Post #309,739
6/16/09 11:59:09 AM
|

gummint motors, gummint banks, now gummint news?
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaot.htm
ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET
On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm nixon must be laughing his ass off
|
Post #309,746
6/16/09 1:26:00 PM
|

Re: gummint motors, gummint banks, now gummint news?
In the economic sphere, many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism.[10][11] This was to be achieved by a form of government control over business and labour (called "the corporate state" by Mussolini).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Anybody care to start apologizing to George yet or shall we rewrite history (and wikipedia) to hide the inconvenient fact that Obama has essentially nationalized the largest manufacturing industry in this country, intends to nationalize the largest service industry in this country, has appointed people to oversee how workers are compensated in this country, has already imposed limits on some compensation (covered by TARP) ...
or will you all just object to this characterization and fire back that "at least he has the trains running on time".
I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
|
Post #309,748
6/16/09 1:27:49 PM
|

george started this crap, obama is continuing it
|
Post #309,756
6/16/09 3:39:32 PM
|

Key difference
In a Fascism the business leaders are in cahoots with the government. With Obama it seems to be the unions that are in cahoots with the government. Still a terrible idea in general and likely to be bad for the US if government involvement lasts too long.
Jay
|
Post #309,758
6/16/09 5:30:41 PM
|

disagree union leaders wall st affiliates of the president
are in cahoots, those who disagree get fired and taken over
thanx,
bill
|
Post #309,760
6/16/09 6:27:43 PM
|

Too bad we got rid of the Fairness Doctrine
Maybe the RNC can use their news organ to present a more fair and balanced viewpoint.
|
Post #309,762
6/16/09 7:40:05 PM
|

We didn't get rid of the equal time rule.
This would fall into a fairly gray exception area as a "news conference"..but if ABC is giving the time away for free then the Reps may be able to make a case that they receive equal time.
I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
|
Post #309,764
6/16/09 8:18:08 PM
|

republicans have a news organ?
I tought the only organ they had was to get behind the people
|
Post #309,770
6/17/09 3:37:12 AM
|

gummint news?
WASHINGTON Â Two weeks before a pivotal election, the Bush administration brought some of the Republican Party's conservative base to its front yard Tuesday by inviting talk radio hosts to broadcast from the North Lawn of the White House.
About three dozen radio hosts set up inside a huge tent, interviewing administration stars such as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and political guru Karl Rove. The hosts, both national and local plus a smattering of liberals, hailed from New York to San Diego. USA Today, 10/25/06.
irritably,
|
Post #309,771
6/17/09 6:26:54 AM
|

Re: gummint news?
Probably brought to the GWB White House on the Bourgeoisie's dime.
|
Post #309,772
6/17/09 6:31:30 AM
|

So I see
talk radio has made the big time...being equated to one of the 3 (now 4) major networks.
Glenn Beck shouldn't worry about his little show on CNN then...since he is already in the big time.
Besides...its good enough just to hear "well he did it too".
Plus ca change....
I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
|
Post #309,775
6/17/09 7:59:39 AM
|

give me a call when repos bring in the big 3
abc,nbc,cbs without having to kiss their ass instead of the big 3 kissing obama's ass, then we will chat
|
Post #309,819
6/17/09 8:06:51 PM
|

Carp, it's not just a fish anymore.
|
Post #309,835
6/18/09 8:00:29 AM
|

dont have a siezure over it
|
Post #309,867
6/18/09 6:19:28 PM
|

Having a cow, are we?
|
Post #309,873
6/18/09 9:02:24 PM
|

sigh, carpe diem
|
Post #309,774
6/17/09 7:06:05 AM
|

If its on Drudge, it must be true. Right?
ABC Responds: http://blogs.abcnews...-rnc-letter-.html
Oh, and the White House getting a big block of time to push something is very old. Kennedy's White House had 3 networks simultaneously (ABC later) and 75% of the audience. ABC will be lucky to get a tiny fraction of that: http://www.museum.tv...ew/tourofthew.htm
On the night of 14 February 1962 three out of four television viewers tuned to CBS or NBC to watch a A Tour of the White House with Mrs. John F. Kennedy. Four nights later, ABC rebroadcast the program to a sizable national audience before it then moved on to syndication in more than fifty countries around the globe. In all, it was estimated that hundreds of millions of people saw the program, making it the most widely viewed documentary during the genre's so called golden age. But the White House tour is also notable because it marked a shift in network news strategies, since it was the first primetime documentary to explicitly court a female audience.
[...]
Consequently, Jacqueline Kennedy's campaign to redecorate the White House with authentic furnishings and period pieces drew extensive coverage. Taking the lead in fundraising and planning, she achieved her goals in a little over a year and, as the project neared completion, she acceded to requests from the networks for a televised tour of the residence. It was agreed that CBS producer Perry Wolff, Hollywood feature film director Franklin Schaffner, and CBS correspondent Charles Collingwood would play leading roles in organizing the program, but that the three networks would share the costs and each would be allowed to broadcast the finished documentary. The weekend before the videotaping, nine tons of equipment were put in place by 54 technicians and cutaway segments were taped in advance. Jacqueline Kennedy's parts were recorded during an eight hour session on Monday.
[...]
I guess finding real issues about which to confront Obama's administration is too much work for the right wing "news" these days, so they have to manufacture these false outrages... Barack must be smiling though, since this "ethical firestorm" surely increases interest in it.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #309,776
6/17/09 8:01:50 AM
|

so now you are equating obama with our greatest president
in modern history, after only 100 days or so?
|
Post #309,777
6/17/09 8:04:51 AM
|

Heh. :-)
|
Post #309,779
6/17/09 8:07:56 AM
|

worth a shot :-)
|
Post #309,783
6/17/09 9:07:06 AM
|

Math question
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.
1 + 1 = "all" ?
--
Drew
|
Post #309,785
6/17/09 9:23:53 AM
|

Well the Libertarian position would take much time
go away and leave me alone...pretty simple.
I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
|
Post #309,791
6/17/09 9:58:22 AM
6/17/09 9:59:14 AM
|

Been there, done that
The result was snake oil. Literally.
Regulating medicine is what got us where we are. Regulation makes it expensive. Without the regulations, you could find a medical practitioner who doesn't have big student loans and insurance to pay, and pharmaceuticals produced by some factory in China. But with the regulations, the free market is broken. "Go away and leave me alone" doesn't work for medicine any more than it works for military defense, police, interstate road systems...
Maybe with better education and access to information unregulated medicine would work now. It would probably be better than it was in the medicine show days. A quick review of my spam folder suggests maybe not. My heart wants to pick Wikipedia over the AMA, but my brain won't cooperate.
All this being said, don't get any non-emergency skeleto-muscular surgery without trying a massage therapist first. The number of people I deal with who tell me what I did helped them more than the surgery they tried first is depressing. And if I can't help, at least you have all the parts you had and no new scars. I've seen (and felt) chiropracters do good stuff too. And acupuncture, well, I don't know whether it works, but it is non-destructive and not terribly expensive, so if you don't have my aversion to needles, what the hell.

Edited by mhuber
June 17, 2009, 09:59:14 AM EDT
|
Post #309,789
6/17/09 9:38:52 AM
|

sure all
reformers and conservatives, just like the iranians have
|
Post #309,850
6/18/09 11:57:34 AM
|

Re: gummint motors, gummint banks, now gummint news?
But such criticism ignores the fact that the Bush administration repeatedly gave exclusive access to Fox News, which often used such opportunities to ask softball questions and run specials about the administration. For instance:
* During an exclusive interview with then-President Bush on the June 8, 2005, edition of Your World, host Neil Cavuto asked Bush questions such as: "Let me ask you about the economy, sir. Almost any objective read tells you that we're still doing very, very well. ... Do you think you get a bum rap in the media on the economy?" and "Do you ever get mad at your fellow Republicans?" As Media Matters for America noted at the time, Media Research Center president L. Brent Bozell III defended Cavuto from criticism that he had lobbed "softball" questions to Bush, asserting that Bush was asked "some challenging questions" and that the interview "was no puff job."
* Similarly, Cavuto's July 31, 2006, exclusive interview with Bush also featured softballs, false assertions, and a failure on Cavuto's part to ask any substantive questions regarding the Iraq war, as Media Matters documented. In addition, Cavuto rarely challenged Bush's answers, including Bush's claim that "I think about Al Qaeda every day" -- even though he previously asserted that he was "not that concerned" about Osama bin Laden. After the interview, Cavuto repeatedly praised the president and his ability to withstand the Miami humidity, telling Fox News' Brian Wilson that Bush "was dry as toast" and "looked great."
* On February 16, 2006, Cheney granted his first interview after accidentally shooting a hunting companion in the face to Fox News' Brit Hume. As Media Matters noted, in airing the interview, Fox News omitted Cheney's comments about drinking a beer the day he shot his hunting companion, Harry Whittington, and even excluded the comments from what it said was the "full interview" posted on its website. Yet, on the February 19 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Hume gave himself high marks for the manner in which he conducted his interview with Cheney, saying "[t]he last thing in the world that Dick Cheney needed on that day was a soft interview," and "my job was to simply sit there and walk through this episode with him and ask all the relevant questions." Moreover, Hume neglected to ask a number of "relevant" questions, as Media Matters noted. For example, Cheney appeared to accept responsibility for shooting Whittington ("Well, ultimately, I'm the guy who pulled the trigger"), but Hume failed to ask Cheney why he allowed surrogates -- without challenging or correcting them -- to publicly blame Whittington for the accident.
* On September 30, 2006, Fox aired a special on then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, titled "Why He Fights," which promised to "examine why President Bush stands behind him and what drives the 73-year-old Rumsfeld to soldier on." In a "Reporter's Notebook" entry on the documentary, Bret Baier, who interviewed Rumsfeld, wrote: "[F]or me, Rumsfeld continues to be one of the most fascinating figures in President Bush's war cabinet." He continued, "At 74 years old, he is a self-made millionaire many times over. He once served as the nation's youngest defense secretary -- now he's the oldest. So what keeps him going? What makes him continue to fight?" Baier further described the special as a "series of one-on-one interviews with Rumsfeld that took place over the course of several months," adding: "I traveled with Rumsfeld to Iraq numerous times, spoke with him at the Pentagon, and even rode along with him as he traveled to and from the White House."
* On the October 16, 17, and 18, 2006, editions of The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly aired portions of his October 16 interview with Bush, which consisted of such "tough questions" as whether Hillary Clinton is "soft on terrorism," whether "the anti-Bush press" is responsible for popular opposition to the war, and whether Bush was aware that critics "are trying to destroy you." O'Reilly also asked Bush, "[Y]ou work hard, right?" In his introduction to the October 16 interview segment, O'Reilly stated that "[b]ecause every presidential interview is finite," he would concentrate on "what is happening now." Absent from the interview, O'Reilly stated, would be any questions that "look back," because, "What good does it do to rehash WMDs?" According to the on-screen text, "Looking back doesn't do anybody any good."
* On October 13, 2007, Fox News aired "Dick Cheney: No Retreat," which was described as "an exclusive interview" with Cheney and teased as "a rare glimpse into the life of the vice president."
* On February 2 and February 3, 2008, Fox News aired a documentary titled "George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish," after, as Fox itself described, "FOX News' Bret Baier was granted unprecedented access by George W. Bush as the president begins the final year of his extraordinarily consequential tenure."
Media Matters has also noted that Fox News hosted events from Bush and Cheney's post-2008 election "legacy tour" where Fox News interviewers utterly failed to push back against statements that were highly disputable, or echoed those statements themselves:
* In a December 17, 2008, interview with Bush that aired on Special Report, host Bret Baier asked Bush, "Do you believe that there hasn't been a terrorist attack on U.S. soil in more than seven years because of the policies your administration has implemented?" The question tracked a talking point reportedly contained in a "two-page memo" that the Los Angeles Times reported "presents the Bush record as an unalloyed success" and "mentions none of the episodes that detractors say have marred his presidency."
* In an interview that aired on the December 22, 2008, edition of Fox News Sunday, Cheney told host Chris Wallace that "the actions that we took, based on the president's decisions and based on some outstanding work by the intelligence community and by the military, has produced a safe seven and a half years. I think the record speaks for itself." Wallace did not note that a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released on April 17, 2008 -- titled "The United States Lacks Comprehensive Plan to Destroy the Terrorist Threat and Close the Safe Haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas" -- found that "[t]he United States has not met its national security goals to destroy terrorist threats and close the safe haven in Pakistan's FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas]." Nor did Wallace note that investigative journalist Ron Suskind has reported that many CIA analysts believe Al Qaeda leaders have declined to attack the United States again for strategic reasons, not due to the Bush administration's counterterrorism policies. Further, the degree to which several terrorist attacks the Bush administration supposedly thwarted were credible threats has been disputed. In the interview, Cheney also claimed that the tax cuts were "how we recovered from the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks," and Wallace did not point out that lost revenue through tax cuts has been the greatest single contributor to the deficit during the Bush administration, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
* During an interview that aired on the January 11 edition of Special Report, Brit Hume asked Bush, "[H]ow badly would it hurt, in your view, if these enhanced interrogation techniques -- that some call torture -- were abandoned and were not used?" Bush replied in part: "Everything this administration did was -- had a -- you know -- a legal basis to it, otherwise we would not have done it." Hume did not note that the interrogation opinions issued by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) from August 2002 and March 2003 were subsequently withdrawn by Jack Goldsmith, who served as the head of OLC from 2003 to 2004. Indeed, Goldsmith wrote in his book, The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration (W.W. Norton & Co., June 2007) that "OLC's analysis of the law of torture in the August 1, 2002, opinion and the March 2003 opinion was legally flawed, tendentious in substance and tone, and overbroad and thus largely unnecessary" [Page 151].
* During a January 12 radio interview with Cheney, Hannity said of Bush: "And I'm frustrated as somebody who is a big supporter of his that he does not get the credit that I think he deserves in keeping this country safe -- and you're a big part of this as well -- after 9-11 and the worst attack on America soil." Hannity then asked Cheney: "Does that frustrate you like it does me at all?" Cheney replied, "Oh, to some extent. But if you've been around as long as I have in this line of work, you recognize that you rarely get credit for things that don't happen." Later in the interview, Hannity said to Cheney: "Mr. Vice President, you kept this country safe, along with the president, for all the years and the days after 9-11. For that we owe you a great debt of gratitude. I know you woke up every morning and that was your number one priority."
* During his January 12 interview with Fox News White House correspondent Mike Emanuel, Cheney said: "I think probably the most important thing we did was to keep the country safe for the last seven and a half years; to disrupt, interrupt, break up all the prospective attacks and plots that were developed to come launch another mass casualty attack inside the United States. That's been a remarkable achievement. It wasn't an accident, it didn't just happen."
source: http://mediamatters....arch/200906170034
"Chicago to my mind was the only place to be. ... I above all liked the city because it was filled with people all a-bustle, and the clatter of hooves and carriages, and with delivery wagons and drays and peddlers and the boom and clank of freight trains. And when those black clouds came sailing in from the west, pouring thunderstorms upon us so that you couldn't hear the cries or curses of humankind, I liked that best of all. Chicago could stand up to the worst God had to offer. I understood why it was built--a place for trade, of course, with railroads and ships and so on, but mostly to give all of us a magnitude of defiance that is not provided by one house on the plains. And the plains is where those storms come from."
-- E.L. Doctorow
|
Post #309,853
6/18/09 12:16:47 PM
|

rolf, what was the date of the FIRST interview?
somewhere in the second term I believe? He started in 2000 and it took him 5 or 6 years to figure out what network would not act like a rabid dog ala helen thomas? I knew shrub was slow but not that slow
|
Post #309,858
6/18/09 1:59:35 PM
|

2003, at least.
I'm too busy to search for more, but this turned up quickly.
http://www.foxnews.c...933,98006,00.html
Monday, September 22, 2003
The full text of President Bush's exclusive interview with Fox News' Brit Hume aired Monday night:
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #309,859
6/18/09 2:18:13 PM
|

makes it 3 years in, was he still adored by cbs abc and nbc?
http://www.cbsnews.c...ntry1242353.shtml
the last time CBS sat down with Bush for an exclusive, long interview was in 2002
Since then, Bush did sit down for one-on-one interviews with the White House correspondents from each network  including CBS John Roberts  shortly before the inauguration of his second term.
so where is the pro fox bias?
|