I don’t understand why this is any different from when the White House went after Rush Limbaugh? Remember what everyone said back then? Despite the publicity generated for Limbaugh, there wasn’t as much criticism of the White House as there is now. The aim was at how Republican politicians are subordinate to a radio talk show host – including the elected chief of the RNC! As soon as any Republican says something slightly negative towards him, Limbaugh goes on the air next day and blows a clouds worth of cigar smoke in their faces and rehooks the leash. This is why in every interview since then he’s asked whether he is the Republican party leader.

Why, this time, when the White House goes after Fox News – is it different or wrong from when they went after Limbaugh?

I guess the main mistake of the White House did this time was to attack Fox with the angle of being a “news station”, when they instead should have used the same angle they used against Rush Limbaugh; attack them for being the leaders of the Republican party. Anita Dunn sorta treaded onto in that very first interview on CNN which instigated all of this – when she said Fox News is an extension of the Republican party. But she didn’t go all the way though.

(I wonder what would’ve happened if George H. W. Bush would’ve name-dropped Fox News in the same interview that he called Maddow and Olbermann “sick puppies”. It was pretty obvious that he meant by “cablers” that it included Fox News too. But because he didn’t call them out by name and only MSNBC, he was only attacked back by MSNBC.)

It still remains to be seen whether the White House is wrong or right in by going after Fox News, I think. Seems to me it’ll either be considered a strategic blunder or strategic genius.

Thanks God! Cenk Uygur tore her a new one on his show yesterday. Anyone who thinks that anything that Fox News says is news and is okay, is crazy and should not be listened to. Glynnis MacNicol, in my opinion, is an idiot!

Why, this time, when the White House goes after Fox News – is it different or wrong from when they went after Limbaugh?

There is a difference in criticizing a particular voice, with a well stated agenda… and criticizing a news network for sometimes reporting stories that are unfavorable to your administration, or hosting talent who disagree with your points of view. It would be like attacking Rush, but instead of going after him, going after his host radio stations (Rush is on WABC in my hometown, so they’d attack ABC).

…attack them for being the leaders of the Republican party.

Nope, they already used that attack. Doing that again would be quickly seen as just a re-hash of their previous argument.

If they wanted to successfully attack FNC, they would have gone after specific stories, specific talent, or specific issues… not FNC broadly. That’s the mistake. If they had said, “Glenn Beck said XYZ, and that’s not true, and we demand FNC issue an apology,” they would have had something concrete to hold out before the audience. Keep bringing up stories like that and you systematically can take down the organization… but whining without examples, makes you appear weak and foolish. This is an obvious strategy… my plan would be a “reaction,” and left the WH in a better position.

This is Obama’s M.O.

During the primary he mocked and tried to marginalize Hillary Clinton – from the very beginning. Her campaign slogan was Ready for Change-Ready to Lead. He ripped it off and started Change you Can believe. From there he knocked her whenever possible, with his snarky little attitude. “Periodically, when she’s feeling down, her claws come out…” He painted the Clintons as racist, and he knocked her all the time. He then took after McCain, with his catty little ads about email and making fun of him on comments, etc.

This is how Obama and his goons operate.
5) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon (Alinsky 1972: 128)
13) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it (Alinsky 1972: 130).

Obama’s detractors are for the most part members of a dwindling sect of fearmongers, misinformers, and blind followers of the likes of Fox Propaganda/Beck/Limbaugh/Hannity. These noiseboxes with a public platform prey on those whose ignorance by choice is a lifestyle and a religion. The White House should certainly laugh-out-loud at the absurdity and stupidity of this crowd. However, The White House should let the Beck Bozos continue to do what they do best…hang themselves daily in a very public way by continuing to prove their own ignorance by choice. The author Alex Steere has a likeable yet disturbed antagonist cull this herd of ignorance with extreme measures. Fortunately for the Beck crowd, it is a work of pure fiction.

The comment by “sarainitaly” is a prime example of a detachment disorder known as ignorance by choice. She succinctly combines her afflication with a common symptom of the disorder, a predilection for espousing revisionist history. In what sensory deprived cubicle did she spend the Bush years? Fortunately, she is in Italy enjoying the benefits of civilized society with public health care. I suggest that she hop on board Sarah Silverman’s worthy cause to end world hunger…Sell the Vatican.

Janders… you need to meet Nachi. Both of you think very highly of yourself, while looking down your nose on anyone who dares to disagree. You guys could sit around, patting each other on the back.

The rest of us, however, will talk intelligently about the subject at hand… instead of just hurling insults and condescension. It’s amazing how many people talk about how “smart and great” they are, and yet when it comes to actually talking about a specific event, idea, or issue… all they can do is attack and insult. How sad.

Lil Blue: And you are defining “intelligently” for us?? Sort of like a pig – staring at a wristwatch, isn’t it??

Janders says:
October 22, 2009 at 1:13 pm

Hey jackass – this post is about Obama and FOX. Bush is no longer President. Your response to my comment is so typical. You completely IGNORE the content of the comment, and just make personal attacks.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT BUSH! MOVE ON! What the hell do the Bush years have to do with my comment, or the topic at hand? And what the hell does socialized medicine have to do with my comment, or Sarah Silverman (who I despise).

Are you challenged in some capacity that you are unable to address the topic at hand, or the content within my comment?

She succinctly combines her “afflication”

afflication?

ImNotBlue says:
October 22, 2009 at 1:41 pm

Gawd, some nasty creeps here….They are going to ruin this site.

There is a far left loon in every bunch it seems but he has a right to spew his opinion
like everyone else… just like we have a right to point out where he is wrong, if you believe
he is, and why.

It’s called debate and until this administraition bans it,w e can do it.

I don’t mind debate – I do hate when people ignore the content, and just make personal attacks. That’s not engaging in debate, that’s just verbal vomit.

Personally they are the fun ones. You can fight them with facts and make them go nuts.:P

The target is not Fox; it’s their supposed media ‘friends’. Typical Chicago thug tactics. The problem is that Fox has a winning business model; they have a near exclusive on half the country, and the rest of the media share’s what’s left. Even CNN has blinked by placing true conservatives in prominent slots. At some point, business has to trump ideology or you become a public and/or non-profit entity. The Obami are not courageous, they are desperate in the wake of the biggest poll swing in fifty years. It ain’t rocket science, it’s intimidation.

“the biggest poll drop in 50 years?” I don’t think so. Obama’s numbers started sliding down to the low 50′s in the Summer but are back up to around the mid to high 50′s. I would suggest you do real homework and look at Bush’s after 9/11 when the whole country was united— to when he left office…with Cheney looking like Dr. Strangelove in a wheelchair….

Just yesterday’s numbers came out that only 21% identify themselves as Republicans. THAT IS a real drop…Even John McCain (remember him?) came out and said that the R party has to come out with a meaningful message other than Being The Party of NO! For Republicans? NO HIspanics, NO Blacks, NO women, NO Pro-Choice, NO youth vote, NO minorities, NO College age votes…I mean, when you are the Party of the basically what was once the Confederacy…where are they headed?

Sure the Dems’s will lose seats in 2010…but who is going to lead the R’s to the Presidency in 2012?

To Sara in Italy…ALL good politicians know how to win. Even after polarizing the Clintons….look at them now…Hillary and Bill are basically eating out of his hand. You might quote Sol Alinksy…but it works…

Finally…as for Fox being #1….the numbers are for Cable…that’s 3.5 million viewers…that is only 1% of the total population….More being watch Dancing With The Stars than watch Fox, CNN & MSNBC put together…

sarainitaly: ick. Go crawl back under the rock you came out from. Hillary lost, and deservedly so; get over it. Is that disgusting site hillariyis44 still up and running? I bet you would fit in well over there: still fighting an 18 month dead cause a just all-around bizarre point of view.

Yeah, the Obama campaign fought a little dirty at times (I remember Michelle making some comments about Hillary not being in charge of her own house to a group of largely black women that I found highly inappropriate), but Clinton’s campaign pulled some stunts that would make a Democrat’s blood freeze. Sometimes things get ugly in campaigns. Grow up. Get over it. Get a life.

sarainitaly”Are you challenged in some capacity that you are unable to address the topic at hand, or the content within my comment?”

hmmm…. and what exactly does Obama supposedly ripping off Clinton’s slogan have to do with the topic here? I understand you were claiming that Obama has used this ‘bullying’ tactic before, but that was rather random. Try not to be completely hypocritical!

Again, your point of view is just bizarre and absurd. Yes, Obama’s campaign did what it could to marginalize it’s opponents to win the election. Rove did it before, Clintons have done it many times before (as Adobeman says), Hillary certainly did it to Obama, and McCain and other Republicans certainly did it to Obama as well.

As far as I’m concerned, Janders accurately pinned the tail on the donkey.

@Blue: LOL, look at you! Condescendingly talking down to others about how you aren’t condescending! How cute!

matt111 says:
October 23, 2009 at 1:08 am

First of all – I crawled out from under that rock because I was sick of your type under there. (I left the Dem party because of people like you)

Secondly – pointing out that Obama uses this tactic, not just on FOX, but on all opponents is relevant to the topic, in my opinion. The mention of the ripping off of the slogan is that it was his attempt to marginalize her by calling her non-credible. The same thing he is doing with FOX. “not a real news network” “Not change you can believe in” “McCain is too old” etc. I stated this was his MO, and provided examples.

I am over it, that Hillary lost. Doesn’t mean she is relevant for examples to demonstrate how Obama operates.

“Grow up?” I came here to discuss a topic – You and Janders resorted to personal attacks and name calling. (And yes, I replied with the same thing because it pissed me off, but I am not proud.)

Adobeman says:
October 22, 2009 at 11:56 pm
But I thought Obama was *change*?

she isn’t relevant. i really need to proof my typing.

You used Glenn Beck and smart in the same sentence. Please explain yourself!!

Ted says:
October 23, 2009 at 6:05 am
Please explain yourself!!

I believe she did, in the post.

Ted: I don’t need no stinkin explaination ,find a woman or in your case another man.

The White House really can’t afford to respond to any of the topics covered by Glenn Beck. It’s a debate they will lose. They know full well that Beck is trying to trap them in the inherent bankruptcy of Dewey’s ideology. The White House believes all the Dewey nonsense, but they’re never going to say so.

Obama is a professor trying to pose as a populist. It’s worked a lot better than I thought it would, but he will eventually run out of gas. The best thing he can do is pull the car over and ask for help. I doubt he does though. He’s already said he’s willing to be a one term POTUS to pass his policies. The Fed and Treasury department are running the government. Obama is just their face to procure control of more capital they need to unwind the systemic risk they have absorbed in the last 16 months.

matt111 says:
October 23, 2009 at 1:28 am

What… you don’t like it? No? Hmm… perhaps YOU should give it a rest then! If you wanna debate like a big boy, we can talk like adults. But if you want to stomp your feet like a child, I can give it back just as fast as you can dish it out. It’s the only way to make people like you realize how foolish they sound.

Glenn Beck is not afraid to investigate and expose the corruption and subversive activities in our White House and Congress. Thank you, Glenn!! You and FNC are the number ONE TV news station in the country today. Good work!