The Obama Admininstration to reward FOX News with continued access to the White House? Huh?

[Dr Fate]

Or:

Obama Admin. and unified effort among DEMS to punish FOX News by denying them access until they fire Sean Hannity. HOORAY!!!!

Which is the better idea? Which is the better headline?

Show your work!

[ProSense]

1. Glenn Beck is attacking Keith Olbermann

The WH tries to critize the media, and gets lambasted by some for doing so.

Cenk and others are wondering why progressives have no power.

[Dr Fate]

2. Oh no! I'm frightened! MOMMY- the bully is after me again! Shudder!

Shudder- what can I do- please dont beat me up Mr. Beck- who do you want me to fire this time?

MOOMMMY- someone is going to "lambast me" unless I reward FOX- please make the scary people play nice with me! I'm frightened!

But seriously- what the hell does anything you said have to do with anything I said?

So if DEMS boycott FOX, Beck will "lambast" us. LOL! No shit. He does that regardless.

I take it you vote for the "Obama rewards FOX" option. And we wonder why progressives have no power.

[ProSense]

6. "But seriously- what the hell does anything you said have to do with anything I said? "

The question is what does your response have to do with my comment?

The fact is that speculating over hypotheticals about what the administration should do is about as productive and declaring that progressives have no power.

Don't just stand there do something.

One of the most effective tools used during the 2006 campaign was the letter to the editor. Hell, people were posting them all over the place.

Bet Fox hasn't gotten a lot of letters from progressives complaining about Breitbart.

[Dr Fate]

8. Already wrote the letters. Called my reps too. Now I want elected DEMS to back me up.

It's not just on me- I need DEMS with power, money and instant media access to get my back.

Where are they?

And yes- I still have no idea what Glen Beck's attacks on KO have to do with the price of tea in China.

[ProSense]

18. "I need DEMS with power, money and instant media access to get my back."

With money so they can be lambasted as rich and instant media access so they can be labeled as being in the pocket of one media entity or another?

You want the Clintons, and given the wedding flap, that isn't working out too well.

[Dr Fate]

19. Your non-plan allows for continued "lambasting" as well- the only difference...

...is that I have a plan to hurt FOX news back-in a way that could help us.

Your excuse making and non-plans just allows for more lambasting- without even hitting back or tryig to curb it.

You do realize that Beck etc. wil "Lambast" us whether we take on FOX or not, right?

[ProSense]

20. Who is

"You do realize that Beck etc. wil "Lambast" us whether we take on FOX or not, right?"

...us?

You're having a hypothetical conversation with yourself.

The assumption that Dems with money who call out Republicans will be given media access is laughable: see Alan Grayson.

[Dr Fate]

22. I see elected DEMS on TV every single day. Maybe your tuner is busted?

Funny, I've even seen Alan Grayson himself on TV this week- on this tiny little station called NBC.

If Obama himself is being denied media access (strange, since I se him on TV all the time), then maybe he needs to give a press conference and give us the details on how this conspiracy works.

Hopefully he wont allow FOX.

So you are telling me that if, say 10 to 20 household names DEM went on TV this week, they would all have their mics cut as soon as they started talking about Sherrod & Hannity?

Really? Can we even call all of this an excuse?

It's beyond the realm of excuse- that's just a plain old fairy story. Obama can get on TV. Grayson can. Hillary can. Reid can. Pelosi can. Etc, etc. etc. Seen 'em with my own eyes, hundreds of times.

[ProSense]

25. "I see elected DEMS on TV every single day. "

So they have media access?

[Dr Fate]

27. Yes Virgina, Obama, Hillary, Blue Dogs, DLCers-even Grayson can get on TV.

And no one is going to cut their mics if they speak up about the FOX Sherrod issue.

Seem 'em myself.

Go ahead- turn on the TV- wait long enough, and the magical elected DEMS will appear, working mic and all- despite these bizzare conspiracy theories.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. If a person is fearful of being 'lambasted by some' then they

are not well suited for either media or politics, much less both at once. Seriously. Lambasted? Oh, mercy! Swoon and cower, I have been lambasted! Whipped with a verbal noodle, the worst of fates, so unexpected when taking the most public jobs in the world!
In the public eye, the fact is you will be lambasted by some for any and everything. And if that makes you shy to action, get a new gig.

[Dr Fate]

4. And "lambasted" by a proven liar, Glen Beck, no less.

If we really couldnt move on anything that Beck would "lambast" us over, then we would do ZERO. I smell another excuse.

If elected DEMS would have any trouble establishing Beck as yet another liar on FOX, then they must be either scared wimps or just plain idiots.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Hard to say

but they could not cut it in many fields if they have issues with this, and the media people learned long ago to embrace lambasting, and they do not care. This gives them an eternal upper hand with skittish politicos. Lambasted? So what.

[scheming daemons]

7. Every President needs a foil in the press room...

...a person they can call on that will look so crazy in comparison to the other reporters, that the heat goes away from the President and on the crazy reporter.


That reporter is Major Garrett.



The Harlem Globe Trotters needed the Washington Generals. And Obama needs Fox News.

[Dr Fate]

9. Sure- but plenty of conservatives at CNN, NBC, news papers, etc.

So unless we can craft some better excuses, we should still be able to move forward despite your concerns.

The idea is to punish FOX news by denying them access- we can find foils elsewhere.

[scheming daemons]

10. See the other thread... the WH has no role in who is in the WH Press Room

[Dr Fate]

11. See my dubunking of each and every excuse on that thread.

The "foil" excuse was easily shot down- but you had others lned up- good for you!

I prerer listing WAYS to fight as opposed to crafting weak excuses for not fighting, but I'm just a crazy liberal.

Is there a particular excuse from that thread that needs to be debunked here?

Feel free to list it.

[Spazito]

12. ROFL, debunking?

There is no 'debunking' from you in that thread at all, nada, zilch. There is 'crickets' from you in that thread.

I do not think that word means what you think it means

:rofl:

[scheming daemons]

13. You don't even have a post in the other thread....

...the White House Correspondence Association selects who gets a seat in the press room. The White House plays no role whatsoever.


Are you really this stupid?

[Dr Fate]

16. I thought you meant this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x385316

Now show me the law that gives the power to The White House Correpondence Association to mandate- to an elected president- who and who not is allowed to attend a press conferecne.

Be it FOX news or any other trans-national corporation- I've never seen a law saying that a President must be forced to allow them access.

I'm ready to concede as soon as I see a LAW that mandates that FOX news must be allowed to press conferences.

[Dr Fate]

14. I thought you meant this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x385316

Maybe you should post a link next time you reference a thread?

Anyway, what was the lame ass excuse that you needed me to debunk?

[scheming daemons]

15. Read the "CIVICS LESSON:" thread.... and quit while you're behind

You're embarrassing yourself.

[Dr Fate]

17. I'll concede as soon as I see the link and the law. Show me.

Show me the specifc law that mandates that a president have FOX news or any other corporation at press conferences.

[scheming daemons]

21. The links at the top of the "CIVICS LESSON" thread explain it... but in brief...

Woodrow Wilson established the WHCA and tasked them with selecting who gets to sit in the 49 seats in the WH press room.

It's been that way ever since. It's not a "law" per se... but the WHCA, as representatives of the "fourth estate", is set up to be completely independent of the White House so as not to play "favorites".


For Obama to, after 90 years of precedent, start to dictate terms to the WHCA as to who gets to be in the press room seats, it would rightly be looked at as something that 3rd-world banana republic dictators would do (i.e. Chavez).


An independent press is embodied in the First Amendment.


Your idea is counter to the spirit of what Jefferson intended in the First Amendment, and what Woodrow Wilson intended when he set up the WHCA.

[Dr Fate]

23. So it's not a law. No Mandate. I'm right- you are just scared that FOX, etc. might attack again.

So if we do this FOX news might accuse of going against Woodrow Wilson- oh, the horror.

And my idea is not counter to Jefferson what so ever.

Show me where Jefferson advocated that trans-national corporations who lie and commit fraud on our soil should have guranteed access to US property or an audience with WH.

You keep making this about free speech- but Jefferson did not beleive that corporate fraud was protected speech, and neither do I. Jefferson would probably have opposed a trans-national corp. like FOX even being allowed to be re-incorporated after a stunt like this. So sorry, Jefferson does not aid the excuse makers on this one.

Defamation where there is actual malice is not protected speech either.

Nothing FOX did to Sherrod is embodied in the First Amendment what so ever, so dont hide FOX behind it.

Actually- allowing FOX news to go unchecked sounds a whole lot more like what goes on in facist banana republic- seems like those are the places where the conservatives & corporatists are just allowed to make up shit and say whatever they want. If he denied FOX access, Obama would be opposing that, not advocating it.

So- Obama would not break a law at all- if anything, he would be setting better standards, as opposed to allowing poorer standards for honesty in media to continue.

So nothing for me to be emabarassed about at all- except maybe the lame-ass excuse making that takes the place of fighting these days.

[scheming daemons]

24. You're not right. You're obtuse and short-sighted.

The WHCA is an independent organization. Exerting dictatorial control over them would be a very bad move for Obama, both politically and ethically.

[Dr Fate]

26. No- I'm right- no law, no mandate- just lame ass excuses.

The Bar Association is an independent Organization too- and Bush got re-elected even after he stopped following their standards for choosing judges.

The League of Independent Women Voters is an idependent org too. Bush got re-elected, even after he DARED (Gassp!) to reject their presidential debate standards.

No one gave a shit, and the majority of voters shrugged. Bush still won- even with independent votes.

In our case, Obama would be 100% justified-he has even better standing than Bush- and unless he is poor at explaining himself (he is not) then he should have no problem explaining why PROVEN LIARS should not be allowed in the people's press corps.

This is the same press corps that allowed Jeff Gannon and Newsmax in it's ranks, BTW, so sorry if I dont see them as having very high standards.

[Dr Fate]

28. kick

n/t