Foxy? Or not?
There’s been a debate raging (on kos and move on) on whether Obama should have given Fox News an interview. As much as I can’t stand watching Fox, I think this was a smart move because:
1. He reached an untapped audience that up until now has seen more of Rev. Wright than the person actually running for president, and…
2. Appearing on Fox is consistent with Obama’s message of talking with our enemies.
Others disagree. Thoughts?
I disagree.
Fox is openly a GOP propaganda arm. All Democrats that appear on any Fox program are helping the most radical right-wing elements of the GOP.
The Democrats have no parallel radically left-wing “news” service so legitimizing the Republican news service makes no sense.
Pandora,
I am not going to vote for Obama, Clinton, or McCain.
But I am not your enemy; I’m an American citizen with significantly different political views. I like to think that your use of the word “enemies” here represented bad phrasing rather than intent. . . .
Well said, Steve. If we are to suggest that approximately half the country is an “enemy,” then we aren’t going to get a lot done.
“talking with our enemies”
What a sad and disturbing view of the country! Once again, you prove that those on the left are the ones that are hateful and angry.
Thanks, Pan.
“Fox is openly a GOP propaganda arm”
Yeah, Jason, there are no such stations that do similar work for the left. Keith O. etc. are so fair and balanced!
Actually I was quoting Obama’s policy when it came to other nations. Could I have chosen a better word? Sure. Don’t be bitter… Did you get my point?
I think that enemies is intended to include those elements of politics and power who pretty openly treat Ds as enemies. And Fox News may be in the Top 3 of that group. It is really interesting how quickly folks jumped in to identify with that.
Did anybody actually see the interview? I saw the edited bits over at TPM and they were cringeworthy. Perhaps the complete version is less so.
Literal when they need it, figurative when trying to deflect blame.
Keith rips them all, BTW – lets see how he acts after a Dem in the WH for a bit.
But your example shows soooo much, since you equated an entire network to one talking head….funny.
And if part of the Press consistently lies (and remember – Fox won a court case where they argued that they are allowed to lie/mislead/omit) and subverts the truth for political & economical gain, is that not an enemy of Democracy?
I believe so, since our Founders understood that the Press is an essential part of our political discourse, and a citizen-driven check on the branches of government…..
But to answer your question, Pandora, if Obama converts a few ditto-heads because of this, then it has to be considered as a good idea. And I think it goes with Obama’s “above it all” approach to partisan politics.
…but who really knows. HRC’s campaign is all over FauxNews, so you have to consider that too…..
Von Cracker, when I first heard Obama was going on Fox I was upset. Then… I wasn’t so sure. THEN, after it was over I thought about his message. I know many republicans who like Obama… so if it leads to more support…
Who knows! I guess I threw this out here because I’m still conflicted!
I need to be clear that what I was saying in regard to “enemies” in Pandora’s post was not consistent with the way A. Bundy interpreted it:
“What a sad and disturbing view of the country! Once again, you prove that those on the left are the ones that are hateful and angry.”
I stand by what I wrote: I think it was poor phrasing, and I know a thing or two about bad phrasing.
But look at where we’ve gotten:
Cassandra: “I think that enemies is intended to include those elements of politics and power who pretty openly treat Ds as enemies. And Fox News may be in the Top 3 of that group. It is really interesting how quickly folks jumped in to identify with that.”
I didn’t identify with Fox; I identified as a non-Democrat who seemed to be caught in the phrase.
Von Cracker’s argument that a slanted or deceptive press is an “enemy” of democracy inimical to the vision of our Founders falls afoul of recent scholarship (see Dana Garrett’s reference on Delaware Watch to the book about how both Republican and Federalist presses during the 1790s routinely manufactured outright lies).
What a sad and disturbing view of the country! Once again, you prove that those on the left are the ones that are hateful and angry
O lordy – get Bundy to her fainting couch!! My heavens she has the vapors.
What Bullshit.
You, Bundy, are an ass.
See what happens when you try to have a discussion.
I’m sure Bundy thinks no one should dwell on the words… ‘maybe a hundred years’.
I identified as a non-Democrat who seemed to be caught in the phrase.
It is the quickness of identifying as an “enemy” that caught me (which I think you know). There isn’t much about what anything that Pandora has said that might imply that you were on some enemies list, Steve (which I think you know).
But if you really didn’t know what she defined as “enemies” perhaps you should have the grace to ask her (since she is right here) instead of defending your strawman.
Yes, Pandora, I think it will be for the good, hopefully!
And Steve, I’m fully aware of the Colonial and Early American press and its wicked ways, with their pamphlets, cartoons and such , but it doesn’t make its actions right.
I know, it’s an idealist argument, but it appears that the current administration agrees with me….
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/principles/freepress.htm
🙂
A link to the book you’re talking about would be cool though…I’d like to take a look.
VC I don’t have a link, but here’s all the ID data that Dana gave to it:
“I’m nearly finished w/ a book I can hardly put down. Infamous Scribblers by Eric Burns. It’s about the beginnings of journalism in America pre- & post revolutionary war.
One of the dirty tricks the Federalist & Republican presses engaged in was to invent stories out of whole cloth. For example, when it appeared that Jefferson would beat Adams, the Federalist press claimed that Jefferson had died. No point in voting for him, then, eh.
Fortunately the dirty stunt didn’t work.”
Cassandra, I’ve directly addressed Pandora, contrary to your suggestion (look back at my original comment). I don’t really care who she meant: I object to the use of “enemies” for other American citizens regardless of their party affiliation or their (non)journalistic tendencies.
That simple.
Steve –
Wouldn’t you at leats agree that modern Republicans like George Bush and Dick Cheney are enemies of the Constitution?
I would.
Steve, maybe we could be frenemies?
Jason, I agree. Bush and Cheney are enemies of the Constitution. I just finished watching John Adams on HBO. Our founders would have had these two up on treason.
I don’t really care who she meant
And this, I think, we already knew.
Cassandra, you persist in picking a fight that isn’t there.
It is fundamentally different to say that Bush and Cheney are “enemies” of the Constitution than to use the phrase “Talking to our enemies” about either Fox journalists or American citizens who watch that network.
And I don’t really care who she meant. In that context I think declaring other Americans to be your “Enemy” is counter-productive and ill-advised.
You obviously have no problem with such.
We disagree.
I think we’ve pretty thoroughly beaten this point to death.
I agree with Jason in the first comment, with one exception. He says, “Fox is openly a GOP propaganda arm.” No, the whole point is that they are not OPEN about it — they claim to be “fair and balanced.” And as long as politicians and real reporters treat Fox as a legitimate news source, parroting “breaking news” on Fox as if it is remotely credible, that let’s Fox propel smears into our nation’s mainstream political dialogue.
Which is exactly why Democratic politicians should help Fox’s quest for legitimacy by treating them like they would real news outlets.
Adam: don’t you mean “Which is exactly why Democratic politicians should NOT help Fox”
Otherwise your last sentence seems to contradict the whole first paragraph
abundy,
Keith O isn’t a channel. He is a show. Fox is a Network. Big difference….
donviti 1
Jason wrote:
Obviously Jason has never heard of CNN or CBS.
Jason wrote:
In what manner? What have they done which is against the Constitution?
Let’s see, you’ll probably answer something about the non FISA warrants, but the most that that would mean is that any evidence developed couldn’t be used in a court of law — and even that interpretation is suspect.
Has your freedom of speech been curtailed? It doesn’t seem so. Have you been thrown in jail for writing things hostile to the president’s policies? Nope, not that, either. Were our elections suspended and martial law imposed? Nope, not that, either.
The notion that wingnuts think CNN or CBS (or even MSNBC) are roughly analogous to Fox never ceases to amaze me.
Try this simple experiment Dana – Watch Fox news for a day then watch CNN a day. Let me know if you still think CNN is a liberal counterweight to Fox.
As for #25 – you’ve disqualified yourself from commenting on the Constitution because you are 100% insane.
Pandora could have been more careful with her words. The GOP machine is what FOX represents IMHO, not normal Republicans.
FOX and all who join in with the spirit of RNC ROVE are basically enemies of the America I love. This machine of pure political bent bent on retaining power… forever…by any means necessay is an enemy to Americans that expect a president who swears to uphold the constitution to uphold the constitution. We have one that demands loyalty oaths to the GOP instead.
etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.
The A
Dana,
wasn’t the 4th Ammendment suspended?
At the risk of being boring and just answering the original question without calling everyone names, my first reaction to Obama’s being on Fox was “what is he doing?” and then when I watched it, I realized he had done a smart thing. If he can’t talk to Fox, how could he talk to our real enemies? But that will never happen. Rev. Wright has seen to that. He has chosen to destroy Obama. Turns out he is an egomaniac.
Fox is nothing more than a mercenary network and a tool for the dominion of Rupert.
Think about this for a moment – What Rupert really cares about is not the GOP, Dems, The Constitution or Abortion, but De-Regulation and Reductions in Capital & Corporate Taxes.
If the Dems pimped those two things then Fox would have been “Fair & Balanced” for their side….
June, I agree about Wright. At least he has gotten this issue so out in front that there is no way to distort it. He has grabbed a hold of it for his own political and financial gain (he is writing a book).
I imagine that the politics of the pulpit is common in some churches. It was not in my episcopal background.
The Obama’s personal familial relationship with Wright shouldn’t be seen in the context of the pulpit preaching he is exploiting now.
I have no doubt that Wright was completely normal and nice guy pastor when he was performing marriage etc in the service of families.
There is no doubt that he sees his higher calling as political magnate bigger than life.
Keith Olbermann was asking if he isn’t on Hillary’s payroll….heh.
After reading all the comments here I see that an intelligent discussion can not be had without some asshole like Jason calling name. since he does it .It is only right that we should all label him an idiot. Unable to disagree in an intelligent manner.
Umm… didn’t you just name call? Twice?
And your point was…?