It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ABC turns programming over to Obama; news to be anchored from inside the White House

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:50 AM
Obama probably has his "Media Czar" picked out, unannounced, quite possibly he is the genius that set this up.

Think it won't happen? Think again. All it's going to take to turn this country into a full fledged regime in Martial Law.

This is testing the water right now.

[edit on 6/16/2009 by sad_eyed_lady]

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:53 AM
At the risk of missing the point....

I understand the passionate fun many folks have debating health 'care' but I thought the OP was about how the US Federal Government can co-opt a commercial (privately owned) media broadcast to proselytize a 'plan' proposed by a single party to overhauls an American institution and have it 'sponsored' but NOT have a dissenting opinion represented in the presentation.

As if Americans were all 'customers' of the Federal Government and this is a 'product' they are 'marketing.'

The issue of health care aside..., does anyone see the patently un-American way this is being foisted upon us?

I suspect I am alone in this perception, since everyone here is still neck-deep in their entrenched dialogue about exactly who gets richer over our health, or lack of it.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:55 AM
Healthcare reform, to me, is a grey are on many levels to begin with. Do i want socialized medicine where I might have to wait for six months to see a doctor just for treatment for allergies or something? Of course not. But then again, having to pay fifty bucks for a bandaid should I end up in an ER is pretty much a negative as well. Doctors do have to go to school for a long time and they deserve to reap the benefits of their work. But at what point does their income stop becoming justified and simply become extortion? And blaming insurance fees seems ridiculous to me. Now that the government owns GM I think my next car payment will be partial and include a letter saying "Due to the rising costs of insurance I've altered our payment arrangement to offset my personal losses." Let's see how that goes over. It's what the medical profession is doing to us.

As far as news being taken over by the Government... I think most of us realize that the MSM has been operated, or at least influenced heavily by the Government for longer than we've been around anyway. This is just PR done well. By showing the public parts of the truth Obama will win over a lot of people, even as he stays, otherwise, with the status quo. "Of course my hand is in the cookie jar people. But everyone in power has their hand in the cookie jar - we are just the first administration to do it in front of you...".

People will eat this up.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:56 AM
If you buy this garbage then I say blame Nixon. After all, he started doing presidential addresses that were broadcast on networks first.

But no, Obama is doing it so it must be an evil attempt at a total government takeover.


posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:01 AM

Originally posted by whatukno
Uh presidents have made addresses before.

Shesh oh Pete people. I know hes a politician, but the world isn't going to end every time this man farts.

"Obama looks cross at a bug! THOUSANDS ARE GOING TO DIE IN GAS CHAMBERS!"

Yes, presidents have made addresses before but this is NOT an address. Presidential addresses are paid for by the government (airtime is VERY expensive), are not usually advertised extensively beforehand which I am assuming this infomercial will be, and are usually on ALL major networks.

Everyone assumes that a presidential address talks about only what the president wants to talk about. On the other hand, a whole lot of people assume that a news agency report is balanced and takes that information as true (although we here know better).

This ABC exclusive IS an infomercial for Obama's agenda clothed in ABC's reputation (although not deserved) as an unbiased news agency.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:05 AM
reply to post by Maxmars

Check For on_yur_6 and my posts (just ahead of yours). We are seeing it as you do.

What the hell is wrong with people? They just can't seem the grasp that the more serious issue at hand is government controlled media.:bnghd:

please read this post on drudge again folks:

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Ken McKay
Republican National Committee

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:05 AM
reply to post by whatukno

What this does is solidify the statement "liberal media", or the liberal spin and favoritism that the media gives liberals and democrats when they air their news. I've been given crap here on ATS for making that statement as liberals have often denied that there is no such thing as a "liberal" media. It's funny because those same people that deny there is no liberal spin to the media are usually quick to point out that Fox News is a "right wing extremist" news media, when the truth is Fox News isn't afraid to call out Democrats on their own BS.

ABC turns over programming to Obama and NBC froths with jealousy. Still deny there's a liberal spin to the media? Well there is, and now it's undeniable because this story proves it without a doubt.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:09 AM
I believe we are all of the same mind concerning our government and it's long reaching arm of change that we, the people, have no say in.

This theme is repeated in nearly every thread we make.

We have stated the problems and eventual move to rape our freedoms and tax us to death.

What I don't read from people is a way to change the events that are happening.

Someone, anyone, what is the answer? How can we stop our way of life and freedoms from eroding into the past tense.

It's easy to sit back in your comfortable chair in front of a computer screen and find fault and absolute idiocy in our governments actions. We can throw sticks and stones all day and night. But they are worthless if we don't put actions behind our words.

Please, tell me. Tell us all how we can change anything. I want to know.

It is like we are looking at a person bleeding to death and all sitting around discussing his blood type and how fast he is bleeding out and we are doing nothing to stop him from dying.

What is the answer? How can we stop the carnage of our constitution?

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:11 AM
Wow you US citizen should really watch out, else it will just end up like here in Denmark with free Hospital and healthcare, its pretty scaring that it got no cost. Im sure that our governtmen are in bed with Chavez also...

.Irony intended.

Best regards.


[edit on 16-6-2009 by Loke.]

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by sos37

Oh don't get me wrong, there is for sure a massive slant in the media. There is no doubt. They bend over backwards to make sure this dunce looks as good as they can, exactly the same way as when the last dunce that was in office they made look like a buffoon. Spin spin spin.

But every time this man makes a move the conservatives in this country start screaming coup and shouting from the hilltops that the sky is falling.

Its not falling, this guy isn't really in charge, we all know that corporations rule this country, perhaps you all got it backwards. Perhaps now you see that we do live in a corporate oligarchy and the puppeteers are just making it obvious. Perhaps it's just easier to set up shop in the white house. After all they bought it 40 years ago.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by dizziedame

Man, if Obama hasn't tried to subvert this government then I am a monkey's uncle. Other than rioting, I see using the internet as the best method of raising public awareness of the danger that lies ahead.

On C2C last night a member of the Iranian community, Hossein Hedjazi offered analysis on the post-election situation in Iran. He reported how the government is not able to quell the outrage over election fraud (as it has in the past) as the word is getting out to the world through the internet and twitter.

Communication is key in making the public aware of what is going down. Knowledge of this issue needs to be spread far and wide. Don't underestimate the power of words.They lead to action. My first thought is that people should be calling the Whitehouse, ABC and the media to voice their opinions.

If the issue gets as much attention as Letterman's Palin joke Obama will take notice.

[edit on 6/16/2009 by sad_eyed_lady]

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:39 AM
The USA - the land where you don`t have health insurance - you die in the gutter

and obama wants to do something about that , and all you rabid-dog neo cons can do is troll?

maybe , just maybe he wants to do some good.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:43 AM
reply to post by Harlequin

Remember Republicans believe that the government shouldn't help anyone, and the only roll the government should have is to bomb brown people.

That's why when republicans get into office the first thing they do is slash education funding. They shoot up defense funding and then attempt to obliterate any and all social services.

Republicans want to take away medicare, medicaid, social security. Anything that might benefit the poor.

A president makes a speech on prime time tv and so to republicans it's obviously a coup and an obvious takeover.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:46 AM
reply to post by Harlequin

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected.

Yeah, maybe he does want to do good, but this is a democracy not a dictatorship. Rabid, neo con trolls??? Sticks and stones, baby.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:48 AM
Obama already OWNS MSNBC. I guess one news outlet wasn't enough for him. Pretty soon, all of the networks, except FOXNEWS, will be controlled by the Obama government. Come to think of it, though, is that much different than it was during the Presidential campaign?

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:49 AM
I am amazed that the people still think there is a right wing media, or a left wing.... Heck, there is NO right or left anymore.

Its all acting, and they play their parts, and i may add, very well.

I seriously dont think the MSM actually engages in their daily rhetoric. some for Obama, some against, and not go home and have vile to puke after their "news". Unless the pay is astronomical, or they have been threatened, i just dont think they could be as stupid as to believe what they say.

Any way, this is a Communist move and its so in your face. I guess it doesnt matter anymore. The stupid public will put up with and watch Charlie peddle his wears.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:53 AM

Originally posted by 0nce 0nce

Originally posted by centurion1211
In answer to this naive viewpoint, let me re-state what should be the obvious.

"Health care" means "health insurance" it does not mean that every hospital is going to be run by the government, it means people will not be left for dead just because they can't afford help. The private sector would still exist, it will just have help from the government.

Private hospitals may still exist (open question), but the bureaucrats I described would still control the costs of healthcare - setting doctors salaries for one thing. With the ability to make more income by excelling taken away, doctors soon become like the bureaucrats themselves putting in their 8 hour day, not really caring ...

I'm not a greedy scumbag, I am willing to be taxed to help people who need help. If you saw someone get in an accident, would you help them? If you found out they were an illegal immigrant and or couldn't afford your help, would you still help them? I would.

Sorry if you feel insulted, but this is where your apparent naivete comes in. You are willing to give up still another facet of your life to government control. You would help in the creation of a "nanny state". Ever read Brave New World"? That's the logical conclusion of taking this path. And "greedy scumbag"? I said your thoughts were naive, I didn't resort to calling you personally anything derogatory. Typical liberal tactic when they feel challenged, however, and I'm used to it. Grow up. Dissent and debate are still allowed (?) in this country. BTW, I am certified in CPR and first aid, which should take care of your last comment. That means I would actually be able to help the people you described.

A government assisted health care system would actually lower health care costs FOR ALL OF US. For example; If someone got in an accident and an ambulance arrives to take them to the hospital, they will end up having to pay hundreds of dollars for that ambulance ride. People without insurance or a way to pay for that ride will force the hospitals to tax SOMEBODY. That is why the cost for an ambulance ride costs so much, there are so many people who can't afford it, or without insurance, that the price gets raised so that the people who actually can afford it, or have insurance, will be able to make up for the difference.

Wrong. The government will control healthcare costs by rationing care. You'll find that anything deemed too expensive by the bureaucrats I've previously mentioned will simply not be available no matter how badly you or your loved ones might need it. As for reasearch and the new drugs and medical procedures that come from that research? Forget it. Too expensive.

We are already getting taxed for other peoples health problems through high health care costs. High health care costs are a disguise to pay for other people's bills. A government health care would lower costs for health care because they wouldn't be forcing people who can afford it, to make up the difference. It takes a brain to understand that so I don't expect everyone to "get it".

Ah, more personal insults. You must be running out of the liberal talking points you've been hand fed.

Basically what I am saying is, we already pay for other peoples health care bills. Heath care costs so much because that is how they pay the bills for people who can't. A government health care system will force everyone to "pitch in" through taxes, to pay the bills. That means people who need health care more than others won't be forced to pay more to cover the costs for other's, and it means health care will be less expensive over all because they will no longer need to raise costs to pay for others. It's all linked together.
[edit on 16-6-2009 by 0nce 0nce]

And again, you will be proven wrong to everyone's detriment if this ever goes forward. Why? Simply because you will have given up the last bit of control over your own medical issues to people that don't give a ratz a$$ whether you live or die.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:58 AM

Originally posted by Digital_Reality
reply to post by centurion1211

You don't have to go to Canada. You can look right here in the good Ole USA at Medicaid and military healthcare.

I'm not sure what makes them think if they cant handle it on a small scale that they do a better job on a larger scale.

Exactly right, and having had to deal with community clinics for my daughters diabetic supplies, and their doctors,

The doctors are horrible, and you seldom see one, only a practitioner,

Then try and get the insulin.

Weeks and weeks of calling to see if it is in, I wont go into all the details it is awful.

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:04 PM
reply to post by 0nce 0nce

"Health care" means "health insurance" it does not mean that every hospital is going to be run by the government, it means people will not be left for dead just because they can't afford help. The private sector would still exist, it will just have help from the government.

Actually program's already exist in every state of the union to "save" those people who don't have the money or the insurance to pay for health care. I know for a fact that they are STATE and FEDERAL.
My brother in law had his aortic artery tear and had to be flown three time's in a helicopter to three different hospital's. Finally ending up at UC Stanford where he had life saving surgery. The state and federal plan kicked in and helped pay 80%+ of the bill. Some of the thing's he had done where paid straight out.

( By "life saving" I mean that the surgeon at Stanford said he had about 4-5 more minutes till he would have bled out and died. The bill was far in excess of 125,000 dollars! He paid a total of 6,000 some odd dollars in very easy to make payment's that they set up for him. If he didn't have the money one month they rolled it over and added it to the end.)

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 12:04 PM

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
Obama already OWNS MSNBC. I guess one news outlet wasn't enough for him. Pretty soon, all of the networks, except FOXNEWS, will be controlled by the Obama government. Come to think of it, though, is that much different than it was during the Presidential campaign?

This is what I don't understand.

How did this happen.

and I want to dig deep enough behind the scenes to see who it really running this show.

Honest to god, I knew it was going to be bad, I never saw it getting this bad , I am stupefied.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in