DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 The reason they don't care is not because their demographics don't overlap with Fox News, because Fox actually draws a pretty solid independent audience, which the WH is losing at a ridiculous pace. I think they don't care because Obama, Emmanuel, etc. think they can. And that's just utter stupidity at a level so deep that even hardcore liberals (New York Times, Helen Thomas, etc.) are telling them to stop. Plus, it's one thing to have a throw-away advisor like Dunn do this, but Axelrod and Emmanuel piled on this weekend, and even though I'm a throw-away conservative, it's really getting a bit embarrassing. This country is in a schitstorm right now, from unemployment, to embarrassing deficits, to stalling on Afghanistan to appease the Pelosi Gang , to a flailing economy. Doing things like spending the weekend fighting Fox News not only comes across as petty, but it's pretty clear that the WH is creating this issue so no one will spend the weekend asking them questions about what a pathetic job they're doing. Demonizing people and groups is being taken to a new level, and it doesn't take a conservative hack like me to see this will likely backfire on them in embarrassing fashion. But fortunately, this president is being open and honest and transparent and, as he said during the campaign, “I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.” Time to change that to "I will demonize you, especially when we disagree." But FoxSnooze has never been one to just disagree with people themselves; they demonize anyone and virtually everyone to hell and gone. The administration's biggest problem there is stooping to Fox's level. And a point of note: as a believer that the economy does whatever the hell it wants with no regard to White House, I refuse to blame any of it on Obama. And the "stalling" on Afghanistan, I refuse to believe is a bad thing, give how naively idealistic their policy there has been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 But FoxSnooze has never been one to just disagree with people themselves; they demonize anyone and virtually everyone to hell and gone. The administration's biggest problem there is stooping to Fox's level. And a point of note: as a believer that the economy does whatever the hell it wants with no regard to White House, I refuse to blame any of it on Obama. And the "stalling" on Afghanistan, I refuse to believe is a bad thing, give how naively idealistic their policy there has been. I believe in the short run you may be correct, but to turn a blind eye to the exploding deficit, well, that's another story.... you have to believe 10 years from now, when our deficit reaches over 20 Trillion dollars, that it will have an effect on our economy, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 But FoxSnooze has never been one to just disagree with people themselves; they demonize anyone and virtually everyone to hell and gone. The administration's biggest problem there is stooping to Fox's level. And a point of note: as a believer that the economy does whatever the hell it wants with no regard to White House, I refuse to blame any of it on Obama. And the "stalling" on Afghanistan, I refuse to believe is a bad thing, give how naively idealistic their policy there has been. They most certainly did stoop to their level with their spokesman and his Mao nonsense... but there is a fine line between criticism of job performance (which not enough of the left-leaning networks are doing these days) and outright demonizing as you said. The problem is that we don't have a reliable outlet of news that tells it like it is, i.e. real news... all we get is fluff and controversy in the name of ratings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I believe in the short run you may be correct, but to turn a blind eye to the exploding deficit, well, that's another story.... you have to believe 10 years from now, when our deficit reaches over 20 Trillion dollars, that it will have an effect on our economy, don't you? I was talking short- and intermediate-term, yes...because it's what the most commonly reported numbers focus on, and what the White House gets blamed for. Long-term, fiscal policy will have an effect on the dollar, and our ability to borrow, which of course directly affects the economy. But again...despite the disgusting budget deficit, I wouldn't blame that strictly on Obama either. Fiscal irresponsibility is a long-term problem crossing many administrations of both parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 I was talking short- and intermediate-term, yes...because it's what the most commonly reported numbers focus on, and what the White House gets blamed for. Long-term, fiscal policy will have an effect on the dollar, and our ability to borrow, which of course directly affects the economy. But again...despite the disgusting budget deficit, I wouldn't blame that strictly on Obama either. Fiscal irresponsibility is a long-term problem crossing many administrations of both parties. Absolutely, deficits were exploding under Bush, there is no denying that, I would hardly consider him a true "conservative". However, Obama is making it much worse, and doesn't seem to be overly concerned about it, even though he says he is. One thing to say you are concerned another is to act on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Absolutely, deficits were exploding under Bush, there is no denying that, I would hardly consider him a true "conservative". However, Obama is making it much worse, and doesn't seem to be overly concerned about it, even though he says he is. One thing to say you are concerned another is to act on it. That's one of the reasons I didn't vote for him - or McCain, for that matter. It was pretty clear even in the primaries that deficits were going to at least stay at the same ridiculous level under either one of them. No doubt the next administration, too, will pay lip service to fiscal responsibility while running up massive deficits to "repair the damage done by the previous administration" (which is, of course, just code for "implement our pet projects that were ignored in favor of the other guys' pet projects.") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I am not buying all the pour me Faux Spews lament. This has been a brewing issue with Fox and the Dems and it has finally come to a head. It is not that they don't care, but they don't believe that they will get much of a fair shake with Fox and it is pointless to even bother. Actually they may get more attention for their perspective by shunning Fox and having a chance to point out how they think Fox distorts facts. However from Fox's standpoint it probably sells to highlight the shunning. By the way, I am not saying the WH doesn't spin its own version of facts, but since they are so diametrically opposed, I am not sure engaging Fox is worth their time, but maybe picking a fight is from both sides' perspective. Interesting strategy... goes into the old Clinton right wing conspiracy idea, though he chose to engage much more and it worked for him. I would get off your high horses though on both sides and think about how this plays out both short-term and long-term. I think Fox probably wins this argument short term. Long-term, I am betting that the WH feels that sooner or later Fox will overstep its bounds of decorum so that they can say, see I told you so... The controlling of the media however has been attempted by all Presidential aspirants in one form or another. Hell, this is a page right out of the Bush White House II regarding the Persian Gulf War II and the set up of Dan Rather on the Bush military record, puleease. Folks this is not new or really news other than a high ranking official actually stated it clearly how they tried to do it.... So fing what. They question is how successful were they and are they currently? Anita is a very smart person, and I am betting there is more to this then meets the eye. If she is back to consulting, which is what she does then she advised well and did her job and is just stating what everyone in Washington already knows... I know this makes for a good sound bite, but I don't really see how this is news??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 The controlling of the media however has been attempted by all Presidential aspirants in one form or another. Hell, this is a page right out of the Bush White House II regarding the Persian Gulf War II and the set up of Dan Rather on the Bush military record, puleease. Dan Rather is an arrogant know-it-all.... he did it all to himself. When Cronkite left, CBS News sucked and continues to suck. He's still a tool to this day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Dan Rather is an arrogant know-it-all.... he did it all to himself. When Cronkite left, CBS News sucked and continues to suck. He's still a tool to this day... Agreed and because of that he was an easy target of the Rove media control machine, that doesn't mean he wasn't set up and isn't a good example of WH attempting to control the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Agreed and because of that he was an easy target of the Rove media control machine, that doesn't mean he wasn't set up and isn't a good example of WH attempting to control the media. He was a big boy who slogged through 1968 and the Vietnam War years... that's the thing. He SHOULD have known better, but he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 He was a big boy who slogged through 1968 and the Vietnam War years... that's the thing. He SHOULD have known better, but he didn't. True, but he was dead in the water in trying to make a comeback of sorts... blew up in his face and Rove's tactics were brilliant. Wondering if the WH is trying something similar with Fox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 I am not buying all the pour me Faux Spews lament. This has been a brewing issue with Fox and the Dems and it has finally come to a head. It is not that they don't care, but they don't believe that they will get much of a fair shake with Fox and it is pointless to even bother. Actually they may get more attention for their perspective by shunning Fox and having a chance to point out how they think Fox distorts facts. However from Fox's standpoint it probably sells to highlight the shunning. By the way, I am not saying the WH doesn't spin its own version of facts, but since they are so diametrically opposed, I am not sure engaging Fox is worth their time, but maybe picking a fight is from both sides' perspective. Interesting strategy... goes into the old Clinton right wing conspiracy idea, though he chose to engage much more and it worked for him. I would get off your high horses though on both sides and think about how this plays out both short-term and long-term. I think Fox probably wins this argument short term. Long-term, I am betting that the WH feels that sooner or later Fox will overstep its bounds of decorum so that they can say, see I told you so... The controlling of the media however has been attempted by all Presidential aspirants in one form or another. Hell, this is a page right out of the Bush White House II regarding the Persian Gulf War II and the set up of Dan Rather on the Bush military record, puleease. Folks this is not new or really news other than a high ranking official actually stated it clearly how they tried to do it.... So fing what. They question is how successful were they and are they currently? Anita is a very smart person, and I am betting there is more to this then meets the eye. If she is back to consulting, which is what she does then she advised well and did her job and is just stating what everyone in Washington already knows... I know this makes for a good sound bite, but I don't really see how this is news??? MSNBC is equally unbalanced as FOX is and then you have CBS, ABC and CNN that all lean to the left. So at the end of the day the media is more tilted to the left than it is to the right. Btw, you can say all you want about FOX spewing information, but I can tell you this, they are providing news that the rest of the ball washers won't, no one reported about ACORN or Van Jones until FOX did. Shame on the rest of the networks for not doing so. No other news network reported how Congress didn't want to publish the full version of the HR 3200 bill online so the American public could read it before it was passed. There is a reason Yellow that Independents watch FOX more than any other news network. It's because they know that they won't get full coverage of what is going on the other networks, and independents are getting turned off by the media coverage and the direction that this country is heading. I'm not just saying things to say them, this is supported by the polling numbers. In regards to this being straight out of the playbook of Bush, to an extent yes, but not to this degree. This administration behaves like a bunch of babies, when they don't get their way, they demonize you, try to put gag orders on you, accuse you of spreading "misinformation" or "call you out" for not being on the same page as they are. My guess is at the end of the day, this little battle they have going on will do more harm for what it is that they are trying to achieve than good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I agree with you in a sense, but Steve Douchey and the rest are such simpletons that they come across as gomer pyle esque in their presentations that they end up sounding whiny and well just stupid. At least Rush makes arguments more put together than I know you are but what am I. I can deal with that. The arguments about the full version of the Bill online was a technical issue of getting that much work done while certain points were still be clarified and written, I have been there done that, happens all the time with both sides and from a staff point of view, it is a cluster... really a no win situation. Though everyone knows what is in the bill. Tying it all together is and getting it in its proper format takes time. P.S. I don't believe there is really such a thing as independents in any large numbers, or at least if you really press, there are people who don't want to declare for either party, but really only support one or the other. The persuadable number is much smaller than the numbers suggested. Like handicap license plates, there are far more people that are not handicapped with them than those that are actually. Regarding the Bush media playbook, how is this any different than who Bush took questions from, singled out unfriendly reporters for sequestration... there may be some differences in style but the tactics were just as if not more pernicious than the Obama admin. Though I would agree, both WHs have taken controlling the media to a whole different level without the media having much of a coherent intelligent strategy to counter. Fox is trying, but they look like idiots doing it. The others are only beginning to wake up. P.S. CNN is useless. At least with MSNBC and Fox you can clean the poles of the debate. The problem with them is that you can't tell the nuances and gain any real info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastback Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I agree with you in a sense, but Steve Douchey and the rest are such simpletons that they come across as gomer pyle esque in their presentations that they end up sounding whiny and well just stupid. At least Rush makes arguments more put together than I know you are but what am I. I can deal with that. The arguments about the full version of the Bill online was a technical issue of getting that much work done while certain points were still be clarified and written, I have been there done that, happens all the time with both sides and from a staff point of view, it is a cluster... really a no win situation. Though everyone knows what is in the bill. Tying it all together is and getting it in its proper format takes time. P.S. I don't believe there is really such a thing as independents in any large numbers, or at least if you really press, there are people who don't want to declare for either party, but really only support one or the other. The persuadable number is much smaller than the numbers suggested. Like handicap license plates, there are far more people that are not handicapped with them than those that are actually. Regarding the Bush media playbook, how is this any different than who Bush took questions from, singled out unfriendly reporters for sequestration... there may be some differences in style but the tactics were just as if not more pernicious than the Obama admin. Though I would agree, both WHs have taken controlling the media to a whole different level without the media having much of a coherent intelligent strategy to counter. Fox is trying, but they look like idiots doing it. The others are only beginning to wake up. P.S. CNN is useless. At least with MSNBC and Fox you can clean the poles of the debate. The problem with them is that you can't tell the nuances and gain any real info. All sides of the argument feel this is a losing strategy for the WH. Seriously, WTF are they thinking? Do you REALLY think this is an effective strategy for them? If so, I want some of what you're smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 fox news is racist....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 22, 2009 Author Share Posted October 22, 2009 I will personally find and beat the **** out of anyone who falls for this bait and feeds this !@#$ing troll. ummm, what was the reason for your last post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I will personally find and beat the **** out of anyone who falls for this bait and feeds this !@#$ing troll. Does this count for all threads and all subjects? Cuz if it do... Tom's got a major beat down coming. You gonna sell tickets to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Cuz if it do... Tom's got a major beat down coming. Really, I've thought you'd nut up enough to pretend to do it yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Really, I've thought you'd nut up enough to pretend to do it yourself. To beat you down? Sorry but unlike you I prefer to take on opponents capable of hitting back, that way on the rare occasions when I do win, it means something. But that's just me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 22, 2009 Author Share Posted October 22, 2009 Does this count for all threads and all subjects? Cuz if it do... Tom's got a major beat down coming. You gonna sell tickets to that? Hey R.I, I found your sig to be quite interesting to announce that there must be no criticism of the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile but is morally treasonable to the American public." You should write your master and his advisors and send him your sig. Then tell him and his entire staff that you believe he should resign for being "unpatriotic, servile and treasonable to the American public" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts