Forget Fox, forget the fact that you don't like them. Honestly think for a second about the ramifications of the President of the United States dictating to the press and people WHAT is legitimate news and what is not, and who may report it. It is absolutely HORRIFYING. The only thing more horrifying than that fact is the fact that there are people like you out there that are defending this attempt at censorship.

Yep.

What this amounts to is a repeat of the Sedition Act, except by executive pressure instead of going through Congress.

It was dangerous to the Republic then, and it's dangerous now.

 

[NickCole]

Something's up when a President invites all his fluffers over for tea:

Speaking privately at the White House on Monday with a group of mostly liberal columnists and commentators, including Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich and Bob Herbert of The New York Times, Mr. Obama himself gave vent to sentiments about the network, according to people briefed on the conversation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/us/politics/23fox.html?_r=1

Fox News uses propaganda techniques to serve up what it wants of the day's events, as do MSNBC and CNN. If anybody's surprised at that, or thinks Fox does it more than MSNBC or the other way around, they're being fooled. Fox went along with Bush, MSNBC and CNN go along with Obama.

News organizations serve up different flavors of propaganda and news consumers choose the flavor that appeals to them. Some like Fox, some like MSNBC, but it's all biased, just from different viewpoints. And whether you're believing news from Fox or news from MSNBC, you're believing what you're being manipulated to believe.

 

[palemale]

Have you caught the lies of ABC, CBS, and MSNBC? Do you despise them as much as you despise Fox?

What Fox News does is just slanted journalism, like the channels I named. It's the commentary and opinion and talk show stuff that dredges the gutters.

Kuli, can you identify any news stories ABC, CBS or MSNBC did that were lies, distortions or out and out propaganda?

 

[palemale]

Yep.

What this amounts to is a repeat of the Sedition Act, except by executive pressure instead of going through Congress.

It was dangerous to the Republic then, and it's dangerous now.

Kuli and Droid, don't take this the wrong way, but you guys need to get a grip. So far, all the Obama administration has done is criticize Fox News. They haven't arrested anyone, they haven't tapped anyone's phones, they haven't plotted to kill anyone. You may not approve of Obama's criticism, or like that they want to exclude Fox News from certain interviews, but what he is doing is hardly unprecedented or more dangerous than what other presidents have done. So let's not get hysterical about it.

In order to put this in perspective, I suggest you read the following article posted on Media Matters web cite. It debunks the silly comparisons of Obama to Nixon. http://mediamatters.org/columns/200910230015

 

[chance1]

Kuli and Droid, don't take this the wrong way, but you guys need to get a grip. So far, all the Obama administration has done is criticize Fox News. They haven't arrested anyone, they haven't tapped anyone's phones, they haven't plotted to kill anyone. You may not approve of Obama's criticism, or like that they want to exclude Fox News from certain interviews, but what he is doing is hardly unprecedented or more dangerous than what other presidents have done. So let's not get hysterical about it.

In order to put this in perspective, I suggest you read the following article posted on Media Matters web cite. It debunks the silly comparisons of Obama to Nixon. http://mediamatters.org/columns/200910230015

wrong palemate

he and his lackeys have specifically said that fox news is NOT a news organization

he has put them on a different plane than the rest - who slant FOR him

he had his Pay Czar (can't make this shit up) attempt to talk to all news outlets EXCEPT Fox

the fish stinks from the head down - is a good saying

Rahm E - this may have been his "brainchild" - the segregation and demonization of Fox news

but Pres. Obama is in charge

seems like maybe he's not pulling all the strings lately - and letting his "people" make decisions - bad ones too

interesting for the first black president to be the one segregating

very sad shit

thin skin indeed

which is not good for a pres. in his first year

cuz it's gonna get tougher

 

[chance1]

You'll have to lay this out for me in a way I can understand. I don't know what you are talking about here.

What I can answer are what I bolded above:

As your blind hatred of Obama has diminished your ability to see

bad obama discussion on fox is good
good obama discussion anywhere is bad - because they are all of course the "liberal media"

it's that simple

and scary

and it makes Fox look really small indeed. Nevermind a bunch of liars, sexists, racist, ignorant, unpatriotic, homophobes, etc....

not sure what happened to u elvin

but ur hyper partisanship is pretty fucking scary shit

first of all

i don't hate obama - and if u track my posts - u would know that - i voted for him in the nys dem primary

but i guess me hating obama somehow makes ur point better - cuz god knows u can't do it alone

the fact that you can't see that the president of the united states trying to crush opposition to him - whether it's valid or not ..............

is a terrible terrible thing

that most all other nets lick obama's balls daily - msnbc being the primary "anti fox" for lack of a better term

that it's ok for them to bring him to orgasm

but not ok for another net to say "wait a second"

IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THEM

you need a break

 

[palemale]

wrong palemate

he and his lackeys have specifically said that fox news is NOT a news organization

Isn't saying that Fox News is not a news organization criticizing them? What has Obama done that past presidents haven't done much worse?

The fact is that Fox News is anti-Obama 24/7. All of the news organizations criticize Obama. Fox is in completely different territory, and they do function like a propaganda organization for the right-wing of the Republican Party.

 

[palemale]

not sure what happened to u elvin

but ur hyper partisanship is pretty fucking scary shit

first of all

i don't hate obama - and if u track my posts - u would know that - i voted for him in the nys dem primary

but i guess me hating obama somehow makes ur point better - cuz god knows u can't do it alone

the fact that you can't see that the president of the united states trying to crush opposition to him - whether it's valid or not ..............

is a terrible terrible thing

that most all other nets lick obama's balls daily - msnbc being the primary "anti fox" for lack of a better term

that it's ok for them to bring him to orgasm

but not ok for another net to say "wait a second"

IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THEM

you need a break

Chance, have you every watched MSNBC. They are often supportive of President Obama. They have also been very critical at times. For example, law professor Jonathan Turley is a regular guest and has been harshly critical of Obama on civil liberties, Guantanamo Bay prisoners and the continuation of some Bush era policies regarding these issues. MSNBC has also been very critical of Obama for his slowness in enacting legislation to repeal DADT/DOMA, for failing to push for the passage of EFCA and for not making a stronger push for meaningful health care reform. Does Fox ever level that sort of criticism against Republicans in Congress, or did they ever criticize Bush for anything?

 

[chance1]

Isn't saying that Fox News is not a news organization criticizing them? What has Obama done that past presidents haven't done much worse?

The fact is that Fox News is anti-Obama 24/7. All of the news organizations criticize Obama. Fox is in completely different territory, and they do function like a propaganda organization for the right-wing of the Republican Party.

criticizing them is saying i don't think their coverage is fair - until recently he said he doesn't always get a fair shake on fox - but that they're entitled ........

now they're personna non grata

and it appears he is trying to penalize them by withholding access

trying to get them re-classified as "not news" is not a criticism

and not to be taken so lightly

and it is def not anti obama 24/7 - that's silly

hannity and beck are on pres. obama's case exclusively - for sure - both love the attention and occasionally make very good points but lose IMO because they're so partisan and therefore lose cred with free thinking folks

oreilly is more than fair to obama - and if u watched him u would know

as for the rest - brit hume - very fair - he could work on any newscast

shepherd smith - milktoast

and the others

as jake tapper said - political opinion programming - talking heads - like hannity and beck - are not to be considered NEWS - just as keith o and rachel m are not NEWS - they are opinion

Pres. Obama like's the latter cuz they adore him and not the former because they attack him

that's show biz

its amazing to me that ONE network - FOX - is not in the tank for Obama and brings up things like ACORN while ALL of the others kiss his ring

yet in pres. obama's mind Fox is somehow not legitimate

is he a king?

nah

he looks mega bad here palemate

and independents will crucify him for it - as they should

 

[chance1]

Chance, have you every watched MSNBC. They are often supportive of President Obama. They have also been very critical at times. For example, law professor Jonathan Turley is a regular guest and has been harshly critical of Obama on civil liberties, Guantanamo Bay prisoners and the continuation of some Bush era policies regarding these issues. MSNBC has also been very critical of Obama for his slowness in enacting legislation to repeal DADT/DOMA, for failing to push for the passage of EFCA and for not making a stronger push for meaningful health care reform. Does Fox ever level that sort of criticism against Republicans in Congress, or did they ever criticize Bush for anything?

silly boy

i watch msnbc regularly

and yes occasionally, very rarely i might add, u will have a "he's not liberal enough" cry

it's not a common thing palemate

the common thing is poking fun of the right wing fringe - like michelle bachman, sarah palin and of course rush limbaugh

personal attacks on them is the norm - calling them names

what galls me the most is the perception that many of these talking heads give that what they say is the gospel and if u disagree with them then ur an idiot - they're so full of themselves - so pious - they give liberals a bad name IMO as they are the typical nose in the air "im smarter than u" assholes

do u watch bill maher ever? he takes issue with Obama being too afraid of the conservatives/republicans - that as president he should be more decisive and follow the liberal agenda - while i don't necessarily agree with bill i applaud his consistency of message

we're never gonna agree on this one unfortunately but i appreciate ur attempts to get me to see ur side

bottom line for me is that pres. obama is trying to quell opposition and trying to de-legitimize any network or people who think his policies r not good ones - and that's horrible

 

[palemale]

Chance, whether you like what President Obama is doing with Fox is one thing, but let's not exaggerate. It's quite tame compare to what other presidents have done. I posted a site to a Media Matters article, but am losing track of where because there seem to be three or four threads dealing with this issue. But if you find it, take a look.

The only thing Obama did that I thought was a little ham-handed was telling the other networks to exclude Fox from pool coverage of Feinberg's interview. If they didn't want Fox included, they shouldn't have offered up Feinberg to the pool. It hardly rises to the level of what Nixon or Bush did.

 

[JB3]

Chance, whether you like what President Obama is doing with Fox is one thing, but let's not exaggerate. It's quite tame compare to what other presidents have done. I posted a site to a Media Matters article, but am losing track of where because there seem to be three or four threads dealing with this issue. But if you find it, take a look.

The only thing Obama did that I thought was a little ham-handed was telling the other networks to exclude Fox from pool coverage of Feinberg's interview. If they didn't want Fox included, they shouldn't have offered up Feinberg to the pool. It hardly rises to the level of what Nixon or Bush did.

That's absolutely false. Bush NEVER purposely excluded a member of the news pool from interviewing a member of his administration or the executive branch. The fact that you're defending it speaks greatly to your character. (or lack thereof)

 

[JB3]

Do you think for one second that the teabagging was a grassroots movement? Nope. All put together and neatly delivered by FOX.

THAT's definitely a new one. No one, not even the queen of lies Rachel Maddow herself, tied Fox to organizing the tea protests.

 

[JB3]

Oh yeah, Obama wants to control the media world. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Did he censor Fox news? Did he ban them from traveling with him? Did he ban them from the White House?
He is not dictating anything. He is simply stating the obvious...that Fox News does NOTHING but slam him 24 hours a day and spread lies and induce hatred.
Want to know what is horrifying? People threatening tio KILL the President because this channel keeps pushing hatred and ignorance. THAT is horrifying.

Actions speak louder than words. The President of the United states told members of the press that Fox would not be allowed to interview a public servant, because he disagrees with their opinion programming. THAT is censorship. THAT is banning them from covering the administration's moves.

I still can't believe you are defending this. It boggles the mind the rank hypocrisy that you liberals are carrying with the whole Fox affair.

 

[naked gent]

That's absolutely false. Bush NEVER purposely excluded a member of the news pool from interviewing a member of his administration or the executive branch. The fact that you're defending it speaks greatly to your character. (or lack thereof)

Actions speak louder than words. The President of the United states told members of the press that Fox would not be allowed to interview a public servant, because he disagrees with their opinion programming. THAT is censorship. THAT is banning them from covering the administration's moves.

I still can't believe you are defending this. It boggles the mind the rank hypocrisy that you liberals are carrying with the whole Fox affair.

Droid I can't and won't defend the Obama Administration when they attempted to bar a Fox reporter from a pool interview but if you really believe nothing like this ever happened during the Bush administration I suggest you do a little research to enlighten yourself.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200910210028#3

I suppose there is a difference between refusing to allow Fox in there with the pool reporters and kicking N.Y. times reporters off of your plane but if access to administration members is the point then the differences do seem to dwindle.

I'll neither defend Obama or whitewash the Bush Administration when it comes to the press and I hope in the future you'll do the same.

 

[JB3]

Droid I can't and won't defend the Obama Administration when they attempted to bar a Fox reporter from a pool interview but if you really believe nothing like this ever happened during the Bush administration I suggest you do a little research to enlighten yourself.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200910210028#3

I suppose there is a difference between refusing to allow Fox in there with the pool reporters and kicking N.Y. times reporters off of your plane but if access to administration members is the point then the differences do seem to dwindle.

I'll neither defend Obama or whitewash the Bush Administration when it comes to the press and I hope in the future you'll do the same.

Ah but the NYT reporters only assumed it was because of who they worked for, which has never been confirmed. I'm not naive enough to believe that they just happened to not have seats, but that is a completely different situation than what we have here. The President and his advisers have stated that Fox is not a real news organization and should be treated as such, and immediately after that essentially banned them from interviewing a public servant.

 

[JB3]

Right. Like it wasn't promoted on a minute by minute basis and exagerrated by Fox.

Promotion and organization is a distinction that you seem to be unable to grasp. Fox had no hand in organizing any of the protests, contrary to what you may believe.

 

[JB3]

And I still can't believe you are buying this crap. lol
No matter what anyone says I won't change my mind.
Bush and Fox excluded and really censored and wire tapped and bugged journalists and blacklisted people. But no one wants to talk about that. Hypocrisy much?

Show me where Bush censored a press entity. Show me where they refused access to public servants because they didn't consider an organization to be a news organization.

 

[naked gent]

Ah but the NYT reporters only assumed it was because of who they worked for, which has never been confirmed. I'm not naive enough to believe that they just happened to not have seats, but that is a completely different situation than what we have here. The President and his advisers have stated that Fox is not a real news organization and should be treated as such, and immediately after that essentially banned them from interviewing a public servant.

You're either kidding or you are naive. Actions still speak louder than words.