Opposition and criticism of the government is part of American politics, and as long it is peaceful and civil, is a good for our country. This political season, especially this past summer, fireworks were lit and parades assembled. But unlike our normal Independence Day celebrations, this was a party based on criticism aimed at our current administration, some justified and others outright insane (i.e. the birthers, guns at town hall meetings, and nasty rhetoric). No baseball games with high fives, just political moments of low blows and innuendos. No picnics, barbecues and concerts with polite conversation; instead of debating the real issues of the day and ways we can make America better, we resorted to elementary behavior of name calling and drama, which included insults aimed directly at citizens.
MSNBC was out in full force to discredit conservative opposition with Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann and Ed Shultz asserting that the protests were “manufactured” and people were being “manipulated.” Shultz inserted that those showing up at town halls were “dumber than Joe the Plumber.” The left has labeled protesters as angry mobs, claiming that all opposition to Obama and his administration are rooted in stupidity and racism, and according the deranged wisdom of Janeane Garofalo, if you are a “black conservative” you must be suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Who could forget Nancy Pelosi’s and Barbara Boxer’s assault on concerned citizens; un-American, Astroturf, diversion by people who want to hurt President Obama, etc. By the way, all of these statements are pure speculation–opinions–, which is relevant to this article.
The latest in this saga: the White House has decided to take on the media, moreover, publicly setting its sights primarily on one specific news organization––Fox News. An October 8th article in Time Magazine, “Calling ‘Em Out: The White House Takes on the Press”, states that due to the criticism, the White House has developed a new strategy, “rather than just giving reporters ammunition to "fact-check" Obama's many critics, the White House decided it would become a player, issuing biting attacks on those pundits, politicians and outlets which make what the White House believes to be misleading or simply false claims." Obama's support was duly noted and was quoted as telling his aides he wanted to "call 'em out."
Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director, a fierce critic of, and leader of the charge against Fox News, which includes blocking Obama and other officials from appearing on the network, had this to say about Fox News, "it's opinion journalism masquerading as news.” "They are boosting their audience. But that doesn't mean we are going to sit back."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Arlo
If you think that the First Amendment is at risk under this administration, you're the one who needs to cut back on hyperbole.
2 - Cobra
Christine Lakatos writes:
"With all due respect, if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen, because we, as concerned citizens, have a right to know when promises are broken and when we are being lied to. "
And you trust the veracity of Fox News because...
You are aware that Fox News was bankrolled by a FOREIGN national named Rupert Murdoch?
You are aware of Fox News' President and Founder, Roger Ailes?
"Fox's founder and president, Roger Ailes, was for decades one of the savviest and most pugnacious Republican political operatives in Washington, a veteran of the Nixon and Reagan campaigns. Ailes is most famous for his role in crafting the elder Bush's media strategy in the bruising 1988 presidential race. With Ailes' help, Bush turned a double-digit deficit in the polls into a resounding win by targeting the GOP's base of white male voters in the South and West, using red-meat themes like Michael Dukakis' "card-carrying" membership in the ACLU, his laissez-faire attitude toward flag-burning, his alleged indifference to the pledge of allegiance--and, of course, paroled felon Willie Horton.
Described by fellow Bush aide Lee Atwater as having "two speeds--attack and destroy," Ailes once jocularly told a Time reporter (8/22/88): "The only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it." Later, as a producer for Rush Limbaugh's short-lived TV show, he was fond of calling Bill Clinton the "hippie president" and lashing out at "liberal bigots" (Washington Times, 5/11/93). It is these two sensibilities above all--right-wing talk radio and below-the-belt political campaigning--that Ailes brought with him to Fox, and his stamp is evident in all aspects of the network's programming."
Now, Christine, don't mistake what I'm trying to say. I believe Fox News has EVERY RIGHT to be the GOP Propaganda Arm that it was designed to be by Ailes. I also believe that President Obama, Democrats, minority groups, liberals and every other group Fox News constantly slimes has not only a right, but a responsibility to call them out for what they are, and respond to them as adversaries with a political agenda, and not neutral journalists in pursuit of "truth."
--Cobra
3 - Christine
Cobra, thanks for the Fox History Lesson. It seems similar to the far left MSNBC, who (to use your words) constantly slimes Ex-President Bush as well as EVERY Republican president, Republicans, conservatives, and whatever group they don't like. However, the entire Fox line-up is not about politics, just the opinion shows. Check out Shepard Smith on twice a day for example. And most news viewers know what they are getting when they watch MSNBC and FOX.
I think CNN is a lot more neutral.
4 - Roy
"However, the entire Fox line-up is not about politics, just the opinion shows."
Likewise, the entire MSNBC line-up is not about politics, just the opinion shows.
"And most news viewers know what they are getting when they watch MSNBC and FOX."
No Christine, you are wrong. Most FOX viewers believe it is a "news" organization and that is why the Obama administration is calling them out for what they are - a mouthpiece for the Republican party.
You can call out MSNBC also, but don't pretend FOX is an unbiased news organization. At best, they are a biased news organization. At worst (and that's most of the time), they are nothing more than propaganda for the right.
5 - Baronius
You heard it here first: Rupert Murdoch is FOREIGN.
6 - Scott
Hello - Excellent balanced discussion in your article, which rightfully detects the Rightward spin of FOX, and the in the tank left spin of MSNBC. Your coverage is much more balanced than either network -- and certainly much more so than the WhiteHouse propaganda merchants.
Here are three points for consideration:
1. Who's thin skinned? CNN's Wolfe Blitzer recently fact-checked a Saturday Night Live sketch about Obama. C'mon -- a comedy sketch? What other President's comedy sketches were ever fact checked? What could have possibly motivated Blitzer to do that? How about a few fact checks on Bill Marr?
2. Ignoring facts? FOX has three elements: News commentators who lean right, straight news reporting, and also -- left leaning commentators like Juan Willams, Alec Hennigan, and until Recently, Alan Colmes was a guest host. Thre are aothers. Geraldo Rivera is also historically left leaning in his politics. But the whitehouse and FOX critics make no mention of the balance the leftwing commentators provide, and make no distinction between news segments and commentator segments. Very convenient for them.
3. Democracy relies on debate in the best interest of education. We need both views. And the Whitehouse has no business attempting to tar its opponents, while conveniently overlooking its apologists. All they have to do is simply refute based on facts.
7 - Clavos
Now, Christine, don't mistake what I'm trying to say. I believe Fox News has EVERY RIGHT to be the GOP Propaganda Arm that it was designed to be by Ailes. I also believe that President Obama, Democrats, minority groups, liberals and every other group Fox News constantly slimes has not only a right, but a responsibility to call them out for what they are, and respond to them as adversaries with a political agenda, and not neutral journalists in pursuit of "truth."
I agree. I enjoy watching all of Fox's targets get apoplectic.
However, there are no "neutral." american journalists (or networks).
8 - Clavos
You heard it here first: Rupert Murdoch is FOREIGN.
Actually, like all of us except for the Indians, he's an immigrant US citizen since 1985.
9 - Christine
Scott, thanks for your comments and the three points that followed. I wanted to spend more time on #2 in my article, however, the BC audience has reprimanded me for being long winded in the past.
I love JUAN WILLIAMS! And Geraldo is most definitely on the left. In fact he is on now and earlier after the "balloonboy hoax story", gave a Republican a hard time about health care reform!
10 - Christine
Clavos, I agree. I enjoy watching all of Fox's targets get apoplectic.
I'm not sure I am following?
Baronius is funny! LOL And thanks to Clavos, we cleared that up!
11 - Dr Dreadful
Actually, like all of us except for the Indians, he's an immigrant US citizen since 1985.
Damn foreigners...
12 - Dr Dreadful
FOX has three elements: News commentators who lean right, straight news reporting, and also -- left leaning commentators like Juan Willams, Alec Hennigan, and until Recently, Alan Colmes was a guest host.
Two points here: first, although Fox has a few 'liberal' pundits and talking heads, their shows are always, always set up in such a way that the 'leftie' is supposed to come off worst (leading questions, 'gotcha' questions, 3 vs. 1 debate panels etc). It doesn't always work, of course, but you can't really claim with a straight face that the handful of left-wing voices on Fox make it a 'balanced' network.
Secondly, there is no straight news reporting on Fox except for the top-of-the-hour news bulletins, and even they're a bit suspect sometimes.
I've got no problem with the existence of Fox News (other than that they're all as thick as pigshit) - it's just that they shouldn't call themselves that!
13 - Reality
Republicans always confront media and witch hunt people who criticize them, Do you remember when 60 minutes journalists had to resign for his documentary about Bush ? same thing should happen with all liars on Faux.
14 - Baritone
As Doc notes, very little of FOX News is actually news. MSNBC starts out the day featuring Joe Scarborough who is definitely a voice from the right. Pat Buchanan, a regular commentator, is also staunchly on the right. The rest of the day, MSNBC is more or less neutral until Chris Matthews comes on at 5PM. Then the left takes over.
A couple of points of my own: Rachael Maddow has taken great pains to illustrate just where the leadership and funding comes from for the tea baggers and the rest. Her research is not of the Glen Beck variety - a nut job who just pulls crap directly out of his butt and hands it gift wrapped to his devoted fans.
I know Olbermann often goes over the top, but he does so largely with intelligence and Maddow is obviously far to the left, but also comes at the right through reasoned, methodical intelligence.
Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly and the rest rarely show any base intelligence, and Doc is absolutely correct in how FOX uses its supposed "liberal" pundits.
If FOX usually came up with legitimate concerns in their criticism of the Obama administration, I doubt that the White House would have considered firing back at them. But, as the great majority of crap plopping out of FOX is absolute lies and distortions, I see why they felt it necessary to do so.
I think Obama and his people can in fact stand the heat, except at times the heat becomes less tolerable when the fires are stoked by ham handed bullshit from FOX.
B
15 - Jet Gardner
You see, in their alternate reality Fox is the ONLY news source that is "Fair and Balanced" because anything else except Limbaugh is far-left propoganda lies. Trying to convince them otherwise is an exercise in futility because like their bretheren their minds are completely closed.
Half of them hate gays to because they don't want to admit that they masturbate to a photo of Glen Beck every night before going to sleep with their stuffed Reagan plush toys every night.
16 - Jet Gardner
Here's a little something from personal experience that you might find interesting...
I've spent a lot of time in hospital and doctor's waiting rooms the last couple of years and I've noticed an interesting phenomomonmonon. If it's an early morning appointment roughly a third have the waiting room TV on the morning shows, a third have them on Fox and a third have them on CNN's headline news.
If my appointment is in the afternoon somehow the same TVs are either tuned to CNN or Headline news.
I tried and experiment once and stayed after my OSU eye appointment one morning while the TV was tuned to FOX and sat in the back and just watched. After about 45 minutes several people began muttering, one got up and asked the nurse if they could change the station... she said no, she had to do it because she'd have to get a little step ladder to reach it.
When she asked what channel they wanted to watch about a tenth said soap operas and the rest said either CNN or Headline news.
This is absolutely true.
17 - STM
Baron: "You heard it here first: Rupert Murdoch is FOREIGN".
No he's not, YOU are.
Actually, he's now a US citizen.
I understand Australians and Americans are now legally able to hold dual citizenship of both countries.
Whether Mr Murdoch holds that status, I don't know, but he ain't foreign to me ...
18 - STM
You philistine pack of foreigners ...
19 - STM
Scott writes: Democracy relies on debate in the best interest of education. We need both views."
Hooray and bingo.
That's modern liberal (in the political sense, not the party sense) democracy at work. It'd be a much worse place if that stuff WASN'T happening.
Imagine the power of one voice, the rest silenced, the debate strangled.
Clearly, that is not the case; America can go to a zillion different sources for its news and opinion.
That's why even if you don't like either Fox or MNSBC, go somewhere else to get it.
You not only have the right to free speech, and to hear free speech, but a God-given right to exercise the remote control.
20 - pablo
The founding fathers on democracy:
John Adams, in a letter to John Taylor, wrote: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
James Madison said: "...democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
Alexander Hamilton, in debate, said: "Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate government."
Elbridge Gerry, in debate, said: "The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue, but are the dupes of pretended patriots."
And after the Constitution had been adopted: Alexander Hamilton, in Senate: "It has been observed that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies, in which the people themselves deliberated, never possessed one feature of good government. Their very character was tyranny: their figure deformity."
Democracy my ASS.
21 - STM
Geez, here we go again.
That would be: Democracy in the modern, commonly used sense, the term that is now in common English usage to describe any type of stable, free, liberal, open, free-market society - not the meaning of democracy in the ancient-Greek sense, which is what the founding fathers were talking about.
Times change and so do words.
Let's not split hairs here, Pablo, over the usage of a word that has NOW come to describe a certain type of government. It proves nothing in the debate and ultimately means nothing.
Even American presidents of the 20th century have come to use the term to describe America as part of that developed world experience.
That expedient use of a word and the different emphasis it now has should dovetail very nicely with your views on rights and the 9th amendment, and how the constant state of flux in a democratic society keeps that one to the forefront, despite many Americans not understanding why.
We KNOW the US is a representative republic under a constitution, with the president wielding executive power.
I also know Australia is a representative constititional monarchy, with the Queen's representive wielding (far less) executive power.
They look (very) slightly different in form, but they function near identically.
And they are both now described as democracies in the modern sense.
22 - Jet Gardner
You're behind the times there Stan, the Republicans are now insisting that we're a Republic instead of a Democracy, trying to scare the ignorant into believing that the Democrats are trying to change the country and to call to the NRA and right-wing militias to arms.
Then we'll get rid of the word "God" in the pledge of allegance to the flag and change the phrase to "...and to the democracy for which it stands..."
Glen Beck has been preaching that for weeks and says once Obama changes us to a democracy it's only a stone's throw to socialism.
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek!
23 - STM
Neither America nor any of the other developed-world countries now described andregarded as democracies are actually real democracies.
Anyone using this argument is splitting hairs for ideological reasons only. I've heard that hoary old "we're a republic, not a democracy" argument over and over again (and it's right if you're talking the ancient Greek sense of democracy), and most often in regard to the 2nd amendment.
My other favourite right-wing saying in regard to the use of the word (which now has much broader meaning) and how it might pertain to certain rights, especially those involving guns, is that "democracy is two wolves and a sheep arguing over what's for dinner".
I say the American experience is actually the polar opposite: Two sheep and a wolf, with the wolf arguing that the sheep have no right to decide what's for dinner despite being in the majority and that because the wolf has much sharper teeth, is bigger, louder and meaner, it actually gets to choose.
The depth of delusion among certain sections of the voting public in America sometimes appears, to (happy) outsiders like me, to have no end.
I'm advising everyone over there to get out now while the going's good.
Just don't come here :) We're full already and we've got enough mad people of our own.
24 - Jet Gardner
China's a Republic; maybe that where the Republicans hope we're going...???
25 - Ruvy
America a developed country, Stan? You sure you're not losing it? The young women there are pretty well developed, but you can say that about most anywhere. Americans and Europeans always struck me as arrogant savages who thought they were civilized (I won't comment about Aussies or Kiwis).
To be blunt, any country that does not have any form of socialized medicine can make no claim to being developed (young women notwithstanding). The problem with the Americans is that they have waited until they are broke and completely in debt to the communist Chinese before being willing to seriously consider socialized medicine. America can't afford it anymore.
There is only one word for such behavior - stupid. America was a great idea - whose time has come - and gone....