|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:09 PM by Eurisko2012
|
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
All 5 got together and said "You know what? This is total BS." 
The White House has NO business excluding any network. 
Team Obama actually thought they could get away with this BS.
Clear message to Obama. Grow up! Stop whining about Fox.
Can you just imagine the Bush Administration trying this trick?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:11 PM by hoghead cheese
|
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
As far as I know, this assault against Fox News by the administration is unprecedented and it flies into the face of the much touted transparency that
candidate Obama promised as part of his "change" and "hope" platform.
This is very dangerous ground for the administration to take because of Fox's growing reputation for "fair and balanced" news reporting across a
broad cross-section of the public, including liberals.
Yes, I know that there are some very conservative commentators on Fox News, but when I speak of their news coverage, I speak of the hard news programs
and not the various commentary shows that dominate the news day.
Still, Fox employs a host of liberal contributors, including Bob Beckel, Juan Williams, Ellis Henican, Morton Kondracke, and a host of others.
Although I don't watch other new sources anymore because of being sickened by years of overtly biased new reporting, I have to give them a tip of the
hat for standing up for Fox News.
Of course they can see the handwriting on the wall and realize that unless the "fourth estate" makes a united stand in favor of the First Amendment,
then any one of them could be the next to be excluded.
Even if you voted for Obama, I would suggest that you watch closely these tactics that the Obama administration uses and pay attention to the rhetoric
of those with whom the president surrounds himself.
The Left for more than eight years falsely accused the Bush administration of treating the constitution as "just a piece of paper" and now we have a
president that actually does that.
In fact, it has been my observation that every thing that the Left has accused Bush of being, Obama is in spades.
Stay tuned.
www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]
I totally agree, the other media outlets knew that if they let this go then sometime in the future they will be next. I really would like to know why
is the Obama administration going after FOX. Because by going after them this way it gives them the ammunition they need to play the victim of a
conspiracy against their "fair and balance" shows. There is something going on in this administration and this isn't about tea parties and such.
I think they don't like that this network is able to incite people and talk at length about NWO issues. Maybe Beck is getting to close to the truth
as with others.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:15 PM by GradyPhilpott
|
It should be noted that E. D. Hill lost her show on Fox for that statement, even though in the segment the body language expert concluded that the
Obamas' fist bump and GW Bush's chest bump at a service academy graduation were either totally benign or indecipherable on the surface.
I never heard the term terrorist fist jab before, but it is clear to anyone who watches the segment that Hill was characterizing a gesture in several
ways to indicate that it could be interpreted many ways depending on one's knowledge of the culture.
It seemed harmless to me, but Hill lost her job over three words that were not meant to characterize candidate Obama or his wife and didn't even
characterize the assessment of the expert consultant.
[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:16 PM by Eurisko2012
|
Originally posted by WarIsASport
Thank God for Fox News. If it wasn't for them we would not have any idea of what the Obama administration has been up to and their apparent desire to
make this into a Marxist state.
Also, thank God that the other news orgs stood up for Fox, even though they are competitors they acknowledge Fox News is a real news org.
[edit on 23-10-2009 by WarIsASport]
The other networks are still nursing their Acorn wounds.
Acorn story? What Acorn story?
The White House told us to sit on that Acorn story for 7 days.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:19 PM by rickyrrr
|
Originally posted by Republican08
Obamas transparency is a joke.
It's like that bug that keeps flying into the window, it thinks it can just go through, but it can't get anywhere!
But at least he's concerned with opinions of the people....oh wait, just read it... no, no he's not.
Haha, I just thought what if Bush had done something similar! Wow, i'd say maybe riots in the streets!
OMG totally, If the Bush administration would have done something to mess with our civil liberties we would have been all over that. Riots with
pitchforks and everything. Thank goodness that never happened!
-rrr
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:23 PM by trueset
|
Great Thread ! Gotta admit I watch alot of news from all sources and when I see a presidential administration try to knock one out of play ! Hey gotta
love the minerals ! Liberal or conservative or independent or whatever ! It really is getting to be an embarrassment for our country ! One by one we
are losing our liberties ! How can we continue to watch this display of arrogance and not wake up !
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:35 PM by detachedindividual
|
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
IMO, move along, nothing of importance here.
All these networks are biased, they all offer their opinion, they all repeat what is given to them, none of them do any work to actually
INVESTIGATE.
Your entire media is a joke.
I'm not saying our BBC is much better, but at least we have a varied choice of options, and we force most to maintain impartiality.
In America, it seems most of you know how bad it is, but you just can't switch off!?
So, what's the difference, CNN repeating what Obama tells them, or Fox, repeating what the Republicans tell them? Either way, you're not learning
the truth.
Edit to add:
I have to admit it is worrying to see the government selecting which media to allow. But doesn't that go back to the crux of the problem? Your media
are "selected" and "allowed" to report on the workings and actions of your government. Why are the press not SEEKING answers, why are they not
DEMANDING responses. Why do they have to be INVITED to begin with?
[edit on 23-10-2009 by detachedindividual]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:36 PM by GradyPhilpott
|
Originally posted by Jezus
During the June 6 edition of Fox News' America's Pulse, host E.D. Hill teased an upcoming discussion by saying, "A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist
fist jab? The gesture everyone seems to interpret differently."
I've just learned that Hill did not just make up this term, "terrorist fist jab." She just took the fall. It had come from a comment to one of
Cal Thomas' online commentaries that was linked by another journalist.
It's often asked, "Where does stupid stuff on the Internet come from?" In this instance, I think probably it came from me [Christopher Beam].
Although I didn't originate the conceit, I'm pretty sure that I'm the one who put it in circulation. Er, sorry. Like The New Yorker, I never
intended anyone to take it as anything other than a laughable example of ignorance.
The morning after Obama locked up the nomination, I was writing a "Trailhead" item that mocked the media's difficulty in figuring out what to call
the now famous gesture. "Fist-pound," "knuckle-bump," and "fist-to-fist thumbs up" were among the funnier examples, but one of
them—"Hezbollah-style fist jab"—was particularly risible. It came from the Web site for Human Events, a hard-right weekly. Unfortunately, I
failed to note that its provenance was not the magazine itself but a reader comment posted below an unrelated column by Cal Thomas. I linked the
phrase to the column but didn't explain that the words weren't Thomas'.
www.slate.com...
So, you see that all this hoopla didn't start with E. D. Hill and it didn't even start on Fox News, but the Left has seized upon it to prove that
Fox News is unfair and unbalanced and worse.
When I realized the confusion I'd helped cause, I posted a correction. But it was too late. Liberal bloggers from all over had already seized on
the phrase. Time and Politico misreported that the words were Thomas'. Then, fatefully, Fox News anchor E.D. Hill jauntily paraphrased
"Hezbollah-style fist jab" on air as "terrorist fist jab." Hill wasn't endorsing the phrase, but she failed to make clear that she was citing
someone else's characterization. She apologized the next day but lost her show anyway.
www.slate.com...
See. It was liberal bloggers who picked this up from one reader comment even before Hill ever misspoke.
[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:38 PM by hangedman13
|
reply to post by whackamole
Really now? By having just one view of the news what do you get? Only what they want you to hear. We have seen the integrity of the msm... Dan
Rather lost his lawsuit over his screw up over false reporting. Ohh I get it he worked for Fox! Fox is in the reporter pool at the white house, so
they must be a legitimate news outlet. How would you like being a member of a group you paid to join and then you were told that you could not go to
a function that group was going to be part of because someone didn't agree w/what you said? You paid right? You have just as much of a right as the
others. Where does it say the president can pick and choose who tells the news?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:38 PM by CoffinFeeder
|
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
This is rather telling of the relative immaturity of the administration. But, this is also somewhat like the classic actual investigative news
reporter vs a corrupt company/agency/etc...
like many have been saying.. "Transparency, my foot!"
Now, why in the world would this administration only want to have the news agencies report only what they say they should report. wtf, is this China
or something?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:41 PM by David9176
|
Yeah...Obama needs to stop this crap. All of the media is corporate owned and intertwined behind the scenes. I guess Obama just doesn't like the
companies Fox News stands by...he sure loves GE though!!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:46 PM by GradyPhilpott
|
Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
[I]s this China or something?
Well, Mao does seem to be popular among certain White House associates.
It's interesting to hear the manufacturing czar refer to capitalism in the manner he does, much less to quote Mao.
[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 04:58 PM by HunkaHunka
|
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
As far as I know, this assault against Fox News by the administration is unprecedented and it flies into the face of the much touted transparency that
candidate Obama promised as part of his "change" and "hope" platform.
I don't think so at all... I think the WH is being very transparent about how they feel toward Fox. Just because they exclude 1 member of the media
doesn't mean they aren't being transparent.
This is very dangerous ground for the administration to take because of Fox's growing reputation for "fair and balanced" news reporting across a
broad cross-section of the public, including liberals.
I JUST SPIT OUT MY WATER!!!
Yes, I know that there are some very conservative commentators on Fox News, but when I speak of their news coverage, I speak of the hard news programs
and not the various commentary shows that dominate the news day.
I'm not sure how you can call Glenn Beck "very conservative". He is much too volatile to ever be compared to a Conservative.
Hannity, though not as volatile as Beck is always one-sided and creates no space for rational thought.
Orielly, well it all depends on his mood...
And I know those are the commentators you mentioned... But still... Fox news, though not WND, is still rather close.
Still, Fox employs a host of liberal contributors, including Bob Beckel, Juan Williams, Ellis Henican, Morton Kondracke, and a host of others.
This is equivalent to saying "Some of my best friends are Black! How can I be racist?"
Although I don't watch other new sources anymore because of being sickened by years of overtly biased new reporting, I have to give them a tip of the
hat for standing up for Fox News.
Well yeah, when you lambast the media, you kinda have to include Fox in there too... so the media sticks up for the media... film at 11.
Of course they can see the handwriting on the wall and realize that unless the "fourth estate" makes a united stand in favor of the First Amendment,
then any one of them could be the next to be excluded.
Last I checked the First Amendment doesn't prevent an elected official from excluding a media outlet from a press conference.
I think you just don't like it when someone is honestly and openly saying "We really don't care to have you around Fox..."
I support the WH in this... As long as they hold press conferences, they have the right to stipulate who attends.... they are in no way making a law
infringing on free speech. Honestly, I believe it's YOUR attitude which is infringing on the First Amendment.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:05 PM by WarIsASport
|
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Well I am sure most Progressives hold your view, because as long as the rest of Liberal media can do as they please and kiss Obama's rearend then
that is just wonderful for you.
As for the rest of us, we don't think the President should be able to cut out a news org just because they hurt his little feelings.
If he is going to be fair then he should cut out Fox, MSNBC, NBC, and ABC and then maybe he might find a non biased news source. 
I watch Olberman, Maddow, and that crazy Ed guy every night on MSNBC and it makes me want to vomit, but I am sucker for a good horror show.
[edit on 23-10-2009 by WarIsASport]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:10 PM by HunkaHunka
|
Originally posted by WarIsASport
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Well I am sure most Progressives hold your view, because as long as the rest of Liberal media can do as they please and kiss Obama's rearend then
that is just wonderful for you.
As for the rest of us, we don't think the President should be able to cut out a news org just because they hurt his little feelings.
If he is going to be fair then he should cut out Fox, MSNBC, NBC, and ABC and then maybe he might find a non biased news source.
Well honestly... where is the law about this?
It's one thing to say "Oh another thing about Obama we don't like"
It's an entirely different thing to paint it as some sort of illegal or unconstitutional act!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:11 PM by GovtFlu
|
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
As far as I know, this assault against Fox News by the administration is unprecedented and it flies into the face of the much touted transparency that
candidate Obama promised as part of his "change" and "hope" platform.
This is very dangerous ground for the administration to take because of Fox's growing reputation for "fair and balanced" news reporting across a
broad cross-section of the public, including liberals.
Yes, I know that there are some very conservative commentators on Fox News, but when I speak of their news coverage, I speak of the hard news programs
and not the various commentary shows that dominate the news day.
Still, Fox employs a host of liberal contributors, including Bob Beckel, Juan Williams, Ellis Henican, Morton Kondracke, and a host of others.
Although I don't watch other new sources anymore because of being sickened by years of overtly biased new reporting, I have to give them a tip of the
hat for standing up for Fox News.
Of course they can see the handwriting on the wall and realize that unless the "fourth estate" makes a united stand in favor of the First Amendment,
then any one of them could be the next to be excluded.
Even if you voted for Obama, I would suggest that you watch closely these tactics that the Obama administration uses and pay attention to the rhetoric
of those with whom the president surrounds himself.
The Left for more than eight years falsely accused the Bush administration of treating the constitution as "just a piece of paper" and now we have a
president that actually does that.
In fact, it has been my observation that every thing that the Left has accused Bush of being, Obama is in spades.
Stay tuned.
www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
[edit on 2009/10/23 by GradyPhilpott]
Nobody told you the whole "left" Vs "right" thing was a phony guise to divide & conquer? The left and right are one DC Mafia family. The ones who
walk in lock step to keep the wars going, allow the PATRIOT act, enable the CIA to murder, meddle and act as a global terrorist petri dish where
pissed off strangers grow into suicidal killers who hate us.
They bicker like children to keep the masses entertained, as if all their posturing & speeches actually equates to something tangible. They can
rightfully accuse each other of being failures, because they are.
Fox news is just a different flavor of breaking non news fecaltainment (my word) who cater to the divided, obama is only making a larger fool
of himself by taking fox seriously. Personally I'd love to publicly ruin people who lied about me, with the truth and reality on my side, it would be
childs play owning those ignorant media clowns... so what is obama afraid of? surely 'the one' can out think Fox news personalities, eh?
Any reasonable person ignores the Fox people as just another gaggle of corporate media jesters dishing out the slanted diet their loyal flock of
sheeple crave.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:13 PM by WarIsASport
|
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Well from what I recollect the Liberals screamed unconstitutional andwar crime every time Bush breathed, farted, or woke up alive. So I guess they
are just going by the Liberal/Progressive example.
[edit on 23-10-2009 by WarIsASport]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:16 PM by Jezus
|
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It should be noted that E. D. Hill lost her show on Fox for that statement, even though in the segment the body language expert concluded that the
Obamas' fist bump and GW Bush's chest bump at a service academy graduation were either totally benign or indecipherable on the surface.
I never heard the term terrorist fist jab before, but it is clear to anyone who watches the segment that Hill was characterizing a gesture in several
ways to indicate that it could be interpreted many ways depending on one's knowledge of the culture.
It seemed harmless to me, but Hill lost her job over three words that were not meant to characterize candidate Obama or his wife and didn't even
characterize the assessment of the expert consultant.
The point is the the comment was considered worthy of national news coverage.
Fox news is divisive and sensationalist.
This has absolutely nothing to do with free speech, this is about a news organization that has demonstrated it can not be treated like a legitimate
news outlet.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:16 PM by HunkaHunka
|
Originally posted by WarIsASport
reply to post by HunkaHunka
Well from what I recollect the Liberals screamed unconstitutional andwar crime every time Bush breathed, farted, or woke up alive. So I guess they
are just going by example.
No only when he lied about intelligence which resulted in over 3,000+ American Deaths... that's an incredibly different thing.
I'll ask again... was there a law or something which was broken by excluding Fox News?
[edit on 23-10-2009 by HunkaHunka]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-10-2009 @ 05:18 PM by WarIsASport
|
reply to post by HunkaHunka
LOL, yeah that is way worse than attempting to turn the whole country into some Marxist state where the government controls everything. Right or
wrong at least Bush had a good reason callled 911 terrorist attack, but I am sure the Progressives blame him for that too.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
