Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The White House's war with Fox News: still dumb

My observations about the Obama administration’s “dumb” war with Fox News seem to have touched a nerve -- 868 nerves, going by the latest tally of comments. They ran the gamut from “another idiotic column” to “Amen, Ruth.” I confess, I didn’t read them all, but I got the drift. Meanwhile, the 869th nerve belonged to my lefty friend Chuck, who emailed, complete with links to angry liberal bloggers, to bemoan my “false equivalency” between Fox News and MSNBC. And again, two hours later, to highlight a post by another member of “your little community” -- ABC’s Jake Tapper -- who took my side. Hey Chuck -- don’t worry. Our little community is getting smaller every day.

One of my sentences provoked particular derision from the left. “Imagine the outcry if the Bush administration had pulled a similar hissy fit with MSNBC,” I wrote. I confess to having forgotten about the Bush administration’s public tangle last year with MSNBC. White House counselor Ed Gillespie wrote to NBC News president Steve Capus complaining about a “deceptively edited” quote from President Bush, but he used the opportunity to complain about other allegedly slanted coverage and “the increasing blurring of those lines” between the "news" as reported on NBC and the "opinion" as reported on MSNBC.

Hissy fit? Well, Dan Froomkin, then a liberal blogger for The Post, cited “the White House's unprecedented attack on NBC News,” noting what he termed “the White House’s outsized reaction,” and he hypothesized that an infuriated Bush had ordered the attack: “So is it a stretch to suspect that Bush told his counselor to get a little revenge?”

More to the point, the Bush administration-NBC tangle is a relevant comparison -- but it falls far short of this White House’s duel with Fox. “Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party,” said communications director Anita Dunn. And, “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent. As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don't need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.''

For the record, Chuck, I don’t think that Fox and MSNBC are equivalent. Fox is more over the line, more often. That doesn’t make it “not really a news organization.” And it doesn’t make launching this war a smart tactic for the smart folks over at the White House.

By Ruth Marcus  | October 21, 2009; 7:32 PM ET
Categories:  Marcus  | Tags:  Ruth Marcus  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Which candidate will raise taxes in Virginia?
Next: How cricket can save the world

Comments

Good work, Ruth. Our president has 99% of the media either sheepishly following or actively supporting him, and he chooses to go after the 1% who dare to be critical. Do we want this petty vengeful behavior in our commander in chief?

Posted by: pmadrasyahoocom | October 21, 2009 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Why not just pass a law outlawing any speech critical of the great and powerful Obama?

Posted by: MarxBro | October 21, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

You people are so clueless that you miss the genius in Obama's strategy. Over the summer when the townhall fiasco was in full blast, Obama said that TV likes a good ruckus. So now that he knows that healthcare reform is at a critical phase, why not distract people with a little ruckus of his own making. Take the fight to Fox News - Fox would love the attention so much that they would begin making all these draconian statements about Obama having a hit list and not devote time to blocking healthcare reform. After the bill passes, this little diversion will just go away. Why? Because the President's poll numbers will begin to move northward and he would have no need for the lemmings on the right and Fox News. It's a classic head fake. I can't wait for his speech to the nation after healthcare reform passes - Republicans will be at the depth of the despair. I wanna wager money on this point.

Posted by: ATLGuy | October 21, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Somebody needs to tell Obama that this is making him look very, very small. He has already damaged his standing.

I think MSNBC is at least as far to the left as Fox is to the right.

Posted by: screwjob | October 21, 2009 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Fox News aka, The Jesus Channel/ GOP TV/ The Glorious Official Republican Government News Network.

While Fox News has the highest ratings, it’s also the same group of people that make up just 20% of America’s electorate… the far right-wing of the GOP.

There will always be an audience for the far right and that’s Rupert Murdock’s Fox News demographic.

Rupert keeps them frothing at the mouth with manufactured fear and GOP talking-points, phony outrage.

Fox is also a right-wing echo chamber.. notice that when “The Wall Street Journal”, “The Weekly Standard” people are on Fox News there’s never disclosure that these people are all Rupert Murdock employees.

Imagine if MSNBC or CNN did this… I don’t know how Fox News gets way with constantly recycling Rupert Murdock’s employees (sockpuppets) from his various media properties.

Also there’s hardly a word on the “MSM” about Murdock’s world wide (far right-wing) media empire.

Murdock has a lot of influence, example: all of his various sockpuppets, Hannity, Beck, etc, and all of Murdock’s worldwide media holdings trash global warming, President Obama and anything else right-wing Rupert Murdock dislikes.

I think that press and especially individual journalists are deathly afraid of Rupert Murdock and what he can do to them professionally.

Rupert Murdock is the new William Randolph Hearst.

Another thing, Sarah Palin, who is a favorite among the Faux News/ Right-wing crowd is getting Rupert Murdock’s wingnut welfare.

Palin’s (Rupert Murdock’s ghostwriter) book publisher is HarperCollins… a wholly owned Rupert Murdock subsidiary, you ‘betcha.


Finally, there should be an award given to the guy that writes the ominous, scary music for Fox News... he's obviously a full-time employee.

No seriously... whenever there's a special where Rupert Murdock wants to convince Americans that Saddam Hussein has WMD, or that Iran/North Korea is going to attack America tomorrow, or a Hannity or Beck segment where they want to scare their right-wing audience (even more) there's always that ominous music to go along with the story.

It's like a scary GOP music video.

Posted by: republican_disaster | October 21, 2009 9:54 PM | Report abuse

FOX is more over the line, more often? Really?

Olbermann is a nightly embarrassment. Maddow is his female equivalent, with slightly less caffeine.

People such as David Shuster have been forced to make on-air apologies repeated times ("pimping out" Chelsea Clinton, ...), clowns such as Carlos Watson played games like "Hey, maybe socialism is the new n-word," etc.

MSNBC wishes it could be on FOX's level. But it can't. It's a hack organization whose political director -- another guy named Chuck -- oddly is a White House correspondent, raising very legitimate and serious concerns about the White House using Todd as its mouthpiece to MSNBC.

MSNBC is a joke. They slandered Rush Limbaugh with fake quotes, rarely even attempt to include non-liberal guests and just are not credible during most hours. There's a reason why no one watches them.

FOX is on a totally different level than MSNBC. It might offer strong opinions, but it doesn't create stories from the ether. Anita Dunn really was on tape talking about her affinity for Mao. ACORN really was shown engaging in would-be tax fraud.

These are real events, things the White House doesn't want you to see. But legitimate stories, unlike fabricated Rush Limbaugh quotes.

Posted by: Truth6 | October 21, 2009 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Forget looking "very, very small". The present peril is that the intentions of the administration are transparent and their statements and actions are inconsistent with preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution.

Posted by: sonoflibertypaulrevere | October 21, 2009 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Think about it: for many years, the right-wing has managed to manipulate the media by crying "liberal media" whenever stations don't immediately broadcast their message. And they succeed: the other outlets advertise that message, no matter how lacking in truth the message is. It is about time that somebody prominent enough started using this tactic back at the right wing!

Posted by: Jake_D | October 21, 2009 10:20 PM | Report abuse

The difference is the owners. The owners of the right wing media, Rupert and the Reverend Moon, have made no attempt at hiding their extreme right political desires. They are a world-wide menace spreading fear, hatred, distortion and division.

Their ratings represent the most extreme reactionary rabble of the right. A little instigation and they show up at congressional town halls with pitchforks and shot guns. How reminiscent of dictators bringing in provincials to attack their educated urban opponents.

Foolish? No, the truth.

Posted by: thebobbob | October 21, 2009 10:26 PM | Report abuse

outside the opinion hours of msnbc (after 5pm) they do a better job of reporting the news than the fox news channel.

Msnbc don't sponsor or promote organized protest against the white house- nor do their news anchors allow their ideological perspective to alter the reporting of the actual news on any given day.

Msnbc's opinionated shows are hard hitting, but they never preach hate, they also can boast having a republican on one of its more prominent and longest opinionated shows - morning joe.

The white house is making an observation about the fox news channel and is preventing their obsession on irrelevant news stories that are driven by their ideological persuasion to infiltrate the main stream media.

Now independents and moderate republicans are aware of where they get their news come from and will dismiss the claims that they call news on the fnc

Posted by: kweyork | October 21, 2009 11:32 PM | Report abuse

When did free speech become a "Right"? It's OK to slam Republicans but it's crossing the line when they start to attack Democrats. Throw the bums at FOX in jail and then start arresting the bankers and CEOs, along with anyone else who opposes whats good for the country.

Posted by: MarxBro | October 21, 2009 11:34 PM | Report abuse

POTUS defames Fox News as "non news station". Yet they always have a liberal and conservative on the same panel, bantering back and forth. Those are "learning moments".
I am not interested in watching a fan club gush over POTUS, even when his actions should be examined.
A reporter with integrity and an ounce of curiosity would be researching the Czars, reading these bills and trace the money line./
Maddow and Olberman are like Love Sick Kids when it cones to their reporting on POTUS.

Posted by: virgosiempre | October 21, 2009 11:40 PM | Report abuse

FOX is the TV equivalent of tabloid journalism filled with innuendo, rumor, deceit, and slander. Media in its worst form.

Posted by: RMB2 | October 22, 2009 12:14 AM | Report abuse

The Peter Principle clearly hit the White House hard months ago. They'll never recover.

Posted by: EcoAZ | October 22, 2009 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Obama and da Boyz needs to grow up and learn to counter concerns of the American people with genuine, bipartisan governance.

Nah...that'll never happen.

Posted by: EcoAZ | October 22, 2009 12:17 AM | Report abuse

ok maxbro - no one cares about attacks, just dont call yourself a news organization if that is what you devote not only your opinion but your "news" programs to as well - attack all you want and please your 2 million viewers.

Virgosiempre- bantering back and forth about the hate spewed and the illogical claims from dick morris and the hypocritical karl rove on their panels, very educational

Morning Joe, Ed Schultz and to lesser extent Rachel and Kieth have been critical of the president over his policies-its no fan club they support him, but share their views on his policies that some times they disagree with - using logical argument... the POTUS gets fairly examined

Researching Czars of the OBama's admin. not Bush's - hyprocitical, we can research alright but to what purpose

Posted by: kweyork | October 22, 2009 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Marcus, So basically you realize that your comparison is silly and your analysis lacking perspective, but you won't take it back because your ego won't allow it. Okay. Got it. Thanks for sharing.

Posted by: esqcass | October 22, 2009 12:24 AM | Report abuse

I am a Republican and I enjoy Fox News over any other source because I sincerely find it to be what it claims to be - "fair and balanced".

What bother's me is that because of that, I think the President now views me as his enemy.

Posted by: 2009frank | October 22, 2009 12:31 AM | Report abuse

The only good thing about criticizing FOX is that those on the fence may wonder what's going on at FOX??Maybe I should watch-WOW-I can't believe I really saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears the skinny on obama's corrupt colleagues(the czars,valerie jarrett,Mark Lloyd,Van Jones,the queer education guy,the droopy-eyed Sebelius,the redneck Gibbs,the veins on the neck and face of Emmanuel,the Hitler looking mustache on Axlerod,the ACORN tapes,indoctrination of kids-WOW!!! why didn't I pick that up on the other networks????????are they the slobbering bunch.When they "protest too much" watch out-the curtain is going up-will they be exposed?? We HOPE so

Posted by: ncsouthernbelle | October 22, 2009 12:40 AM | Report abuse

I'm afraid, Ms. Marcus, that the dumbest one in this "debate" is you. Since you remain unswayed by rational argument, actually ridiculing same, I won't attempt to disabuse you of your (still dumb) biases.

Posted by: gsross | October 22, 2009 12:46 AM | Report abuse

This whole issue is truly a waste of time and energy and I feel it also touches on the First Amendment rights. I think FOX News does have a source in the White House and someone at the level of Emmanuel or Axelrod resents that fact. I'll make my own decisions about what is news to me and what isn't. I'm not a FOX viewer but now I will tune in at times just to see what they are talking about. It sounds like they have struck a few nerves in the White House.

Posted by: npsilver | October 22, 2009 12:50 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, you are absolutely right again. The White House move against Fox was dumb, dumb, dumb.

His communication people are giving him very bad advice and their TV appearances criticizing Fox are beneath basic journalism standards.

Fox News is NEWS and they are quite good at it. There is none better than Shepard Smith or Major Garrett or Catherine Herridge.

The opinion shows starring Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity are just that and yes, they are very biased. Beck is an idiot. The other two are just biased.

Posted by: Kansas28 | October 22, 2009 12:53 AM | Report abuse

"Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party". Can't argue with that. Fox News has every right to say what they do, and the Obama administration has every right to shun them.

Posted by: RobertaHigginbotham | October 22, 2009 12:57 AM | Report abuse

And you are still wrong. Very. Next up: Marcus digs herself all the way to China.

Posted by: daphne5 | October 22, 2009 12:58 AM | Report abuse

May I suggest that you check Media Matters where they have compiled a very interesting list of the "news stories" that Fox News has reported. And Ruth, just for the record, I don't recall either NBC or MSNBC creating a political protest, endlessly hyping that political protest, and cheerleading that political protest, then covering said protest as though it was news and Fox was an objective reporter. Did I miss that, or did the mainstream media just fall meekly into line behind Fox and treat Fox's hand-made teabagger rally as though it really was news, with nary a peep about how Fox had pretty much stage-managed the whole thing? You see, one could argue that said stage-managing was the real story. But you all missed it, I guess.

Posted by: Beej1 | October 22, 2009 1:19 AM | Report abuse

Oh, and incidentally, no one in the WH has made any move "against" Fox News. No one has decided to try to pull their broadcast licenses, or take them off the air, or have them investigated by the FBI or FCC as Nixon did. All the Obama WH has done is to define who they are not. And what they are not, is a news network.

Posted by: Beej1 | October 22, 2009 1:25 AM | Report abuse

Fox and MSNBC are pretty much mirror images of the other, from a different political perspective. MSNBC used to run a fairly straight-up news organization, until Keith Olberman's rant against Bush several years ago- after which I thought he would be fired for being so unprofessional (and I'm a moderately liberal Democrat). Instead, it seemed to have improved his flagging ratings and then spawn others on MSNBC to imitate his antics. I give Bush credit for THINKING tht he was doing the right thing by invading Iraq, even though he was manipulated into doing so by Scooter Libby and Ariel Sharon. Olberman's Bush bashing that evening was really unseemly for someone purporting to run a news show; I've never seen anything like it. Then, always the innovator, Glenn Beck came to Fox this past year and proved that his viewers have no intellect whatsoever. The worst thing about this is that it's tainted the more legitimate side of both news organizations from doing exposes, and pushed them into more of an entertainment mode- to the detriment of both networks.

Posted by: ripvanwinkleincollege | October 22, 2009 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, you're still wrong. Quit while you're ahead.

Posted by: slowpoke132 | October 22, 2009 2:11 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, 1/3 of the country believe we found WMD in Iraq. Where exactly do you think they got that incorrect info? (Hint: Fox)

1/3 of the country STILL believe that Saddam Hussein was in cahoots w/ bin Laden, although every intelligence agency in the world has disproved that. Where exactly do you think the 1/3 still get that incorrect info? (Hint: Fox)

An informed electorate is indispensable in a democracy; Fox's brand of nonsense news is a clear and present danger to the nation.

Wake up.

Posted by: slowpoke132 | October 22, 2009 2:17 AM | Report abuse

So the White House is wrong for pointing out the bleeding obvious?

Why isn't the Post doing it, then? Or is that not in your job description? Is it so important to keep publishing deceptive editorials and op-eds that you simply haven't got the space to point out that Fox is, indeed, a right-wing propaganda outfit and not a news organization?

Posted by: sembtex | October 22, 2009 2:36 AM | Report abuse

In my part of the world, the other side of the planet from America, the cable industry did not offer Fox News. We had CNN and BBC for news from the west. Now, after Obama's demonisation of the channel, the cable operators have been flooded with demands to provide Fox as well.

I too have asked for and have got Fox on my set-top box, It is obvious that CNN will not be carrying ALL the news for fear of offending Obama. I watch Fox to find out what CNN is leaving out, what it is hiding.

Sure, Fox has opinions, a perspective, so does everyone. To have opinions is to be human. In democracies, you have a ruling party and you have an opposition. There is nothing that says that, to be a loyal opposition, you have to make like an ostrich, with head under the sands.But I draw a line at so-called "real" news channels fact-checking what is transparently and unshamedly billed as fake news. Shall we now fact-check Jon Stewart? Specially, when no one fact-checks Obama or his pals, a.k.a. czars.

Posted by: sar1turbo | October 22, 2009 2:58 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, nothing squeals louder than a Village journalist faced with somebody telling the truth.

Your job would be immensely harder if you had to spend time debunking lies and finding the truth of situations. Imagine the complaints from lobbyists, paid all day just to make sure nobody at the Post has the courage to represent the broad interests of the American people against the interests of their corporate clients, if the Post changed its stripes and tried to actually work in the public interest.

Then again, maybe if the staff of the Post really focused on the good of the country, it might not be on its midway point through a long series of embarassments and layoffs until the inevitable bankruptcy.

So keep protesting that the Emperor really, really does have clothes on. Really. And they are handsome. Really.

Posted by: Dollared | October 22, 2009 2:59 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, you are wrong again. It's time to go on the attack, and you are spineless and clueless.

And please, do us Democrats a favor and abandon the liberal chair as a replacement for Mark Shields on the News Hour. I have to keep scrolling up on the transcript to the start of your idiotic points of view to make sure it isn't Brooks' or Gerson's take.

With friends like you, liberals don't need enemies.

Posted by: secretaryofspite | October 22, 2009 3:19 AM | Report abuse

Ruth you are still right, but the liberals who post here will have none of it! Its their typical MO - ignore valid points, fingers in their ears screaming "la la la la" until we're all quite and agree with them.
MSNBC in no way compares to Fox - Olberman and Madcow are idiots that attempt to talk down to their audience and use snide comments about the right to replace solid facts and evidence. I agree Beck is over the top, but the majority of Fox programming does offer both a liberal and conservative perspective.

Posted by: zosimos | October 22, 2009 3:19 AM | Report abuse

Ruth,

Imagine someone keeps yelling day after day: Ruth, you are a commie, racist, fascist traitor! What are you going to do?

while conventional wisdom has it that a sitting prez should not pick a fight with a media outlet, it presumes the press is behaving in a traditional manner. fox has been attacking prez obama from the get go. it made no attempt to hide it. in fact, fox is the one who behaves like as a nixionian bully, going after van jones, jennings, and other officials in a vindictive and nasty matter.

i don't remember reading your column, or anyone else in the msm, defending the administration. so i see nothing wrong with the administration hitting back. in fact, if it were up to me, i would kick fox out of the WH all together. who cares if fox's rating go up. in the end, what matters is the administration shows that fox is basically a gop mouthpiece.

Posted by: JoeBridgeman | October 22, 2009 3:34 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, fox is in another delusional universe all together, they ARE WAAAYYY over the line, mostly pure propaganda directly related to supporting, leading the republican party and trying to destroy, smear and belittle democrats and democratic agendas any way possible, mostly with misinformation and absurd shock-jocking.

Should the White House be the one to wage this war?

They certainly are not the best choice, it is unseemly like the Goliath swatting at David. But the White House is right, and it is far past the time that Faux News get a serious prolonged spanking and de-legitimation. The are an organization of far right opinions, not news, not real fact-checked reporting. They indeed are an enemy of the Obama Administration.

Posted by: yarbrougharts | October 22, 2009 4:23 AM | Report abuse

It seems to me that the quid pro quo of granting access for sympathetic coverage received is pretty well established in Beltway Village by now. To even write your previous column, Ruth, you had to conveniently forget the fact that the previous administration was doing this left, right, and sideways. What's all the huhu? If FOX wants more access, it should adjust its story.

Posted by: fzdybel | October 22, 2009 4:33 AM | Report abuse

Yes, "It id still dumb", but it is not what Ruth Martin thinks she is referring to that is still dumb... her doubling-down is.

Posted by: dcs4070 | October 22, 2009 4:44 AM | Report abuse

Just report the news please.

Posted by: eaglehawkaroundsince1937 | October 22, 2009 5:02 AM | Report abuse

I love all the punditocracy denigrating the Administration's attack on Fox.

I suspect that the Obama people did extensive market research indicating that taking Fox on was a good idea.

If this is true, it doesn't really matter one way or another what the pundits think, unless they did their own market research.

The funniest criticism about Obama is that he promised to bring the parties together. I think he was being more naive than disengenous.

Does anyone think that O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, and their ilk would have any interest in promoting bi-partisan efforts?

Since their focus is on self-promotion, they have no reason to do anything other than carry on their vacuous, obstreperous campaigns of personal destruction.

They even did it to the detriment of McCain's campaign in 2008 because it was all they knew how to do...

Posted by: berniesilverman | October 22, 2009 5:30 AM | Report abuse

I don't really believe that the Obama administration is particularly concerned with Mr. Beck's opinion of its own personnel, but I do believe they are outraged that Mr. Beck and Fox "out" so many unsavory facts about them.

I'll grant that Glenn Beck is happy to give his opinions of facts. As often as I've watched his show, however, the facts he offers his opinions of are well documented, usually, backed up with video or audio clips of a person at issue, or verbatim quotes from something that person has written. When a high-ranking advisor to the president is card-carrying, self-avowed communist (e.g. Van Jones), Mr. Beck's or Fox News's opinion of the fact hardly matters: it's the American people's opinion of the fact that's damaging. The fact that Mr. Beck and Fox document such facts beyond any doubt must give the administration nightmares about who's going to be "outed" next, about what and with what unsavory, overlooked video from the horse's mouth.

Praising Mao Tse Tung, a murderer on a scale to dwarf Hitler, as one high administration does, claiming him to be "political inspiration" (in her own words, on video) is tantamount to finding political inspiration in murder. Is this an administration a free United States can tolerate? Is this what the American left is all about? Is this what's in store for us if we leave any vestige of the left in government office? What concerns the Obama administration is not, "How will Ruth Marcus answer these questions?" but, "Are these the questions the American people are beginning to ask?"

Posted by: dryrunfarm1 | October 22, 2009 6:03 AM | Report abuse

The problem is not really that Fox is biased, Rush Limbaugh is biased but he is honest about it. The problem is Fox presents themselves as 'fair and balanced' when they clearly and obviously are not fiar and balanced. When was the last time you saw a positive story about President Obama on Fox 'news'? Is the President really 100% wrong 100% of the time? Point proven.

Posted by: orange3 | October 22, 2009 6:21 AM | Report abuse

Ms Marcus: you are right to take up a position and welcome the support of Mr Tapper who is very good at being supercilious.

Anyone who has followed the career of Rupert Murdoch in China, Britain and here knows that he is in the business of making money and of sensationlising the news. He had the licence to broadcast BBC World into China. He suspended that service when the Chinese threatened his business interests.

So let's not pretend that some great freedom of the press issue is at stake when the WH puts the boot to Mr Murdoch's ass.

Posted by: bitterpill8 | October 22, 2009 6:30 AM | Report abuse

My favorite story about WH manipulation of the news is when Peter Wehner, one of Karl Rove's deputies (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Strategic Initiatives), sent an email that was quoted almost verbatim that evening by Brit Hume of Fox. Now that's journalism, Brit.

It was Wehner's job to get out WH talking points on a daily basis, often many times so,to friendly journalists, and you can only imagine that his addressees did not/not include MSNBC, NBC, CBS, Reuters, CNN and the rest.

My second favorite is when Rupert Murdoch descended unannounced in a helicopter on the lawn of a Canberra area sheep and cattle rancher whose father had bought the property in the early 50s from Murdoch's father.

He asked that he be resold the ranch, was told to get back in his helo (at the point of a shotgun), and left. What arrogance!

Fox viewers can and should continue to stick to that channel. The WH is equally right to ignore Fox and let the subject drop. How can you talk to people who, like Chris Wallace, say that "this is the biggest bunch of crybabies I've seen in the 30 years in Washington." You don't; you ignore them, the O'Reillys, the Hannitys, the Becks, the Cavutos, the Doocys and the Kilmeades.

There may be some good reporting during the day, but it does not define the bullying tendencies of the network nor the petulance and peevishness of Wallace who can barely put a string of guests on his show on Sunday. Lowest rated for a reason.

Posted by: harper-d | October 22, 2009 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Just for the record Ruth, Faux News is not a news organization. You follow the Nixonian train of thought, as well as that of the repugnacant party, when you assume that because you say something a billion times, it makes it true. Manure still tastes and smells like manure despite a billion flies telling you it is fine dining.

Posted by: democratus | October 22, 2009 7:19 AM | Report abuse

A suggestion for Ms. Marcus. It may or may not lead to nuanced discussions on the comment boards but seems worth a try. When you write about such issues, include more historical context. There’s plenty out there to draw on, from impartial observers (Kathleen Hall Jamieson, professor and director of the Annenberg Center) to former principal players in White House media operations with a particular point of view (David Gergen, George Stephanopoulos, Mike McCurry, Ari Fleischer, Scott McClellan) to the contemporaneous records historians rely on. Memoirs and other insider accounts and archival records suggest that every administration gets drawn to some extent into wrangles over news stories. The rise in niche media means this is likely to continue regardless of which party controls the executive branch. There always will be some people who react with comments along the lines of “oh yeah, well the guy I voted against did this.” And those who respond, “oh yeah, well your guy did that.” That some of this seems inevitable shouldn’t stop a writer from digging a little deeper than you have on this issue (and maybe hooking more readers) by considering longer narrative arcs, how what administrations tend to look at press problems develop and evolve over time, and how the rise of niche media has affected this.

Posted by: Former_Archivist | October 22, 2009 7:39 AM | Report abuse

So how are the American people viewing this propganda campaign by the Democrats, Obama, and the folks who installed the one last November, our liberal MSM wolfpack press.........:


It's the Obama Administration that is out of control and here's what the American people think:

"Who or what poses the biggest threat to the White House's agenda?


U.S. Chamber of Commerce - 2 %

Rush Limbaugh - 2 %

The insurance industry - 11 %

Wall Street executives - 7 %

Fox News - 8 %

Itself (White House)- 70 %

Results are based on 24494 votes

....... and there you have it. The Divider-in-Chief's Chicago style bullying and intimiination isn't working.

Which is why Obama's poll numbers are dropping like a rock, except in the COOKED Washington POST polls, of course.

Consider the source...........sad.

Posted by: allenridge | October 22, 2009 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Obama should continue to speak the truth. Fox news is working against him.

I will say it again, they sponsored the tea party demonstrations. Once they did that they became a political organization. They should be treated like any other political organization.

Fox actively works to deceive the American people. "Death panels" were wholey made up and false. Fox treated them as fact.

Posted by: zpope | October 22, 2009 8:10 AM | Report abuse

I guess your opinion shows why you are work for the new right wing Washington Post rather than in politics. The media always closes ranks whenever any of their colleagues are criticized. Most of us who voted for Obama are glad he called out Fox Not News. Fox is a propaganda wing of the Republican Party and needs to be identified as such.

Posted by: cdierd1944 | October 22, 2009 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus is missing the point.

Fox News and talk radio have become the most dominant political media force that has ever existed in our country.

The Obama administration earlier called out Rush Limbaugh because he is more popular than any Republican politician.

The fact is that political discourse is dominated by the strong opinions that come from Fox and talk radio. An overwhelming majority of the American people support a public health care option, yet the media -- including CNN and other more moderate channels, still treat it like a two sided debate. The whole birther concept is far more mainstream than it should be due to noise dispelled on Fox and on the radio. Fox and talk radio are shaping debates and policy. Why is environmental legislation so puny? Why is the concept of gun control so taboo? It's because the media is slanted really far to the right because Fox and talk radio have immense power. Karl Rove is a regular contributer on Fox -- Karl Rove.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 8:23 AM | Report abuse

BTW -- I am not a liberal blogger. Fairly moderate actually, which is why the far right propaganda machine is so troubling to me. I'd be just as bothered by a far left propaganda machine but there is isn't one.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Fox "News" is pretty much like a tabloid, spreading lies and misinformation on a daily basis.

I agree the President should just ignore them. Why give them more publicity and the opportunity to act like martyrs?

The Fox News talking heads are buffoons and actors with very few having any in depth knowledge of events. They generally just spew hatred and divisiveness and incite their right wing base, most of whom do not investigate as to whether they are getting the straight facts.

On the other hand, Rachel Maddow is a Rhodes scholar with a degree from Oxford University, among other degrees. She does extensive research on the subjects she presents, interviews people with opposing views without denigrating them and, generally, is very knowledgeable about the subjects she speaks about.

Compare Rachel with Glenn Beck or Hannity or O'Reilly or a few of the talking heads during the day. No comparison.

I think Fox News is abominable but the President and his spokespersons should not lower themselves to even acknowledge Fox "News". That's my advice anyway.

Posted by: JaneDoe4 | October 22, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

To the poster who thinks the WH has been transparent, where have you been? Whenever Fox News finds these speeches, someone at the WH goes in and scrubs the internet of all the speeches!! Sounds a bit like Nixon to me. This administration is all about POWER. They have done nothing yet except put in place more ways to CONTROL us. If you want to be a slave, just keep thinking like you do. If you want to be free, find out the facts. MSNBC and others are NOT telling you the facts.

Posted by: annnort | October 22, 2009 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Why is it so terrible for a public figure to confirm what we already know? FAUX News is the propaganda arm of the repiblican party. Is that fact really in dispute? Even there news stories are slanted to the right. Heck, they even PROMOTED the wingnut teabagger and 9/12 marches.

Posted by: wiatrol | October 22, 2009 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Its really sad and demoralizing how this country has become so damn partisan. Hell,
even when we ALL sat and watched the LA Police savagely beat Rodney King...people STILL came away from that incident backing the behavior of the police. The truth of the matter is that we will see and hear what we want to see and hear, and what our own prejudices will permit us to see or hear. Having said that, I can not imagine how an otherwise sincere, open minded, sober individual could possible compare Fox with either MSNBC or CNN for that matter. For while both MSNBC and CNN may have "left" leaning programming...there
still is programming on both cable networks
featuring individuals who are anything but liberal (i.e., see Joe Scarborough/MSNBC and Lou Dobbs/CNN). Would someone please
identify similar programming on Fox? I'm also particularly amused at how republicans
can and will hide behind a "conservative" label to spit out racist trash about Obama,
his wife, their children. Forget about your political leanings...just frame this discussion around decency. And if you can
still defend Fox, well then I would suggest
your defense would speak volumes about your
very own lack of decency. And for the record, Fox is NOT a "news" organization...
it is simply a media tool for the right wing of the republican party. With an emphasis on the far right!

Posted by: NHITEVIZION | October 22, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus opinion piece #2 on the alleged WH war with Faux Snooze: still dumb.

Posted by: Gatsby10 | October 22, 2009 9:03 AM | Report abuse

The only thing that is dumb here is you Ruth. Your analysis is always lacking and more often than not it seems to me that your columns are more about you being fair and balanced than anything else. How about something real for a change? Oh! and yes, please stay off the News Hour, its much to good to give you a platform for anything.

Posted by: robertmerry | October 22, 2009 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Poster annnort: You don't watch Fox news, do you? Just asking -- your use of all caps and your arguments suggest you might.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

The real reason Obama took on Fox News was to get people's minds off the health care fiasco. No one on Fox News makes a statement without documenting it. Glenn Beck always shows the speaker's words when he quotes someone. Obama DID say during the campaign we would know where he stood by the people he has around him. And that he would be transparent. Well, he has avowed communists and maxists around him as well as Dunn who admires the philosophy of Mao Tse Yun - a mass killer of millions of people! His WH is certainly NOT transparent. If it were, Olberman would not be in business. If you think Glenn Beck is crazy, watch his program more than one time and listen to what he says.

Posted by: annnort | October 22, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

mrskinsfan, I have always been a Redskin fan. Yes, I watch Fox Hews. My post was NOT all caps. I think I used 3 caps or so.

Posted by: annnort | October 22, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

The use of the word "war" is what's "dumb."

Posted by: mzblk | October 22, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Oh no. Somebody said the king has no clothes.

Posted by: dirty_ed | October 22, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Can't help but agree with the poster who said Faux News is 100% against everything that Obama does - does anyone (no matter your level of hatred for this president) really believe him to be wrong 100% of the time?

For Faux to give the president credit for anything good would go against their agenda which clearly is "an arm of the Republican party". What other news chanel organizes "tea parties" - name just one.

Further, what's the fuss - so the administration dist FOX by not thinking of them as "real" news - SO WHAT?! Don't they have a right to fight back against an agenda that is clearly anti Obama? Obama is our president - we the people should support his efforts and we can take issue with those things we disagree with as can FOX - but when 100% of what you say in your opinion hour is negative I would ask - where's the "fair and balanced" reporting in that?

Posted by: Kathy5 | October 22, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

I've watched Beck more than once. Each time he talked about his "concerns" and how "scared" he is of some of the things the administration is doing.

Paranoia and fear -- two things I'd prefer our media not focus on.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 9:21 AM | Report abuse

All you have to do is watch John Stewart and Stephen Colbert for a week and you will never be able to take fox news seriously again.
Both Stewart and Colbert are not only hilarious but they are also right on. They use actual footage of fox news to drive there point home.

Posted by: mmalewitz | October 22, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

When you have a so-called news organization sponsoring tea parties; 9-12 whatever those are; giving voice numerous times to birthers; giving time to a proven fraud, liar author Corsi; having commentators splice video to fit their narrative, etc., etc. I don't care how much you write most sane people think the White House is well within their rights to not interact with them. You reap what you sow.

Posted by: rlj1 | October 22, 2009 9:24 AM | Report abuse

"Still dumb".
Well, there's a mature intelligent retort. Who can argue with high-brow logic such as that?
I guess I'm not as smart as Ms. Marcus, but I don't see what is so "dumb" about speaking up against a "news" organization whose sole mission seems to be throwing mud at you, facts be damned. And just who is the administration going to alienate by saying something negative about the GOP news network, the Fox-heads who detest Obama no matter what he does?

Posted by: SamBrown2 | October 22, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

The more we focus on the "issue" of Obozzo and Fox News, the more it takes our attention away from the real issues-

1) Massive unemployment which continues to rise (531,000 new claims this week alone)
2) Massive foreclosures which continue to rise
3) The socialization of our entire health care delivery system
4) Incompetent and indecisive handling of GITMO, the war, bailouts, the budget, deficits, taxes, clunkers (as simple as that should have been) and virtually everything this ignorant clown has put his hands on.

To hell with Fox News. They can handle themselves. It's the rest of us I'm worried about.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | October 22, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus: Still Dumb. Just because the press gets queasy when one of their own gets attacked doesn't mean the press is right. Fox's audience is 2 million tops. By making Fox the face of the opposition, Obama makes it easier for independents and ex-Republicans to repudiate them. Plus no one can seriously call Anita Dunn's remarks wrong. On the facts, she's right. Or doesn't that matter? Attn: Ms. Marcus: Stubborn is not necessarily admirable.

Posted by: panskeptic | October 22, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

I guess I just do not mind that MSNBC actively refutes the obviously bias and often bogus reporting of Fox News. Pure propaganda. Somebody has to be there to balance it out ... The White House could never directly respond to all that mud and garbage without appearing "small". While we could all turn blue debating who started it all, the White House is finally beginning to understand that raw partisanship broadcast under the guise of "Network News" is simply just raw partisanship. I for one am happy that the White House is calling them out, and fighting back!

Posted by: fromtherestofthestaff | October 22, 2009 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Right Wing media are the New McCarthyists.

Lies and liars must be challenged.

I am astounded by the irresponsibility of what you are suggesting.

Should politicians cower as a major media outlet corrupts our political system by making their standard operating procedures lying?

Most media did such a poor job of challenging Fox lies that MSNBC made a business model out of taking Fox on. Fox brought on the destruction of corporate media, because in "competing with them in the theater of the absurd, people abandoned you for the web and just looking things up for themselves.

By your reasoning the President should also not denounce a future Senator McCarthy. Ridiculous.

Posted by: eclvvin | October 22, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, I have a question: have you ever actually watched Fox News? Spend a few hours there on any day and see how almost every story is approached as "How can we frame this to make Obama and the Democrats look bad?". Are supermarket tabloids newspapers? Sure. Do they have acutal news stories? Sure. Are they in the same business as the Washington Post? ... Hmmm. Good question.

Posted by: durangodave | October 22, 2009 9:34 AM | Report abuse

"And then the third lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa -- not often coupled with each together, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you're going to make choices. You're going to challenge. You're going to say, "Why not?" You're going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here's the deal: These are your choices. They are no one else's."

***************************************

For all you well trained Fox viewers - the above quote is from Anita Dunn who your man Beck thinks he has found an issue he can once again critize this WH for (Obama). He cut the tape off at " but the two people that I turn to most." - very disingeous. If you care to know the truth (sadly, I don't think that you do) read above what Ms. Dunn actually said. Then tell me Beck's not a trouble making liar with an agenda. Even if that agenda (sadly) is only to satisfy those watching.

Posted by: Kathy5 | October 22, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

How is pointing out that Fox is a joke 'going to war' with them? Woman, you're insane.

Posted by: unpluggedboodah | October 22, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

It matters little whether it's Joe Wilson, Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter from the extreme right or their twins from the extreme left, all represent the money to be had by demonstrating their lack of civility and respect for other people in public. So long as we reward their misbehavior it will continue.
I've grown quite tired of their crass, crude,ill-mannered behavior and tend to avoid left and right 'shock' "news" whether it be national or local in origin. I feel I'm not alone.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | October 22, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Don't feel the need to justify your rational opinion. You were right the first time. These people who claim to be interested in "fairness" would be frothing at the mouth if Bush had conducted such a SUSTAINED attack on MSNBC. As I've said, a passing comment about a story or an organization would be understandable. Sending out minions for over a week is embarrassing. But hey, the lemmings love it, so score one for the White House.

Posted by: Pike4 | October 22, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

The media is afraid. They are gutless and don't know what to do.

For years they turned a blind eye to talk radio and Fox .. and the New York Post, etc.

Its like the 'thin blue line'. The media is afraid to police their own. Maybe it is because they have friends who work at Fox or for the Wall St. Journal editorial board or at the NY Post. Maybe it is because they think that one day they may need a job and they will be sending their resumes to these places or to people who once worked at these places. They don't want to burn a bridge.

But the fact is what goes on at Fox and on talk radio is a festering sore. The media has to own up. They can't get along with the "entertainer" excuse anymore. The attack dogs don't sing, they don't dance and they are not telling jokes. They are telling lies, and attacking our institutions ... and making some vulnerable Americans very afraid, and perhaps encouraging some to be violent. ... And they are part of the media.

The Obama admin, or anyone else, has a right to call it what it is. Fox and the rest can go on air and do what they do, nobody is stopping them, this is America, but it doesn't mean that Obama, his staff, or decent Americans have to ignore these people the way the rest of the media wants to.

Posted by: dpand1 | October 22, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Marcus, I'm afraid The Crazies (birthers, secret muslim believers, anti-Socialists, etc.) are siding with you on this one. Any reasonable person can look at objective reality and see that Fox is a propaganda arm of the GOP aiming for the nut cases. One comment above points out that MSNBC had to make apologies/corrections to its viewers. That's precisely the difference with between the two networks: When MSNBC makes an error, they ADMIT it. Fox just plows ahead as if nothing happened and cranks out more misinformation.

Posted by: billyfla | October 22, 2009 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Let me give you a little taste of Faux News tactics:

Is Heraldo Rivera Gay? Have you heard that Brett Baier is a poofter? Is Greta Van Sustren a Lesbian? Is Glenn Beck secretly a closet Homosexual? Has Bill O'Reilly stopped beating his wife?

Each of these headlines is misleading and a small amount of evidence FOR each of these things could probably be found (i.e. I am sure there is a picture of Heraldo walking somewhere with a man that could be taken out of context to show that Heraldo might be in a pose that could be construed as a "gay pose"). That doesn't make it true and doesn't make it investigative journalism (and for the record it doesn't make him a bad person, even if he is gay), but it would probably serve to mislead those who want to be mislead.

Case in point,
A Headline currently (10/22/09 at 8:36AM Central time) says:
"- YOU DECIDE: Do You Think You'll Catch H1N1? "

How it the heck is that someone "deciding anything"? They may be guessing if they are going to catch H1N1, but it is only guessing. I am sure that it does make some Faux viewers happy because they feel that Faux News is "ALLOWING" them the opportunity to "DECIDE" if they are going to catch H1N1 or not, but it is really a symptom of their journalistic attitude. Ask misleading questions and shape the news in the manner to which their viewers want. It isn't journalism, it isn't "Fair and Balanced" (as soon as a News Organization has to tell me that they are "Fair and Balanced" means that they most likely are NOT) !

Posted by: JSKEVV | October 22, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

As for MSNBC ... point out one instance of them telling an outright line, or taking a quote out of context .. and I bet the quilty party will offer a correction and an on air apology. That crappolla goes on at Fox everyday. ... Death panels and birthers oh my!

Posted by: dpand1 | October 22, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Wow, the crazy right is crying, FOX and the right declared a WAR on the Democrats over 9 years ago, Obama should have declared that Fox news was liars a long time ago not just now.

Posted by: tqmek1 | October 22, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

I think the line is being blurred. Fox, CNN, et al have news shows that for the most part do their job, which is to report on events, then they have opinion programs like Maddow, Hannity and Dobbs. If the administration does not like the opinion shows then don't provide staff to be interviewed to those shows, but to take on the entire channel is just petty and stupid. It is time for the Obama administration to start governing and stop acting like a spoiled child who isn't getting their way.

Posted by: welangIII | October 22, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Amen, eclvvin. And those lies pour into the mainstream media and vastly distort the overall conversation. The administration is supposed to let this go unchecked?

I've seen it suggested in these comments that Obama is going back on his promise to unite the parties. He’s not. Check the polls, the American people agree on lot more than Fox news and talk radio would have you think.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Fox was always the biggest cheerleader for going to war. They only seem interested in telling viewers what to be afraid and whom to blame for it.

They have the right to say what they want and make $ throwing red meat to the radicals, but I can understand why the White House is too busy to play their games.

Posted by: jrubin5 | October 22, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Lord Obama finds your lack of Faith disturbing.

Posted by: moose6 | October 22, 2009 9:53 AM | Report abuse

I certainly don't think that FOX is a valuable source of information, but regardless of how we feel about the President, he is working harder than anyone else to get this country more energy efficient. Using less energy and developing new technology will last for all time and will save the planet; anything else can be reversed when a new President takes office if you hate it so much.

Still, I don't know enough about political strategy to know whether or not going against FOX was a smart idea. You can't fight emotion with facts, and FOX has plenty of emotion.

Posted by: ElectricGileq | October 22, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus just doesn't want to get it.
Faux New is not a news organization. They manufacture news and incite violence against Obama. You want the president to just sit there and take it?

I watched Washington Post become "Washington Fox" because your paper thinks it can make money like Fox destroying the fabric of this country. The White House saw other news organization start doing the same thing for a buck, presenting right wing nuts as heros on national TV. In August it even became cool to be a racist in America. That's one of the reasons Dunn and Emmanuel have decided to push back. Fox is a cancer that is destroying journalism.

Faux News wanted a war against decent people? They got it.

Posted by: tchanta | October 22, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, but I don't see your point. No news organization, in fact no one, has a right to be so detrimental in communication so as to undermine the credibility of another person; especially when that other person happens to be someone who disagrees with you about politics. Does the media want respect? Then earn it! The first amendment says that no government organization can deprive freedom of the press. It does not say that we have to put up with disrespect for the sake of ratings to make more money. Get over yourselves. You have become nothing more than entertainers who are trying to fool every one into thinking that your right to make a living is protected by the Consitution.

Posted by: hanrm0415 | October 22, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

To those suggesting that the White house has better things to do, let's be clear. It's not as if Obama is spending his time doing anything. It's Dunn, and I don't know that she's spending a huge percentage of her time doing much about this. And, even if she is, Obama has got a pretty big staff to focus on everything else going on.

Posted by: nyskinsfan | October 22, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

The point of the column is that the whitehouse is engaging in politically divisive aggression unbecoming of the office.
Their actions bring to mind a pre-litigation team taking an extreme offensive against their opponent- in this case the right-leaning media of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. President Obama currenlty appears to be acting like an agressive attorney trying to win the approval of his high-paying client. His client is his liberal base and his pay is their community activism that got him a huge voter turnout. The problem is, Americans are not used to seeing litigation style tactics in the Presidency. We are surprised at the sight of such low-level chest-thumping so long after the campaign and embarassed by it. But, we shouldn't be surprised at all. We elected a young, unseasoned but serious, litigator with a lot of ambition. This is, unfortunatley, all we are getting in terms of leadership so far. Hopefully, that will change.

-a Fox News watching attorney.

Posted by: bendex7 | October 22, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

I just think your a trashy, red meat, writer. Your bias and agenda are very transparent through your clunky words. Give it up. Your dragging down the integrity of the Washington Post.

Posted by: naturalkingdom | October 22, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

And by the way every single cable news media outlet spews fecal matter from their mouths 24/7. Every single one. FOX, MSNBC, HLN, CNN, etc. etc.

In other news... water is wet

life gets alot easier when you make peace with this fact and move on.

Posted by: moose6 | October 22, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Newspaper subscriptions are down. Wonder why? Ever listen to talk radio? Fox? I suspect the people who defend these folks, people like Ms. Marcus never listen.

Everyday they slander not only Democratic pols, but the press. The newspapers, the networks, the other cable shows. Fox talking heads, and the radio guys, flat out say the WaPost, the NY Times, the evening news .. they are the drive by media, the "MSM", they don't tell the whole story, they are in the tank for Obama, they are LIBERAL! These talkers promise their listeners they will give the straight scoop that the media is hiding from them.

What does the WaPost and others do? They get punched in the face by these bullies, then defend the bully tactics, then come right back the next day for more.

Actually listen Ms. Marcus. Do some research. Pick a few shows and tune in for a few weeks. I can't stomach them for long, but you don't have to, listen to Rush for 20 minutes and you pretty much get the whole 2 hour show. Listen to Hannity rant for a half hour and you could be excused or turning the channel at that point. But check out their acts for a few weeks ... then come back and defend them, and say anyone who speaks out against such nonsense is "dumb."

Posted by: dpand1 | October 22, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

I think you are missing the point.

The point Obama was making is that fox was driving the new cycle with stories that weren't all that news worthy.

examples
Birthers. News outlets treated this like it had some basis in fact. The flat earth folks were jealous you were not giving them that much coverage.


tea parties. This was a practically a fox sponsored event. It got hours of coverage. 300K calls yesterday for health care and it didn't even make the news.


Obama said he would work with the news arm at fox. Opinion has bleed into news on cable and this really is polarizing a nation that has so much in common.

Posted by: joejoe2000 | October 22, 2009 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Yep, everyone who thinks Obama is wrong here is a "crazy righty".

There really is little hope for us all to ever even come close to rational debate anymore. Everyone seems so brainwashed...on both sides.

Firstly, using "but Bush did it too!" is a HORRIBLE excuse. Aren't we all in agreement that Bush was perhaps the worst president in our lifetime? Probably not the guy Obama should be emulating, no? He was supposed to be something different, or at least that's the smoke that was blown up our backs during the entire campaign.

Second, there are intelligent people on all sides of every debate. Yes, if you watch Fox News and listen to Limbaugh, you're under the impression that every Democratic voter is a socialist pinko commie who wants to take away your money.

Yes, if you watch MSNBC, Bill Maher, and the Daily Show, you think every Republican voter is some ultra religious fanatic who screams at Town Hall meetings and doesn't realize Medicare is a government program.

Uh, it ain't all true. Do those people exist. Yes, of course. But taking those people and painting a whole voting bloc with the same brush is nothing more than srategy. So when we have reject lawmakers in both parties making a mess of the country, they know they'll always keep their base, because they paint the other side as the "crazy bad guys." It's easier then for a Democratic or Republican voter to say, "Well, I'm disappointed in my party, but I'll NEVER side with those wackos on the other side!"

As far as quotes out of context...if you honestly can say with a straight face that you DON'T see that happening on BOTH sides, then this entire comment isn't worth the key strokes.

Posted by: Pike4 | October 22, 2009 10:03 AM | Report abuse

[hillary clinton] DISSENT IS PATRIOTIC!![/hillary clinton]

Posted by: moose6 | October 22, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Don't we have more important issues to address, instead of giving even one second of media time to this drivel? I mean really!!

Posted by: tgolamb | October 22, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I am happy the Washington Post is giving republicans an opportunity to vent their anger at the same time get their digs in.

The facts as I see it are across the nation Americans are seeing how narrow interests republicans have in regarding the future of the United States and it's people.

Fox news has a market, and that market is people who do not want to think; past their own ignorance and narrow corporate special interest; usually basking in so called christian ideology, but in reality it is ignorance that does not encourage hope.

Posted by: ArchieHaase | October 22, 2009 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Well thought out and written column. I did smirk at your "Smart people at the White House" line though.

I don't watch any American TV news channels, it is clear to me that they all have extreme bias and it shows up in strange places, interspersed with real news.

So I view your comments about MSNBC, Fox et al, as being spot on. The fringe nutjobs from both the left and right have zero sense of reality, so expect their gnashing of teeth and screaming hysterics. I'm one of the majority that wishes we could put them all in straight-jackets and medicate them.

The hilarious play out of this is that I view the Obama administration as a carbon copy of the Bush administration. Here is a list of 10 comparisons where they both are identical in their approach to the world. Hopey changey? We got just more of the same.... http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/02/obama-bush-comparisons-10-ways-barack.html

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

If you think Juan Williams is liberal or many more so called liberals and aka Democratic Strategists are on Faux; you've drank the Kool Aid. Those so called Liberals agree more with Faux lies than oppose them.

Faux loves using New York Post editorials, another Rupert Murdoch outfit, to support their twisted news. Brother quoting Sisters and opinion is not news; it's gossip.

Posted by: ddoiron1 | October 22, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

not to mention that you cant really compare a private letter with a very public campiagn rolled out on the most watched sunday morning talk shows. the media's lack of outrage is liberal hypocrisy at its worst. this will be a watershed event in the public's awareness of the very real and pernicious liberal bias in the media.

as for Froomkin, well, im proud to say that back in 2007 I told him that his usefulness at the WaPo would barely outlast the Bush Admin.

what was it? Inauguration on Jan 21., and Froom Froom gets sh!t canned on Jan. 28? guess they decided to let him finish the pay period.

Posted by: dummypants | October 22, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

What if we were to say "(insert news agency name here) often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Obama Administration”? Wouldn't everyone be up in arms that we didn't have a free press? So how is it right for the Executive Branch of the Federal Government declaring war on any news agency? A free press is crucial for a republic or democracy! Without it, good or bad, people would be hard pressed to make informed decisions for how they are governed.

Posted by: G_R_T | October 22, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Many of the Fox commentators have consistently tried to de-legitimatize this President, so now the White House is doing the same to them by questioning if they are really news organization. What is the big deal?

Posted by: MartinB1 | October 22, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

This arguement that they are guilty is a cop out by the rest of the media that is afraid to own up that their friends over at Fox and on talk radio are out of control. MSNBC, CNN can't be compared to Fox.

Sure, CNN and MSNBC offer opinion shows during the course of the day, BUT the big difference is that their opinion is fact checked, they don't make stuff up. Their opinion is based on facts and reality.

We can all debate and express opinion over whether the money spent on health reform is good or bad, well spent or not. Or whether we need more troops in Afghanistan or should prepare to draw down.

But you can't debate crazy.

You can't debate someone who thinks Obama is a Muslim or was not born in the US. You can't debate people who say health care reform will kill seniors. You can't debate people who call our President a "commie" or a socialist or who says he hates white people. You can't debate people who say our President doesn't want to defend this nation. You can't debate crazy and you can't excuse the networks that air crazy.

Posted by: dpand1 | October 22, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

You are all nuts. Every time Obama opens his mouth he outs another dollar into FOX's till. It could never afford the free publicity it is getting. When they are correct the ones becomes tens. The purpose of newspapers is to sell newspapers. Ask the New York Times. America is financially bankrupt, Fox and Obama morally.

Posted by: hondolane13 | October 22, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Setting the record straight, thank you:
"Fox News aka, The Jesus Channel/ GOP TV/ The Glorious Official Republican Government News Network.

While Fox News has the highest ratings, it’s also the same group of people that make up just 20% of America’s electorate… the far right-wing of the GOP.

There will always be an audience for the far right and that’s Rupert Murdock’s Fox News demographic.

Rupert keeps them frothing at the mouth with manufactured fear and GOP talking-points, phony outrage.

Fox is also a right-wing echo chamber.. notice that when “The Wall Street Journal”, “The Weekly Standard” people are on Fox News there’s never disclosure that these people are all Rupert Murdock employees.

Imagine if MSNBC or CNN did this… I don’t know how Fox News gets way with constantly recycling Rupert Murdock’s employees (sockpuppets) from his various media properties.

Also there’s hardly a word on the “MSM” about Murdock’s world wide (far right-wing) media empire.

Murdock has a lot of influence, example: all of his various sockpuppets, Hannity, Beck, etc, and all of Murdock’s worldwide media holdings trash global warming, President Obama and anything else right-wing Rupert Murdock dislikes.

I think that press and especially individual journalists are deathly afraid of Rupert Murdock and what he can do to them professionally.

Rupert Murdock is the new William Randolph Hearst.

Another thing, Sarah Palin, who is a favorite among the Faux News/ Right-wing crowd is getting Rupert Murdock’s wingnut welfare.

Palin’s (Rupert Murdock’s ghostwriter) book publisher is HarperCollins… a wholly owned Rupert Murdock subsidiary, you ‘betcha.


Finally, there should be an award given to the guy that writes the ominous, scary music for Fox News... he's obviously a full-time employee.

No seriously... whenever there's a special where Rupert Murdock wants to convince Americans that Saddam Hussein has WMD, or that Iran/North Korea is going to attack America tomorrow, or a Hannity or Beck segment where they want to scare their right-wing audience (even more) there's always that ominous music to go along with the story.

It's like a scary GOP music video.

Posted by: republican_disaster | October 21, 2009 9:54 PM |"

Posted by: mtravali | October 22, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

joejoe: "examples - Birthers. News outlets treated this like it had some basis in fact. The flat earth folks were jealous you were not giving them that much coverage."

You think this story was driven by the right? The "birthers" story was the best thing that could have happened for Obama...it made anyone who opposes him look completely crazy! Left-leaning shows like Bill Maher and the Daily Show ate up the "birther" movement to paint all opposition as a bunch of racist nutjobs.

Do you honestly think rational critics of this administration's rampant spending and pushing everything through as an "emergency" and "crisis" want to be lumped in with martians like "birthers" and people screaming "government keep your hands off my Medicare?"

Posted by: Pike4 | October 22, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Fox News is non-hostile to conservative and Christian values, viewpoints, spokesmen, and ideas. I suppose from a Liberal's point-of-view that makes Fox News conservative and Christian. In actuality, Fox News has gained the reputation for reporting the news in an unbiased manner and then allowing the viewer to decide; "We Report, You Decide".

Ruth, this is just a "side show" while insipid Pelosi continues to push her socialist programs through Congress. Only, Fox News, is likely to report on all the news while the others wait for Anita to tell them what Obama wants to hear about today.

Posted by: 2009frank | October 22, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Obviously FOX News is biased but so is the rest of the media. The difference: FOX has a right-wing bias and the others swing to the left. Big deal. It's been that way for as long as that channel has been around.

But the result of all this petty sniping from the White House just makes me more tired of Obama and his minions. After nine short months, the country is more polarized than ever. Everyone is arguing and nothing is getting done. nobody in America seems happy with their government anymore. Obama pledged to unite the factions of red states and blue states into one nation that was united and lived up to our moniker of the Untited States of America. Yet, that guy seems to have disappeared and has been replace by a puppet whose strings are pulled by Rahm Emmanuel.

So many people voted for Obama hoping for a change. Hoping for a new start and a Nation that once again pulled together to be the hope of the World and instead we have become more angry, bitter and divided than ever.

I say enough with the fights and division from this administration.

Posted by: Ci2Eye | October 22, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

I do think they protest too much. It's so obvious that FOX is doing something correctly ~ I mean, really, why mess with them if they are just hacks?

You don't see them going after The Daily Show ~ and they make fun of Obama as well as FOX points to Obama and says "look, look what they're doing now!" Ok, maybe not as much as FOX does or as well as, but they still do it....

I'm just flabbergasted at all the people who have yet to WAKE UP! The guy you elected is NOT who you think you elected. He certainly is not making the country a better place, nor will he leave it in better condition than he found it. He's showing us that already.

Posted by: katfelch | October 22, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

What is becoming more interesting is Fox continues to uncover stories that the main stream media ignores (Van Jones, Anita Dunn, other Obama Czar's . . without them it would be a relatively unchecked government.

Posted by: sarno | October 22, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Fox "manufacture(s) news and incite (s) violence against Obama"? Nobody needs to ask if you are maybe a little bit crazy, you already laid that to rest. You can't be so bothered just by one newspaper column... c'mon, what's this really about?

Seriously, if a republican or independent (I can dream) administration were pulling the came crap as this one is, the liberal-minded people on here would very likely be engaged in something active, starting with demonstrations, then devolving to brick throwing 101 and looting en masse 102. Ya know, smashing the state by tearing up other people's stuff.

Liberals clearly crave authoritarianism from their leaders, hence all the tough talk on here.

Posted by: GoFigger | October 22, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Question: Is the story about the op/ed written by the two GOP chairmen from SC about Jim DeMint which slandered Jews newsworthy?

I ask because it was only carried by MSNBC. CNN, Fox News and the major networks... none of them reported it. Maybe as a Jew I'm biased... I think this was a lot more newsworthy than the manufactured outrage over the "lipstick on a pig" comment from the 2008 election which was reported everywhere all of the time. But I am starting to believe the bias in the overall media is a conservative one.

I have seen MSNBC rail on Rod Blagojevich, Elliot Spitzer, etc. But I get the feeling that Fox News won't do anything that would make a Republican look bad, and that CNN will bend over backwards to not look "liberally biased" to the point where they have become decisively biased conservative.

My question still stands though, does a couple of GOP chairmen disparaging Jews in a major newspaper op/ed constitute a newsworthy event?

Posted by: porkbellies37 | October 22, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I listen to all of the cable news stations, however FOX is the only one I trust. It is not just what the other channels say, it is also what they do not report.

Posted by: jkwkent | October 22, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

If people are saying Fox News doesn't report the news....then why did CNN run a "fact check" on the SNL intro spoof of the president having done nothing since elected. Now that was pure news! I am sure most people took the SNL intro at face value, as comedy and didn't need CNN to verify it.

I watch all the cable news networks for their news broadcasts and not their opinion shows (because all of them have them). I am a conservative, but I don't watch Glenn Beck or listen to Rush Limbaugh. I don't have to...I have my own opinions.

Here is my opinion: the President said before the election that he was not a Chicago style politician… the problem is he has surrounded himself with Chicago style politicians. So much for change!

Posted by: G_R_T | October 22, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

I'm waiting for Fox to selectively show touchdowns of white players on their Sunday NFL game show. That would teach Obama a lesson about his racism! They probably write the Mallard Fillmore comic strip. The level of their ploitics is about equal to Homer Simpson's intelligence.

Posted by: msjn1 | October 22, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Anita Dunn - an admitted admirer of Mao Tse Tung, one of the greatest mass murderers in history. So much for the moral compass in place at the White House.
Why the surprise at the reaction to Fox News? After all, this is a liberal administration and behaves like liberals - petty, vindictive, and mean-spirited.
And isn't it refreshing to hear admirers of those bastions of 'fair' reporting, NPR and PBS, complain about biased news coverage? Well, a sense of irony has never been the strong point of liberal lefties.

Posted by: scvaughan | October 22, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

This cracks me up. Do any of you liberals realize that Fox News almost cost George Bush the election in 2000? Yes, it was Fox that uncovered and ran with the story of Bush's DUI conviction just days before the election. Would a news network that was in the tank for the right wing do that? Republicans were apoplectic about that story coming out so close to the election.

On the other hand, in that election we had "legitimate" news organizations like the New York Times running front pages stories on TV ads with supposed subliminal messages calling Democrats "rats." In 2008 the New York Times spiked a story about ACORN being in cahoots with the Obama campaign, just weeks before the election. Barack Obama went to college in New York City, yet the Times never even attempted to obtain his transcripts or talk to anyone who taught him or went to school with him.

NBC News ran a faked story on exploding GM truck gas tanks. CBS News ran a story on faked documents about George W. Bush. The Washington Post had Janet Cooke. The New Republic had Stephen Green. As far as I know, Fox News has never been found to have run actual fake stories that it had to retract, nor has it had to fire its most famous news anchor or reporter over a fake story.

There is enough FAIL in all of the so-called Mainstream Media outlets these days that the legitimacy of all of them could be called into question.

Posted by: rkinneypa | October 22, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

You're wrong about FOX and MSNBC being on different sides of the same coin. When FOX presents "news" and represents it as "facts" invariably, and particularly when in connection with politics or religion, the data is missing or the analysis of the data is missing or breathtakingly fraudulent. My baloney detector says you discard the premise when it doesn't fit the data, not the other way around.

The two networks aren't equal but opposite - one network (FOX), brings baloney to the table and the other (MSNBC) has the courage to detect it and say so with conviction. When the Allies opposed Germany and Japan in WWII, it didn't make the Allies equal but opposite fascists, did it?

Posted by: onefossilrabbit | October 22, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry to say that from what I can see you are downplaying the role of Fox News on the right and playing up the role of MSNBC on the left.

MSNBC, in the past few years, has started carrying people who were (and remain) critical of the George W Bush administration. Rachel Maddow is demonstratively on the left; Keith Olbermann, not as much. However, they are careful to base their opinions in demonstrable facts. They may make mistakes, but they tend to own up to them when mistakes are pointed out to them - pressure not required. In Ms. Maddow's case, her liberalism springs from what she sees.

On the other side, with Fox News, you have Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and more. They do not seem to have a demonstrable political ideology aside from GOP Good, Democrats Bad. They are known to pull manufactured facts, ofttimes false, out of thin air; they do not apologize for factual errors unless there is extreme pressure brought to bear. Their rightwing-ism - they are demonstrably not conservatives - seems to come before the facts, with inconvenient facts discarded.

More notably, Fox News "News" coverage that involves government at any level is almost always brought back to how GOP Good, Democrats Bad. There are several documented cases of a GOP politician getting into trouble, publicly, and the Fox News crawl among other bits of on-screen material for some reason list those politicians as a Democrat for several hours. This says either they are completely incompetent at covering news or they have an agenda to show that GOP Good, Democrats Bad.

MSNBC has slammed Democrats who have done bad things; they haven't made any mistakes in party affiliation. They are, as such, either less biased or more accurate. Or, perhaps, both.

Posted by: JacobSommer | October 22, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I disagree that the folks over at the White House are "smart."

Posted by: Cranios | October 22, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Overall I agree with you that this war is dumb. I also think all the attention it is getting by the media is a bit dumb. No disrespect, but it is also a little bit self-serving.

The Bush Administration declared war on the NY Times also, even to the point that it threatened criminal prosecution. The first Bush Administration declared war on CBS News.

In regard to current cable networks, I'm a bit disturbed that none of the media will step up and do a story about how bad Fox News and MSNBC truly are. Fox is an arm of the Republican Party, and it has deliberately misrepresented much about the current administration. It has consistently gone over the line. I think whether Fox News is really news any longer is a fair question. News outlet still have a responsibility and I think it is fair to ask whether cable networks are violating that responsibility and what effects that has on a society that now gets the majority of its news from television.

Posted by: socmorons | October 22, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Fox is not news, it is just a right wing propaganda machine. You can prove this to yourself by signing up to their web site and trying to post a comment that does not agree with their view. They will not post it, they will censor it, just like any other dictatorship would.

Posted by: luckyboomer48 | October 22, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

The White House's attack on FOX is straight out of the Saul Alinsky play book - ID your enemy, attack them and isolate them. This is done with a heavy dose of Chicago strong arm politics. The country is imploding in front of us and Obama picks a fight with all those who disagree with him. In a few more months when the economy collapses, this conflict with FOX will be meaningless. Then ALL of us will be on the bottom rung of Maslow's hierarchy of needs struggling with each other for food and shelter!

Posted by: saelij | October 22, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Just to see for myself, I have listened daily at work to Fox News at my desk for about 4-5 hours per day for over a year now.

Conclusion? Fox News is not 'news' reporting. Fox News focuses on the titilating and the sensational stuff out there. Fox editorializes ALL the time; it's not content to just report on something. Fox ALWAYS reports on all things negative regarding Democrats and Obama. I could go on and on ...

Try for yourself. Try objectively to listen to Fox over a long period of time and see for yourself.

I have no objections IF the Obama Administration wanted to blacklist Fox as they aren't a serious news organization and they're NOT interested in unbiased reporting; they just want to condemn and criticize and obstruct and rally their own kind.

Posted by: HillRat | October 22, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

The major media is as incompetent as it can be on this matter. Newspapers are all dying and TV news is scared. FOX has found that changing the definition of news to what many other countries do (100% opinion) it can generate a massive following. Now the other networks are following suit (MSNBC going more liberal and CNN taking FOX's leads). While the networks are fighting the old boogie man of state control over news, it has surrendered to fake "news" for ratings. American free press is dead and FOX has won.

Posted by: stanisloski101 | October 22, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Although it can be said that not all ignorant people get there news from FOX, it can be said that people who get all their news from FOX are ignorant people.

Posted by: jbc2 | October 22, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

First of all...this is ridiculous to even suggest that the White House "started" a "war" with Fox news. It was Fox that broadcasted lies about the POTUS. It was a Fox employee that called POTUS a "racist", a "socialist" and a "marxist." Somehow people have the mistaken beleif that it is not appropriate for the WH to defend itself against lies and slander. If it was not the WH...if it was an ordinary citizen or organization...Faux News would be getting sued for slander right about now. There is absolutely no camparison between MSNBC and Faux News. MSNBC is actually news whereas Fox is right wing entertainment. Get it Right!

Posted by: vintel7 | October 22, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

No one to date has written a cogent reason as to how this hurts the White House.

Bernie Goldberg (on Fox News, as it happens) appears to be the only one who gets the full strategy. The target is not Fox or people who watch Fox. Goldberg said it's for people who do not follow politics daily, but who may have heard about a story initially reported on Fox:

Goldberg: "They're trying to affect the entire culture. If they repeat this long enough and often enough that Fox News is not a real news organization... it might become part of the bloodstream of the American culture. Once something gets into the culture like that the damage is very hard to undo."

Posted by: mypitts2 | October 22, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

The major media is as incompetent as it can be on this matter. Newspapers are all dying and TV news is scared. FOX has found that changing the definition of news to what many other countries do (100% opinion) it can generate a massive following. Now the other networks are following suit (MSNBC going more liberal and CNN taking FOX's leads). While the networks are fighting the old boogie man of state control over news, it has surrendered to fake "news" for ratings. American free press is dead and FOX has won.

Posted by: stanisloski101 | October 22, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

The major media is as incompetent as it can be on this matter. Newspapers are all dying and TV news is scared. FOX has found that changing the definition of news to what many other countries do (100% opinion) it can generate a massive following. Now the other networks are following suit (MSNBC going more liberal and CNN taking FOX's leads). While the networks are fighting the old boogie man of state control over news, it has surrendered to fake "news" for ratings. American free press is dead and FOX has won.

Posted by: stanisloski101 | October 22, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Per my earlier comment of today @ 10:07:
"The fringe nutjobs from both the left and right have zero sense of reality, so expect their gnashing of teeth and screaming hysterics. I'm one of the majority that wishes we could put them all in straight-jackets and medicate them."

Plenty of fringe nutjob subjects posting here today; let's get out that supply of syringes and combination locks, it looks like we've got ourselves a blog full of lunatics!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:19 AM | Report abuse

I think this spat with Fox news is about as dumb as the next guy. However I would like to remind those on the right the Bush Administration did pretty much the same thing with NPR...up to and including the threat to halt funding. Not that it is ever okay for any president to wrap themselves in the american flag and cast the media into the evil light.

Posted by: fortheclueless | October 22, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

stanisloski101, Fox followed CNN's lead, but took it in the opposite direction. Given there were zero non-Liberal TV news channels in America, Fox won out by default.

I'm neither a Left wing, nor Right wing nut job, so I saw it coming. You apparently loved CNN and didn't note their change until Fox came along. Yep, you're definitely on the Left.

I've got syringes and paddle-locks ready, step over here and try on one of these nice, white canvas jumpsuits.....

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

I'm a democrat a d never used to watch FOX news. Now I do watch and they seem to ask some very relative questions. I would like the white house to answer instead of just dismissing them.

Posted by: buzzychief | October 22, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

And just to clarify for both Rightwing and Leftwing nutjobs, Obama=Bush=Obama=12 yrs of the same thing.

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/02/obama-bush-comparisons-10-ways-barack.html

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

What was the point of this follow up? To admit two gross factual mistakes but wrap the admission in utter condescending smugness? Marcus' friend Chuck was right. Commentators have been circling the wagons to protect their little community. For some reason, they seem to deliriously believe that falsely conflating Fox with journalism somehow enhances their profession.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 22, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Forget about what you think about FOX or MSNBC. The underlying problem with the White Houses statement about FOX is much more complex then what appears in the surface.

If we are adults we should be able to judge for ourselves what is news and what is not. I guess the White House does not seem to believe so.

Now the hard reality , if in their mind we are children or worse , ignorant , then why stop at FOX. Since we cannot think for ourselves.

Maybe next the White House will come out with a campaign to tell us. What to eat, when to eat, where to sleep, when to sleep etc.....

Doesn't this remind you what parents do small children?

Posted by: haroust | October 22, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

What makes FOX “not really a news organization” is its trolling for and whipping up assassains.

Posted by: Maezeppa | October 22, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Let Fox News call themselves Fox News.
Going after them is like going after SNL.

Fox news mouthpieces and hosts are entertainers, not political scientists. Several are radio DJs for crying out loud.

This flap over Ms. Dunn is classic Top-40 radio host science, who turns respect for an extraordinary man under seemingly impossible circumstances into a warrant for mass murder.

The former DJs of Fox News are not going to remember that even members of the FBI actually praised the terrorist leader of the 9-11 attack crews, not because they condoned murderous action but because they respected his ability to lead a large group on a long-term suicide mission.

When I was in the military, we talked about the amazing shooting prowess of Lee Harvey Oswald, given his weapon and distance to a moving target. Remarkable! But not because we wanted to shoot US Presidents.

To respect your enemy is to know your enemy clearly, to learn from and to eventually defeat. The alternative is to let your enemy teach you a thing or two about respect.

Fox News is entertainment, and their personalities are entertainers. Leave them alone.

On a side note, I will mention that the Economist last summer published the results of its independent inquiry as to why Americans were so misguided in their notions of world affairs, especially the events leading up to the invasion of Iraq.

What they found was that the most misinformed Americans received their news predominately from Fox News.

When I inquired on the Fox forums if the patrons there were aware of this report, my message was promptly deleted...along with my account.

For a humorous entertainment organization, apparently they didn't seem to find that funny.

Posted by: bushieisa | October 22, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, get over it. Fox is a big propaganda machine, slanted and biased coverage. They consistently hit below the belt, well beyond the bounds of propriety even for political standards. Obama has played the grownup long enough- at some point, one needs to defend oneself and set the record straight.

The other networks get this: they realize Fox cheapens their profession. Where is the journalistic ethics of a Cronkite on Fox? Speculative story after sensationalized story, one wonders if they are watching tabloid cable or a news channel.

Obama's team finally recognized it's time to treat Fox like they would The Enquirer or some other tabloid post in the Murdoch empire. Nothing wrong with Obamas team speaking the reality of what Fox represents.

Posted by: mm14 | October 22, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

stanisloski101:

Your comment from 11:17 deserved better than the hack-job response your got from Guilden_NL.

I think you are spot-on correct, except I don't think the battle is lost. Fox is redefining what news has traditionally meant in America and in the process severely damaging the credibility of the Fourth Estate. The story is not why Obama is calling them out, finally, but rather, why has no one else?

I watch a lot of Fox News every day, and, with the exception of Shepherd Smith, their "news" anchors find many different ways to spin a story. For instance: When they have guests on, say, one on each side of an issue, they do the the double-team tactic. The host sides with the conservative guest either explicitly or in the way the questions are framed.

This is every news show on Fox. As for the opinion, that speaks for itself: Anti-Obama all the time.

Reporter Major Garrett is the objective one, and as I understand it, he gets to ask his questions in the White House press room along with everyone else.

Posted by: mypitts2 | October 22, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Oboobie et. al. wants to attack an organization that a large portion of the voting populace loves? Great! Doing so will only hasten Bawhacky's removal from office.

Posted by: flintston | October 22, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

So, in summary, Ruth:

You admit that Bush *did* do this, and you can't name a single mainstream journalist who condemned it. And that is proof that your critics are overly-sensitive.

Or, to summarize the summary:

You were both wrong and unfair, and have too much pride to admit it.

"Imagine" that.

Posted by: edta | October 22, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

It's funny. The strategy of the right is to destroy all chance of compromise by painting Obama as a wacko instead of the centrist he is. (Just like Clinton)
Part 2 of the plan will be to tone things down towards the election to appear reasonable to the independents.
However, the problem will be that so many have gone so far off the reservation it will cause doubt among the base who has bought in to the outrageous/crazy talk...and they will doubt their heroes...if they remember.
This'll happen about the time Obama returns to the Fox airways (2010)...and it'll be a hoot, because his unchanged positions will sound just like the moderated right wing.
So, staying off FOX is brilliant

Posted by: anetgroup | October 22, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

It IS dumb. Why is the White House wasting their time going after a channel called "Fox News" that isn't even a news channel? Every time I flip to Fox, they spend 90 percent of their time pontificating their personal editorial opinions on various subjects. They only give "the news" 10 percent of the time. To call Fox News a news channel when they spend 90 percent of their time giving opinions is a laughable joke that shouldn't even be a consideration of the White House.

Posted by: mgjohnson1 | October 22, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

The difference between Fox and MSNBC is not so much the messengers or even the message. Its about those who are listening. Rarely do you ever see the "left" putting KO or any of the opinion-blowhards up on a pedestal like the "right" does with Billy O'Radical, Rush or Beck.

The "libs" does not do a good job with idolization to begin with, as we are seeing with the post-Obama hangover. Its not their thing. Where as "cons" are always desperate for a savior.

Posted by: alex35332 | October 22, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

For the record I don't call myself a liberal or conservative, I consider myself more of a Radical Moderate with my opinions being a high octane mix of libertarianism and socialism.

Posted by: alex35332 | October 22, 2009 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Every person and news organization should be up in arms over the White House's attack on Fox News. As Nixon demonstrated, it is not the job of the White House to police the news. The First Amendment is our most important weapon against bad governance, and any attempt to silence opposing opinion should be taken as a declaration of war against the entire news media. The White House may be declaring war against Fox today, but there is nothing to stop it from going after the Washington Post columnists tommorow.

Posted by: stacyrobyn | October 22, 2009 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Where did Alan Colmes go and why was he never replaced?????????????????????

I know, it's a foolish question but I thought I would ask it anyway....

Some final thoughts:

"You can fool some of the people all the time" unfortunately.

...ooooh, look at all the bright colors and pretty girls....

...Wait, is that "News" anchor smirking while delivering the news? Yep!

FOX is a joke and Obama is right to call them out for what they are! Tabloid Jounalist. F' em!

Posted by: jbc2 | October 22, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

In a crowded theatre, MSNBC provides the entertainment, Fox stands up and shouts "Fire", but only for effect as there really is no fire - only someone holding a burning cigarette lighter above their head, and CNN reports the event as it happened.

That Fox alone hears words being spoken from the flame of the cigarette lighter shouldn't surprise anyone.

Posted by: German-Irish-American | October 22, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Ruth, a few months ago, a WaPo colleague of yours, and one with a GOP bent, offered up this question to his readers concerning the Prez calling on non-traditional media for questions at a presser--"Is Obama risking the ire of the media movers and shakers who set the conventional wisdom for a presidency?" And one wonders why newspapers are going under!!! With the arrogance of this question it is obvious that beltway media have a far too high of an opinion of themselves.
How could you forget about the on-air FOX announcer 'ginning up' the numbers of attendance at tea partys, or the FOX producer getting the crowd going before airring at a 9/12 gathering, a la a gameshow. That's fair and balanced? How about only FOX on tv's in Iraq at FOB's et al? Isn't that trying to indoctrinate soldiers? The Prez warned the right during his speech to congress that they were going to be fighting back against the biased, non-fact based crap whether it spews from GOP politicians, or anyone. Can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen!!!

Posted by: katem1 | October 22, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

"I confess to having forgotten about the Bush administration’s public tangle last year with MSNBC."

What a load of BS. Isn't it your job to keep track of these things? Do you job and quit whining.

Posted by: forshizzle | October 22, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Blame Bush, Blame FOX....here is the irrefutable public record since Jan . 20 2009

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2354

"Public ownership of the financial system"
"Public control of the Federal Reserve Bank"
"Counter-crisis spending of a bigger size and scope to invigorate and sustain a full recovery and meet human needs - something that the New Deal never accomplished"
"Strengthening of union rights"
"Trade agreements that have at their core the protection and advancement of international working class interests"
"Equality in conditions of life for racially minorities and women"
"Democratic public takeover of the energy complex as well as a readiness to consider the takeover of other basic industries whose future is problematic in private hands"
"Turning education, child care, and health care into 'no profit' zones"
"Rerouting investment capital from unproductive investment (military, finance and so forth) to productive investment in a green economy and public infrastructure"
"Changing direction of our nation's foreign policy toward cooperation, disarmament, and diplomacy"
"Full-scale assault on global warming"
"Serious and sustained commitment to assisting the developing countries that are locked in poverty and misery"

Posted by: bruiserND | October 22, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I realize I'm showing my age with this comment. Nevertheless, the more I observe this particular White House, the more David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel seem to be morphing into John Erlichman and H.R. (Bob) Haldeman.

The earlier duo was not very pretty in Nixon's time and the latest version appears less so now because we should have all learned from history.

And so it goes...

Posted by: pgould1 | October 22, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Nurse Ratchet, A little more medication for the Leftwing and Rightwing nutjobs please. They are starting to foam at the mouth!

Faux News this, MSNBC that! More overt control over the people by Obama, but it's all Bush's fault!

ROTFLMAO @ you wingnuts!

OBAMA=BUSH=12 years of the same ol Shinola.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

All this so-called "war" the White House wages on FoxNews is just a sleight of hand to take the nation's focus off the "healthcare reform" that will tax and control and bankrupt all of us and our nation if passed into law.

You know, the ratings themselves--FoxNews versus Obama's herd of blathering sheep--serve as a referendum on how many sleeping sheep there are left to be exploited in America. Not many. By a two to one margin--FoxNews versus all the others put together--not too many sheep left in this country at all. And there's your real Hope for Change.

So, let the liberal sheep bleat "O-o-b-b-a-a-m-a-a" and "Mmm, mmm, mmm..." After he's gone, and the Democrats have had their assets kicked out of Washington by the electorate, these sheep don't know it yet, but they will still have to get a job like the rest of us. Until then, they'll continue to collect their ACORN money by the post to bleat the liberal party talking points as if all Americans are hanging on every repeated and repeated and repeated lie...er, word.

In the meantime, all those Americans not fooled by the latest White House sleight of hand will remain vigilant against the underhanded tax and behavior control measures masquerading in Washington as so-called "healthcare reform" and cap and trade thanks largely in part to the good solid reporting at FoxNews.

Funny thing is, since this White House "war" was declared by Mao-supporter Anita Dunn, Rasmussen's polling indicates the President's approval rating is tanking, double digits against now.

Bleat that, you liberal sheep.

By the way, I used to watch ABC News until they decided to become the All Barack Channel earlier this year. That's when I switched to Fox News, and am I ever glad I did--by a two to one margin.

Posted by: novelator | October 22, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

The Obama Administration is right about treating FOX NEWS as a political organization, indeed a propaganda machine. FOX NEWS consistently and persistently provides a political point of view. They give voice to a single, and simplistic political worldview, which was expressed by Ronald Reagan's infamous statement: "we are the government, and we are here to help."

Posted by: rmorris391 | October 22, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I have watched FOX News when they had just started out. I then watched FOX News as they slowly became bought and paid for by the Republican Party thus becoming an extension of the Republicans. This occurred when the "Fair Doctrine Act" in news was rescinded. When it was in place, citizen groups used the Fairness Doctrine as a tool to expand speech and debate. Typically, when an individual or citizens group complained to a station about imbalance, the station would set aside time for an on-air response for the omitted perspective: “Reasonable opportunity for presentation of opposing points of view,” The most extreme change has been in the immense volume of unanswered conservative opinion heard on the airwaves, especially on talk radio. Nationally, virtually all of the leading political talkshow hosts are right-wingers: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Bill O’Reilly and Michael Reagan, to name just a few. The same goes for local talkshows. One product of the post-Fairness era is the conservative “Hot Talk” format, featuring one right-wing host after another and little else. Disney-owned KSFO in liberal San Francisco was one such station. Some towns have two.

When Edward Monks, a lawyer in Eugene, Oregon, studied the two commercial talk stations in his town (Eugene Register-Guard, 6/30/02), he found “80 hours per week, more than 4,000 hours per year, programmed for Republican and conservative talk shows, without a single second programmed for a Democratic or liberal perspective.” Observing that Eugene (a generally progressive town) was “fairly representative,” Monks concluded: “Political opinions expressed on talk radio are approaching the level of uniformity that would normally be achieved only in a totalitarian society. There is nothing fair, balanced or democratic about it.”

President Obama and his team are correct to point out this fact. The Republicans were in office when they allowed local media to be concentrated in the hands of a few individual corporations by constantly weakening FCC rules, this is their payback for allowing Rupert Murdock a near monopoly in certain markets. "Fairness In Media", from which some of the above information was gleaned from and a substantial number of Americans are not so much upset that FOX News reports almost exclusively "conservative-republican" talking points and views. It's the out-right lies, unscrupulous video editing and mis-information that, in a former era, would have had their license pulled.

Posted by: Taylorsucram | October 22, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

** Let Fox News call themselves Fox News **.

Going after them is like going after SNL.

Fox news mouthpieces and hosts are entertainers, not political scientists. Several are radio DJs for crying out loud.

This flap over Ms. Dunn is classic Top-40 radio host science, who turns respect for an extraordinary man under seemingly impossible circumstances into a warrant for mass murder.

The former DJs of Fox News are not going to remember that even members of the FBI actually praised the terrorist leader of the 9-11 attack crews, not because they condoned murderous action but because they respected his ability to lead a large group on a long-term suicide mission.

When I was in the military, we talked about the amazing shooting prowess of Lee Harvey Oswald, given his weapon and distance to a moving target. Remarkable! But not because we wanted to shoot US Presidents.

To respect your enemy is to know your enemy clearly, to learn from and to eventually defeat. The alternative is to let your enemy teach you a thing or two about respect.

Fox News is entertainment, and their personalities are entertainers. Leave them alone.

On a side note, I will mention that the Economist last summer published the results of its independent inquiry as to why Americans were so misguided in their notions of world affairs, especially the events leading up to the invasion of Iraq.

What they found was that the most misinformed Americans received their news predominately from Fox News.

When I inquired on the Fox forums if the patrons there were aware of this report, my message was promptly deleted...along with my account.

For a humorous entertainment organization, apparently they didn't seem to find that funny.

Posted by: bushieisa | October 22, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

What everyone fails to do is provide concrete examples (provide video clips) where Fox News reporting is wrong - I have been watching lately and failed to see any wrong or misleading information, even from their two most conservative commentators (Hannity and Beck). President Obama's criticism is against the commentators because as others have said, he does not want any criticism at all. The criticism I see from those who dislike Fox News is that they disagree with their opinion shows - how is it in America, that one will attack others because they have a different view? If someone keeps repeating the same message over and over again does not make it wrong. Please provide concrete examples where Fox News or their opinion shows are wrong and I will listen and join the criticism or else I will just label you a screwball.

Posted by: eme2000 | October 22, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama is not trying to "silence" anybody. He's just not giving Fox "terrorist fist jab" News the courtesy that a credible news organization deserves. "Fair and balanced" is a joke. We all know it. They have given up their right to be treated like a respectable news organization.

Posted by: phil55 | October 22, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Faux news is the most partisan so-called news organization to ever exist in this country. Anyone that thinks the white house shouldn't be calling them out for what they are needs a critical thinking class in the worst way. So if you think calling out faux news is dumb you need to educate yourself about politics and bullies in general. The people at faux news are loud mouthed charlatans masquerading as journalists and reporters. Take some of the stupid opinion out of what you say and add a dose of truth and see if it doesn't taste better to yourself and your readers.

Posted by: IRemember | October 22, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Ruth, aren't you going to get in trouble for mentioning Dan Froomkin's name? I don't think your editors want to be reminded that they once employed an actual journalist on their staff...

Posted by: jerkhoff | October 22, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

First things first, I can tell you I'm not a fan of Obama-nomics and I most likely never will be since I already feel government has far too great of a role in our lives.

That being said, I regularly listen to far right and far left commentary because it helps me in forming my opinions on various political topics. Do I side with Fox News ideologies... yes, on occasion. Do I side with Bill Maher ideologies... surprisingly yes, on occasion. While I pray the day Obama gets support [for much of what he is doing] never comes, any intelligent person knows that every outlet for your message yields a change in the minds of a handful of viewers and/or people who are willing to listen.

Everything in moderation [with a dash of tolerance] would make the world a better place... and a lot less partisan.

Just my opinion, Dallas H.

Posted by: dallas4 | October 22, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Good,bad or indifferant its still freedom of speech/freedom of the press. I just don't like the idea of my tax dollars and the governments time being waisting on this matter. Instead of bickering over party issuses isn't the president supposed to look past party lines and focus on running the government?

Posted by: rainman2 | October 22, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

So, the George W. Bush white house did in fact pick a fight with MSNBC and there was such an "outcry" by liberals that Ruth Marcus didn't even remember.

Funny how the only complaint Ruth could find about the Bush-MSNBC tiff was the blogger she and her cronies forced off the WaPo website because they didn't want to hear what he had to say.

Just to summarize: Froomkin calls the Bush attacks on MSNBC "outsized" and he is a WaPo pariah, while Marcus calls Obama attacks on Fox "dumb" and everything is cool. Ruth, do you know how hypocritical this looks?

Well, lucky for Fox news they can prove that the white house is wrong and they are not overtly partisan Republicans. They only have to point to the Liberal former congressman who hosts a 3-hour morning show show on their network.

Posted by: grimmke | October 22, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Ruth,
You're right, the W.H. needs to stay out of these petty actions.
As a liberal they make me nervous when they
seek to destroy opposing opinion.
It's an attack on the First Amendment.
Obama may be a little too far to the left extreme for me.

Posted by: rw-peterson | October 22, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Stop wasting tax dollars!

Posted by: rainman2 | October 22, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Tempest in a teapot, Ruth. As on the comments over at Tapper's blog, which mostly are in the vein of "the White House is trying to censor Fox News!", many of the folks here - and perhaps you, yourself - seem to forget that Fox News isn't the only individual or organization with free speech rights.

Just as Fox is free to misrepresent and outright lie, the White House is free to offer their opinion on what it is that Fox does. It in no way hinders Fox's ability to continue misrepresenting and twisting facts (and in fact, Fox won a lawsuit on reversal in 2003 wherein their attorneys argued that Fox has a first amendment right to spread information it knows to be false. You really want to lump yourself and your news organization in with that?). Your pal Tapper seems quite proud of the concern-trolling he did of Gibbs the other day, repeatedly asking "is it APPROPRIATE for the White House to offer this opinion?" Well, duh. Of course it's appropriate - certainly no less "appropriate" than any other American citizen or institution expressing an opinion. The fact that you and Tapper don't like the opinion is not a reflection of whether or not it's APPROPRIATE to offer it. Perhaps most amusing of all - over at Tapper's place, where the comments are running something like 9-1 in the direction of "YAY TAPPER! Thanks for standing against CENSORSHIP of Fox News" - Tapper's blog is erasing comments they don't like. Yeah, some champion against "censorship."

At some point, the right in this country needs to learn that "freedom of speech" does not mean "we get to make up whatever we want, and if you voice disagreement, you're trampling our rights!" It certainly doesn't help when people like you and Tapper - who should know better - egg them on.

Disagreement with an opinion, a point of view, the way someone describes themselves - none of these are "censorship". They're what more enlightened people recognize as "differences of opinion" and yes, they are also covered by the first amendment.

Get back to us when Obama orders Fox off the air. Until then, there's no story here other than Fox's butthurt for finally being called out for transgressions they've been committing for years. If they can't stand the heat, perhaps they need to get out of the business.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

It might be better to ignore Fox than to fight with them, but the WH is certainly correct in their evaluation of Fox as a "news" organization. And they are nothing like MSNBC. I watch Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann all the time; they don't pretend to be giving you fair and balanced reporting of the news. They give news with a liberal slant to make a point -- a point I generally agree with. The difference from Fox is, (1) they don't pretend they're giving "news" when they're giving opinion; (2) they don't intentionally tell lies; (3) they are willing to say they disagree with their own team when they disagree with them; (4) they are willing to have respectful dialogue with the opposition (usually in the form of Tom Pawlenty, the only Repub generally willing to go on Rachel's show) rather than screaming over them; (5) they give rational, documented arguments for their positions. Oh, and I guess most importantly, they're not a bunch of hate-mongering bigots. Having said that, I go to MSNBC for the same reason right-wingers go to Fox: cause it makes me feel good to watch people who agree with me. If I want straight, unbiased news, I turn on CNN.

Posted by: francissheed | October 22, 2009 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Lining up for their meds, nice straight-jackets there folks:

IRemember
phil55
bushieisa (aren't you barryisa?)
Taylorsucram
rmorris391

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

So the White House has done this, but you forgot. Must have been some outcry!

Posted by: joelc | October 22, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

...and let's not forget you francissheed

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:18 PM | Report abuse

** I confess to having forgotten about the Bush administration’s public tangle last year with MSNBC.**

Thanks for the confession! It has reduced the verity of your opinion.

Posted by: lichtme | October 22, 2009 12:20 PM | Report abuse

CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC = All Barry Network
FOX = All Bush Network

This comment section = AWN = All Wingnut Network

OBAMA=BUSH=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Gee, Ruth, now you get to feel what has gotten Republicans so angry. How long before you are labeled un-american, only out for a dollar, snobbish, racist..etal. Your point is spot-on, I'm amazed you saw it through your liberal-tinted glasses.

Posted by: Ratzoe | October 22, 2009 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Taylor, newsflash here: The majority of this country is right of center in their political views. So there's probably one big reason liberal talk shows fail while conservative talk shows prevail. I mean, who wants to listen to a steady diet of liberal propaganda that advocates, among other things, taking our hard-earned tax dollars and giving them to those who can't accept the idea of personal individual responsibility for one's own life.

I'm not at all into supporting welfare recipients, especially those who simply pop over the border to have their children, using their new-born "American citizen" as leverage for their extended family of illegals to take advantage of our system. Instead of healthcare reform, why not address the illegal immigrant problem first? Why not enforce laws already in place? Why not do this and see what kind of savings to taxpayers result in having firm borders instead of porous ones? Oh yeah, that's right, since gay is the new black, there's less and less ways to breed new liberals. I bet California would love to balance their bloated budget someday. Just think of the savings that would result from not having to print every single official sign in languages other than English, not to mention the savings in healthcare across the board from those illegals who treat the ER of the local hospital as their personal free clinic.

I could go on and on, but in a free market, conservative opinion shows are always going to trump dedicated liberal propaganda. By a two to one margin. That's just the facts. Liberals ought to get a grip on reality once and stop trying to sell their utopian fantasy of do as I say, not as I do, as truth. Might ought to read the Constitution, too, while you're at it. Hell, you might, with enough diligent study of history and the Constitution of these United States become an independent free-thinker as our Forefathers intended all of us to be, like a majority of the rest of us are now.

Posted by: novelator | October 22, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

It's no secret that Obama is much better at being a celebrity than he is at being a president. It's no surprise that he would go on the attack against Fox News. He's never been their darling. It is, however, disappointing to see that this president's priorities consistently begin with his image. He doesn't seem to understand that he has an actual job to do, and that job is about the good of the American people, not about the good of Barak Obama. Ironically, by being so focused on his own relevancy, he makes his presidency the least relevant one many people can remember.

Posted by: nlynnc | October 22, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

What MM14 wrote bears repeating, so I've added it below.

But let me add this: When you never stand up to a bully, you end up looking like a wimp and a fool. Anyone who tunes into Fox for more than five minutes can see that there's noting objective about them: they are into attacking Obama 24/7. Their only goal is to utterly de-legitimize Obama's presidency by any means necessary, creating controversies where none exist, spreading lies, rumors and innuendoes. You'd think Obama, and not Bush, was the president elected with a minority of the popular vote.
As I believe Ignatius pointed out a few weeks ago on the international stage, meeting with demagogues legitimizes them and increases their stature. I think the same is true here.
The right wing echo chamber has a good game going. They've been playing it for 20 years. Attack, attack, attack, and then when someone stands up to them, play the poor beleaguered victim. Look at what Limbaugh and his wannabes did with the St. Louis Rams incident! (BTW, they must know their demographic -- the most offensive people ALWAYS believe that they have been terribly victimized, so they feel entitled to hurt others as payback.)

Ruth, you and the rest of the Post have been enabling the right wing for 20 years. Do I need to mention Whitewater? So can you just see your part and do something different? I'm glad Obama is.

>>Fox is a big propaganda machine, slanted and biased coverage. They consistently hit below the belt, well beyond the bounds of propriety even for political standards. Obama has played the grownup long enough- at some point, one needs to defend oneself and set the record straight.

The other networks get this: they realize Fox cheapens their profession. Where is the journalistic ethics of a Cronkite on Fox? Speculative story after sensationalized story, one wonders if they are watching tabloid cable or a news channel.

Obama's team finally recognized it's time to treat Fox like they would The Enquirer or some other tabloid post in the Murdoch empire. Nothing wrong with Obamas team speaking the reality of what Fox represent<<

Posted by: OMGalmost53 | October 22, 2009 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Over on the Huffington Post (you know, where Dan Froomkin landed) there is an interesting discussion about Public Rage, and the disconnect of Washington over unemployment. Some observers have pointed to the manipulation of rage, and ponder who will harness rage for constructive ends. Fox News walks the path of destruction, and contributes no ideas for economic progress.

It is ironic that our nation realizes that Iraqi's with no jobs, no government, no hope easily turn to extremism, and violence. Shouldn't we all be as concerned about our unemployeed citizens? FOX NEWS is playing around with fire with tea parties, death panels, town hall meetings, etc. Everyone knows were there is smoke, there is fire.

Posted by: rmorris391 | October 22, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Take a look at these absolutely eye opening video series called "Fall of the Republic," once you have seen it you will know exactly what is going on and what is coming down the road!
Fall Of The Republic is getting rave reviews from those who watched it first on Prison Planet.tv yesterday, with viewers labeling it the most hard-hitting and well produced Alex Jones video to date, outstripping even The Obama Deception, adding that it will undoubtedly unlock minds on a massive scale and smash the phony left-right paradigm.
Download the DivX version or get the DVD and make copies like there’s no tomorrow. Fall Of The Republic will be devastating for the globalists and their agenda to impose a new world economic order and the cap and trade scam, but only if you play your part in getting this information out to the world!http://www.youtube.com/user/GuerrillaNewsChannel#p/u

Posted by: PaulRevere4 | October 22, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

rmorris391, 3 6 9 the goose drank wine, the monkey chewed tobacco on the street car line...... tired old platitudes you're tossing out here.

America's answer is http://www.kickthemallout.com

OBAMA=BUSH=12 yrs of the same ol' Shinola

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

You people are so clueless that you miss the genius in Obama's strategy. Over the summer when the townhall fiasco was in full blast, Obama said that TV likes a good ruckus. So now that he knows that healthcare reform is at a critical phase, why not distract people with a little ruckus of his own making. Take the fight to Fox News - Fox would love the attention so much that they would begin making all these draconian statements about Obama having a hit list and not devote time to blocking healthcare reform. After the bill passes, this little diversion will just go away. Why? Because the President's poll numbers will begin to move northward and he would have no need for the lemmings on the right and Fox News. It's a classic head fake. I can't wait for his speech to the nation after healthcare reform passes - Republicans will be at the depth of the despair. I wanna wager money on this point.

Posted by: ATLGuy | October 21, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

===

Hilarious, everyone points fingers yelling "sheeple", meanwhile the adults are left to work on healthcare in peace as sheep bicker amongst themselves.

Brilliant.

Posted by: Crucialitis | October 22, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I hate to spread what seems like nothing but a mean insult. It certainly isn't nice, but its growing to be increasingly necessary to tell the truth exactly like it is: the biggest names in the media are nothing but a bunch of nitwits. Can you believe this insane group of pampered, fatuous hypocrites?

They all just looooved it when Bushie got rough with the media. But when a Democrat objects, whew! Now that is the living end. Every one of these media elites should be fired for gross incompetence and raw stupidity. The world would be a much better place without these vacuous gas bags stinking up the air we breathe.

Posted by: junket | October 22, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

I find it interesting that no one has connected the dots. The fight with Fox is a diversion, an attempt to divert the attention from the fact that Obama is stalling for time, time for the Healthcare vote. If he makes the decision either way before the vote, the bill will not pass. This is putting our militaries men and women in harms way unnecessarily.

Posted by: pipian | October 22, 2009 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Hey, guys and gals, lighten up. I think the "war" with Fox news is hilarious. It's our "public servants" at work doing important stuff. Jay Leno is having a ball with it. We all need a good laugh,(as Jolly Bean Biden hasn't been up to snuff lately). This is funny stuff.

Posted by: inmanorj | October 22, 2009 12:34 PM | Report abuse

inmanorj , Joe's just biden his time, waiting for floppy ears to get out from behind the teleprompter so he can run his mouth off too without the benefit of a teleprompter, ala Bush.

Obama=Bush=Biden=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I wish people would quit referring to Fox News as a Cable News Channel. It is an extremist propaganda channel, nothing more.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | October 22, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Pipian,

You're absolutely right. The fight with Fox is a diversion, a stalling tactic on the part of the White House to avoid dealing with Afghanistan and get the healthcare reform passed.

But it's backfiring on Obama and his gang, big-time, because while we indeed argue amongst ourselves, a great majority of us are just passing the time, waiting to see what kind of new scheme to tax and steal our freedom that this White House will attempt next. We have turned this diversion to our advantage in that we have not stopped watching Obama or Congress, even if they think we have.

Should've left the Sleeping Giant to sleep, but the greedy wolves in Congress just couldn't remember, or never learned, to be gentle as a lamb and cunning as a snake when first entering the den. Now, we're all awake and mad as hell about having to watch our elected employees like hawks to ensure our children aren't screwed out of their future as well as their freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

Posted by: novelator | October 22, 2009 12:45 PM | Report abuse

I have never been able to watch Fox for more than 5 minutes (any show, any "commentator") because I'll recognize a mis-statement, an outright lie or rant like tea parties are spontaneous but contact us for cool ideas on planning your own, death panels, etc. I will watch some MSNBC shows but here's a thought -- I read local newspapers, using the Internet I access larger newspapers, subscribe to weekly magazines and watch regular network news -- then I MAKE UP MY OWN MIND where the truth FOR ME lies.

That said I know how easy it is to avoid working at having an opinion - in past administrations Fox was the golden child of both Bushes -- Rush was invited to the WH for a birthday celebration, no one in the media other than MSNBC commented that for a NEWS ORGANIZATION this was not too smart -- especially when Fox would repeat word for word (including errors) press releases from 43.

There are more important questions to ask than comment on this decision by POTUS not to waste his time trying to argue his point with an organization that isn't at all interested in discussion and goes out of their way to lie about each and every thing done -- including a 14 hour round trip to put in a good word for the Olympics -- had he not gone that would have been the reason Chicago lost -- everyone knows Fox has an agenda -- that's fine, they are allowed but they are not allowed to pretend they are fair and balanced for ALL Americans only the Republican Party -- and POTUS has decided not to waste his time on explaining his policies.

I want to know why you are speaking up for Fox? I didn't hear this outrage against the attack by Bush on the NYT. Why aren't you writing about 30 Senators voting NO on allowing a woman who was raped being allowed to sue the company that hired the men who raped her? Why aren't you writing about the lack of funding for education, about a million different things that do need exposure, that do need attention drawn to it -- no you would rather go on about a non-issue -- POTUS didn't say he WOULD NOT appear on Fox but rather spend their time in venues where they will get a fair hearing and not a 24/7 attack. I listened to O'Reilly's interview with then Senator Obama -- O'Reilly wasn't listening to the answers to follow up or respond he interrupted before the sentence was completed to put his own intrepretation on what he thought POTUS was going to say. Then POTUS had to say "no, no that's not what I'm saying" and try to get what he did say out -- and Bill-O would interrupt again. That's not interviewing that's pontificating and when running for office he had to make nice, now he doesn't.

MOVE ON.

Posted by: Lemon7221 | October 22, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

thomasmc1957, I couldn't agree with you more! Just like CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS are extremist propaganda channels for Leftist tools.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Anybody who doesn't listen to ALL the news networks and entertainment programs as a steady diet will NEVER be able to figure out WHAT the news really is!! They all repeat their programs so often at so many various times of the day and night that such an essential feat is very simple to accomplish!

However, if you have a CLOSED mind and don't WANT to really know the REAL story, just how somebody else wants you to understand it, then you watch only ONE channel and let ONE person tell you how you "SHOULD" think!

If, by some chance, you are one of the RARE and fortunate FEW who have a BRAIN and have LEARNED "HOW" to THINK all by yourselves and do broad RESEARCH, (AFTER you listen to them all and research the facts,) you will know "almost" ALL of the REAL story!!

THEN, you'll have what's called your "OWN" opinion, NOT the one someone else hopes to cry or scream or twist or plant into your narrow head. This rarity of "thinking", however, doesn't happen to very many because it's so much easier to let someone else do their thinking FOR them!


Posted by: Maerzie | October 22, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Bingo, junket.

Posted by: SportinLife | October 22, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Never let the President say "I'm not losing any sleep over it" without following up with "Why not? or "Then tell us right now that Fox is not a threat to you and you're fine with them."

He won't. He's in it. He's losing sleep.

Two choices: either Obama is afraid of Fox or he's not. If he's not, then he can "sit down and negotiate without preconditions." If he is, then we are seeing fascism at work.

The naysayers and name-callers are part of this. Always have been. This is their day in the sun. The PRESIDENT is calling names with them. The President is now "blogger-in-charge." Hey, I like that. Give me copyright credit.

BTW, Feinberg is working without the President's knowledge? What? Where are we?

Posted by: gengar843 | October 22, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama has been watching way too much Fox News. He has got himself all wee wee'd up over it. If he doesn't like it, he should change the channel or go shoot some more hoops.

Posted by: faudel | October 22, 2009 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Maerzie, Here's a big hug, and an open bar tab for a breath of intelligence here.

I don't watch ANY American news, even local has political bias these days. They are all owned by big business who has an agenda behind them.

The best thing Americans can do next year is this: http://www.kickthemallout.com

ALL of the tools in the US government are idiots, sucking up from the fools who return them to office at a 97%+ rate.

Obama was supposed to be Hope and Change. All America got was a White House full of something that fills diapers and needs a change. Obama=Bush=12 yrs of the same Shinola.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"Get a mop"

Obama did not "inherit" anything. He "applied" for a job. When you "inherit" something, you can turn it down. When you apply, you stake a claim for everything that comes with it. No one drafted Obama, he came to it on his own. HE is the one whining.

He lost Bush to blame, but now he's not only bringing Fox to the front as "blame-boy" but he's even gone back to blaming Bush. Good for Cheney on blowing the whistle on "blogger-in-charge" Obama.

Posted by: gengar843 | October 22, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse

gengar843, that's a patently foolish "observation" you made there.

Seems more to me like the White House put out there what they wanted out there, and their opinion towards Fox is "they'll either get over it, or they won't" - in other words, not our problem. I use this strategy quite a bit myself when dealing with unreasonable or dishonest people - tell them how it is, and then let them deal with it however they like.

And, BTW, it's not "fascism" to refuse to sit down and talk with people who have no intention of operating in good faith. Was it "fascism" when George W. Bush refused to meet with Kim Jong Il? No? Then this ain't "fascism" either, any more than I'm a "fascist" for refusing to entertain the pleas of an ex-boyfriend seeking a return to my good graces.

Sweet christ you folks have made an industry out of your own imagined victimization.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Oh lordy lordy, break out the smelling salts, ah doo de-claruh, ah sense a faihntin' fit a-comin' ohn.

Is there anyone with thinner skin in America than the Media (by which I mean the pundit class like Marcus, not the hardworking gumshoe reporters)?

The moment you shine a light on them or call them on their laziness, incuriousness, and general penchant for making things up, they, start hissing and howling and desperately attempt to change the subject.

Sad, really.

Posted by: dadanarchist | October 22, 2009 1:06 PM | Report abuse

"pmadrasyahoocom wrote: Good work, Ruth. Our president has 99% of the media either sheepishly following or actively supporting him, and he chooses to go after the 1% who dare to be critical. Do we want this petty vengeful behavior in our commander in chief?"

and

"MarxBro" wrote: Why not just pass a law outlawing any speech critical of the great and powerful Obama?"

*****************************************

OR, how about learning HOW TO THINK?? That would be "different" if more people learned HOW to think so they really UNDERSTOOD what's going on instead of simply "parroting" what they are TOLD to think! Just realize how NOVEL that would be to actually figure something out by yourselves instead of just believing everything you hear from only one resource. If it were gossip about yourself or your child, you certainly would take the time and the effort to find out the facts. I actually think many people don't CARE to know the facts because it is so much more fun to repeat what they are TOLD to think! Nobody would ever want to be BLAMED for having a mind that knew how to think!

Posted by: Maerzie | October 22, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Another simpleton fox supporter in need of some critical thinking skills.
Guilden_NL

Posted by: IRemember | October 22, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Where was the outcry over Bush refusing to give an interview to the NYT for his entire 8 years in office? Oh, yeah, the right-wing noise machine was fine with that, so the MSM was too. No outcry at all, Ruth. The point should be obvious.

Posted by: PeruW | October 22, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Both Obama and Fox deserve each other. Both are extremely narcistic and deluded by their own image.

Posted by: peterroach | October 22, 2009 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Obama is doing an excellent job of mopping up Cheney/Bush's manure, one room at a time!! AND, he is holding the mop HIS way, regardless of all the sick "programmed" critics who allow themselves to be told how to think! I am VERY proud of our President! It was long overdue to finally get a President who has a BRAIN!! 8 years of an idiot was a little too long to suffer.

Posted by: Maerzie | October 22, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, "slowpoke132"!! You're a real breath of fresh air. FINALLY, someone who doesn't recite the pre-programmed, spoon-fed fairy tales!

Posted by: Maerzie | October 22, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Anita Dunn calling for civil war?

“We’re going to treat them (Fox News) the way we would treat an opponent. As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don't need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.'' said communications director Anita Dunn.

According to recent numbers http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/06/fox-news-... , 2.1 million Americans are watching Fox news nightly. Suggesting Fox News is not a legit news organization because they do no egregiously give favorable coverage to the President doesn't make much sense. Is this the way it works now? Either go along with the White House or become and enemy of the state?

Conservative talk show hosts claim to have millions of listeners as well. If Dunn thinks Fox News is at war with the President then wouldn't she , by association, include most of the viewers and most of the listeners? She is describing viewpoints held by an estimated 20 million if just counting viewers and listeners.

In my opinion, Ms Dunn should carefully reconsider her comments. She has essentially insulted over 1/10 of American voters, abused the power of the Office of the President to attack a private business employing Americans, is inciting hostilities within the country by referring to her fellow Americans as "enemies" and categorizing opinions she does not agree with as an act of "war".

FYI, if you don't agree with the President then your views are not "legitimate" and you need to "behave". You will be bludgeoned with false accusations about your hate, racism and intolerance and enemies of politically correct concubines - Democrats, diversity and all that is evilgood. So behave or else.

Posted by: rom12921 | October 22, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

"novelator wrote: Hey, Taylor, newsflash here: The majority of this country is right of center in their political views."

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"the MAJORITY??" Please reference your statistics, novelator, or I'm going to be able to figure out where you earned your moniker! A "novelator" writes "NOVELS", right?? See! You didn't fool me for a second. Novels are made-up stories, just like your "statistics"!!

Posted by: Maerzie | October 22, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

So Marcus admits her ignorance, but persists in her idiocy anyway. Yawn. the Post loses millions of dollars but finds a way to pay for lazy, ignorant writing like this.

Posted by: thebuckguy | October 22, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Another 3 years of permanent campaign is going to get old.

I guess Obama didn't like it when the MSM grudgingly picked up the Van Jones and ACORN storles after ignoring them as long as they could. I guess he thought the "we were a beat behind" mea culpas meant that the NYT et al were turning over a new leaf. I can't imagine he thought they actually meant it.

I still don't know why he picked a fight with FOX. FOX isn't going to change. The MSM will continue to do what they always have done - ignore stories that reflect poorly on the Left. All he did was fire up the right wing base a little more, and annoy independents.

And anyone that says the MSM isn't biased to the left, I have two words: Dan Rather.

Posted by: sold2u | October 22, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

As someone pointed out elsewhere:

"So let’s get this straight, she asks us to imagine an outcry if the Bush administration had attacked MSNBC. Then she admits that Bush did this but she forgot. It must have been quite an outcry! And then she cannot find a single member of the mainstream media that complained about it. Not one! (I’m not sure Froomkin is really a “liberal blogger” but he’s not really part of the regular media, either.)"

Not surprising the Post's revenue is swirling down the toilet. The product is just not up to snuff anymore. Who would pay to read stuff from Marcus or the rest of Hiatt's stable of increasingly out-of-touch lightweights?

It's not a left or right thing. It's a piss-poor product quality thing.

Posted by: antontuffnell | October 22, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Obama took an oath to defend the Constitution - even the parts that aren't convenient. He is failing to uphold his oath and should be impeached.

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

"my lefty friend Chuck"

Oh, and by the way: generally speaking if you need to rely on the patronizing attitude, it says something unflattering about your argument.

That's the interesting thing about the new wave of opinion writers who actually have achieved their position of prominence through *merit* as opposed to the Peter Principle. They realize that if you're incapable of defending your argument to the point of calling folks a "righty" or a "lefty", it's time to hang up the keyboard.

Just saying.

Posted by: antontuffnell | October 22, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

He is failing to uphold his oath...

In what way, pkhenry?

You are aware, aren't you, that the constitution gives us the right of free association? That means you're free to associate with the people you with whom you want to associate. It does not include a requirement that you are obligated to associate with people who wish to associate with you, but with whom you'd rather not associate.

In short, your rights end where mine begin. My right to not have to deal with you trumps your desire to force yourself upon me. This concept of yours regarding the "right" of forced association is at its foundation a concept of slavery to the whims of another. And slavery is most decidedly UN-constitutional.

So let's hear your grounds for impeachment, then....

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

WHO CARES?!?!?!? Isn't there anything of VALUE going on in this world? Dang- talk about the tail wagging the dog. Can't get an interview? Get over it! Go back to the Miss California story for pete's sake!!

Posted by: FirthDavenport | October 22, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who dares speak out against President Obama should be arrested and imprisoned.

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | October 22, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion", prohibiting the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech and infringing on the freedom of the press.

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

pkhenry - I'm well aware of what the first amendment is and what it says. Simply repeating to me what I already know is not an explanation of how you believe the oath of office has been violated.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

FoxNews? Now that's an oxymoron!

Posted by: HughBriss | October 22, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

United we STAND, Divided we FALL. The MEDIA is dividing the citizens of this country. ALL of the MEDIA. Faux News, MSNBC. sure the Bill of Rights guarantees freedom of speech, but this freedom of speech is leading to hysteria. I wouldn't be surprised if Rupert Murdoch didn't own MSNBC also. sheesh folks, grow up, follow the money.

Posted by: caramello51 | October 22, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama and company have brought Chicago politics to the White House. It's all about pay for play, keeping everyone in line, control of everything, shutting up and demonizing dissenters, finding jobs for your friends, and the enormous egos of those who think they can get away with anything. They have gotten away with it for decades in Chicago, a city that holds the rest of the state hostage to its agendas.

Illinois is a state where governors and other politicians have been sent to prison for their pay-for-play schemes. As we speak, ex-Governor Blagojevich (impeached and about to be tried in court for, among other things, trying to sell, yes, sell, Obama's Senate seat) and the University of Illinois (the trustees were asked to resign and the chancellor just resigned two days ago) are mired in political scandals that are all about the misuse of political influence. We now see this going on at the national level, and they clearly think they can get away with it.

These people have no regard for the law or common decency. Do you think they care about upholding the Constitution? The president and the Speaker have even stooped so low as to belittle the people (as in "We the People") who had lawfully gathered to protest. (Attacking political adversaries is one thing, but to attack the citizens of the country whom you have sworn to represent?) This feud with Fox and their push to use the Fairness Doctrine against them (because we just can't have one conservative station that "is not a news station" competing with the kajillion liberal "news" stations) are just them wiping their feet on the First Amendment.

Wake up, people! As soon as you disagree with them, about anything, you'll be treated the same way.

Posted by: lashadow1 | October 22, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

pkhenry - you continue to fail to articulate any violation of the constitution or the oath of office. Simply repeating what they say isn't a case for anything.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

.....

Why are Ruth and all these birthers, tenthers, Glenn Beckers,
Bushies, et al. so upset with Obama?

Fox News is looking for someone to take a shot at the
president....plain and simple.

It's very interesting Ruth doesn't see the danger in the
fear that Fox is ginning up.

..........

Posted by: printthis | October 22, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
------------
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion", prohibiting the free exercise of religion, INFRINGING ON THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND INFRINGING ON THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

“A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither”

Thomas Jefferson

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

pkhenry - ok, since you don't seem to be able to articulate exactly how you think the first amendment has been violated, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume, since you typed these things in all caps, that you believe that somehow Obama has violated someone's freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Whose? Who has been told they aren't allowed to speak or been arrested for speaking?

Which press outlets have been shut down, had their licenses pulled, been harrassed by the IRS or other agency? Which ones?

If those things haven't happened, no one's right of free speech or the freedom of the press have been violated. So what say you?

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Its not whether you agree with Fox News or not (I often don't), but this is a free country and we have a right to free, and often unpopular, speech. Obama and his thugs going after Fox News because they dared to be critical of him is not only an assault on free speech, but a message to the other water carriers...NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, etc., that they better tow the line or they come under the screw as well.

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 22, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse


Praise allah - he has given us the great Obama to rule over us... apologist to the world..the first President ever who truly hates America and wants to destroy it and then remake it in his image....Stop him and his radicals before they push their bills through to bankrupt us !!! Thank God for Fox NEWS - the ONLY NEWS OUTLET that isnt afraid to tell the truth. Those clowns at MSNBC do not represent most of America. Boycott them and drive them off the air...Matthews,Olbermann and Maddow - the 3 stooges - so in love with Obama they cnanot even tell the truth from fiction.

Posted by: JUNGLEJIM123 | October 22, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Fox News aka, The Jesus Channel/ GOP TV/ The Glorious Official Republican Government News Network.

While Fox News has the highest ratings, it’s also the same group of people that make up just 20% of America’s electorate… the far right-wing of the GOP.

----------------------

Maybe they don't have anything better to do than sit around, be miserable and watch TV

Posted by: jfern03 | October 22, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Another Left wingnutjob in need of med and a straight-jacket:

IRemember

OBAMA=BUSH=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

SUPPOSED EQUVALENCY OF FOX AND MSNBC:

FDR at the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia on June 27, 1936, accepting his second nomination for President, said:

"...the immortal Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted in different scales."

So, too, with Fox and MSNBC.

Posted by: norriehoyt | October 22, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

nother Left wingnutjob in need of med and a straight-jacket:

jfern03

OBAMA=BUSH=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!
CNN=FOX=MSNBC=ABC=CBS
OBAMA=BUSH=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Jefferson was a person who himself suffered great calumnies of the press. Despite this, in his second inaugural address, he proclaimed that a government that could not stand up under criticism deserved to fall.

Posted by: pkhenry | October 22, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Fox is just treating this adminstration the same way the MSM treated the last. So what?

Posted by: sold2u | October 22, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

pkhenry - again, Obama hasn't declared Fox's criticism to be illegal or tried to shut them down. The White House, and Obama by proxy, has just said they don't consider Fox legitimate and they don't want to associate with them.

It's a free country, you know.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

The same people who spend all day posting ultra-political comments here go home and watch cable news channels all night. That is so lame

Posted by: nmoses | October 22, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Remember the old admonition against battling newspapers? "Never pick a fight with a guy who buys ink by the barrel." The 2009 version of that should be "never pick a fight with a cable TV station that broadcasts 24/7."

Even if you agree with the White House's opinion of Fox (which I do not) Obama is the president and Glen Beck is just a TV show host. The president should be above petty personal arguments like this.

Never mud wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty but the pig enjoys it.

Posted by: merrie7137 | October 22, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

merrie - the president hasn't personally said anything about it. He has other people to wrestle the pig, while he deals with really important things like health care.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

nmoses , SO True! So true!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

So funny to accuse this administration of abandoning the Constitution when the past administratrion shredded it, tossed our civil liberties and protests were forced blocks away from anywhere the POTUS might look and to protest those acts was "unpatriotic" or "treason". As was stated before Fox is allowed to spit all they want on the truth, make up their own facts and denouce anyone who disagrees with them. Nightly they urge the loons among us to "DO" something and this article pushes it along. Then if anything happens they can wring their hands and say "not me", I didn't encourage the loons that Obama was Hitler, that he wanted to kill your granny. Free press is one thing, inciting murder is another. POTUS has not called out the IRS or SEC to go after Murdoch - he simply has elected not to play their game - as is HIS right. I hear criticism of POTUS on every channel even on Keith & Rachel but it is backed up by facts and if the facts are wrong they say so -- that's what I want from "journalist". I'm aware of no wording in the Constitution that demands the President respond to any news outlet but to citizens.

I am now expecting Fox, this newspaper and every other outlet to voice their outrage that the National Enquirer or TMZ is not given interviews or allowed to ask questions in press conferences. In some circles they are "news" organizations.

Murdoch made his $$ by trashing journalism and was hated in the UK, denounced by millions when Princess Di was killed. Just because Murdoch bought the WSJ, and calls Fox a news network doesn't make it so. This administration hasn't limited their ability to attend press conferences or report on the news, they simply won't waste their time with them. Quite sensible to me - I prefer to think for myself not listen to poorly educated hacks tell me their version of the truth. I guess though some find it too much work so they watch Fox.

Posted by: Lemon7221 | October 22, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

JennOfArk ,
Hypnotized..........

Obama=Bush=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/02/obama-bush-comparisons-10-ways-barack.html

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Marcus, you're misconstruing what Fox News does, compared to other cable stations. The emphasis on Fox is clearly on promoting right-wing agendas and viewpoints, not on delivering coverage of events around the nation or globe. That emphasis is what delegitimizes Fox as a cable news service.

If a print publication had, say, 10 pages devoted to general news and 80 pages devoted to right-wing op-ed articles and politically slanted analysis, I doubt you'd consider the publication unbiased.

SRS

Posted by: StevenRStahl | October 22, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

For the record - I decided to become a registered Independent after years of voting for various presidents - both Rep & Dem -I realized that none of them kept their campaign promises, because our country is run by special interests. Now I watch FOX in order to get a good debate on the issues. I also watch MSNBC but it seems to be mostly Dems all the time except for "Morning Joe" which offers balanced debate as well. SADLY yesterday while watching Mika & Joe debate the WH vs FOX issue - Mika received an EMAIL FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, correcting Joe's comment regarding Jake Tapper's conversation with Gibbs - THAT IS CREEPY!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Babybloomer | October 22, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Guilden_NL,
Dull & incoherent..........

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

StevenRStahl , Come on down! We have a nice, new straight-jacket for you and a hightech, no pain syringe filled full of Clozaril, or if you prefer, your choice of Risperdal, Zyprexa, Seroquel, Geodon, or Abilify.

Yes we know that you cannot understand that ALL TV news channels have a political agenda, and that the tones generated by Fox News Channel put you into a spittle flinging rage. But this medication coupled with our even toned, non-political speech will help you come back to reality.

Obama=Bush=12 yrs of the same ol Shinola!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

JennOfArk, you are correct! Dull and incoherent accurately describe the Bushie and Barry twins.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

If any of you want to see why the White House might be concerned about the vile attacks it is under, you should read the comments to a short article in yesterday's electronic Washington Post. It is an article written by Ed O'Keefe concerning an eye condition that HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebilius has. The hundred or more comments are virtually all personal attacks against her. Many wish her death; others comment on her age and appearance. Few deal with her performance as Secretary. They are sickening.

Posted by: esch | October 22, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

esch ,
Might be be fair and balanced and run them up against the eight years against the Bush administration?

I hate both Bush and Obummer, but fair is fair. Don't act surprised, this has been going on a longggg time by the Left and Right.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

So, in summary, Ruth:

You admit that Bush *did* do this, and you can't name a single mainstream journalist who condemned it. And that is proof that your critics are overly-sensitive.

Or, to summarize the summary:

You were both wrong and unfair, and have too much pride to admit it.

"Imagine" that.

Posted by: edta | October 22, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Ruth:

You will be proven right with time don't worry.

Just make sure you file this little episode away to bring up later.

Posted by: RJ14 | October 22, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Here's what's going to happen. Fox news is looking to incite someone to do an assasination. Then, they can say all they are is info-tainment clowns. So much for "news" in Fox News.

Thay are nothing more than a refuge for Bush flunkies, and they are bitter violent people who blew it bigtime.

Any republican that has a problem with Obama need look no further than their mirror for blame, and their finger which they used to elect Bush.

Posted by: jfern03 | October 22, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Marcus keeps missing the point. Fox, MSNBC, and any other media outlet gets to have their own opinions on policy. They don't get to make up their own facts. Ruth, its Fox's misstatements of fact-intentional or otherwise-that merit the criticism. I've seen both Olbermann and Maddow publically retract factual reporting errors. Beck,Hannity, and the other Foxers-NEVER. Why do you MSM folks keep defending intentionally shoddy journalism?

Posted by: BBear1 | October 22, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse

jfern03 - "Here's what's going to happen. Fox news is looking to incite someone to do an assasination. Then, they can say all they are is info-tainment clowns. So much for "news" in Fox News."

Nah, CNN and MSNBC tried that with Bush and it didn't work. Rupert Murdoch is a lot smarter about making money, he won't waste time and cost when these two have already wasted it.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Well, nothing that any of us say, on either side of the aisle, is going to make a difference to these reporters who consider themselves so "inside" and so"knowing" that they end up relying on their own pre-conceived notions, period.
However, that being said, I believe it is a great relief for Obama supporters to hear him fighting back. Democrats sat back and waited for John Kerry to fight against those preposterous claims made about him way back in 2004, and, guess what, he didn't, and he lost and his loss was, in some part, because he simply believed himself to be too "large" to fight back.
Now, people are criticizing Obama as being "small" for fighting back.
Are you kidding? Obama, and anyone else, is entitled to fight back whether the battle is "small" or "large". In fact, many battles are ultimately determined by the "small" steps one takes.

Posted by: cms1 | October 22, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

jfern03 - "Here's what's going to happen. Fox news is looking to incite someone to do an assasination. Then, they can say all they are is info-tainment clowns. So much for "news" in Fox News."

Nah, CNN and MSNBC tried that with Bush and it didn't work. Rupert Murdoch is a lot smarter about making money, he won't waste time and cost when these two have already wasted it.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

====================================
NO Bush and Cheny hung themselves..
Facts Trump Fux...
and
Murdock will not live forever.

ISA

Posted by: Issa1 | October 22, 2009 4:19 PM | Report abuse

The major problem with the networks is that their people can't report the news when their lips stay in a permanent pucker in case the president stoops over.

Pucker, pucker, little network news star,
In case your lips won't stretch,
You can blow the President's butt
A kiss from afar.

Forget the news
Just simply repeat
a leftie ruse
Doesn't matter whose

If it comes from the white house
From some leftie rat
disguised as a mouse
Just liberal chit chat

Pucker, pucker, little media star
The remote, from your network strays
Finds its way to truth from Fox
And there it stays.

Posted by: johntu | October 22, 2009 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Issa1 - no argument from me.
But Hanoi Jane, Ted Turner and CNN?
Very irrelevant today.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Whats really sad is that Obama and the White House have chosen to "punch below their weight" in picking on Fox. Yeah, they may be critical, but not everyone can be Gunga Din for the Administration. The administration is de-basing themselves...

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 22, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

The point is not whether Fox is or isn't "legitimate." The point is that the White House is behaving as if it is the government's role to determine which news organizations are legitimate and which are not -- and most of the media is allowing it! Media organizations that don't object to this seem not to realize what they are revealing about themselves -- that they are so eager to curry favor with this administration that they will sacrifice their most cherished and important Constitutional freedom, their stock in trade, in exchange for what they think is an advantage over a competitor. They fail to see that Fox is not the target of this attack. The real target is the media's willingness to report the truth, as opposed to whatever fables the White House wishes it to tell. The media's complicity in selling its freedom -- and therefore itself -- and therefore all of us -- down the river ought to be genuinely terrifying to every American, whether or not they watch Fox or voted for Obama. But instead, only a tiny handful -- Marcus, Tapper, the indomitable Helen Thomas, and perhaps a few others -- are even willing to speak up. The rest of you ought to be ashamed.

Posted by: MrsWhatsit | October 22, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

MrsWhatsit - Yeah Maam!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

The Obama administration is simply pointing out the obvious fact that Fox generally is promoting an ideological point of view and it impacts the alleged news side of their business. The Bush administration, on the other hand, promoted them and used many mechanisms to control the ability of any news organization to report effectively. The paid "military consultants" which dominated most news channels was particularly insidious.

The Washington Post gives way too much space to so-called conservatives who have not been right about much of anything for a very long time and who demean and cheapen public discourse with their smug opinions.

Posted by: csaether | October 22, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

And as much as I cannot stand Bushie & Co, criticism of PBS is fair game when taxpayers' dollars are subsidizing it. There is no need for PBS. If they were truly centerist and fairly presented both sides of a story, I would support them, but they are just another shill for the Left while Fox is the Right's shill.

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Hey, can you "spot" the conservative? Meh, didn't think so.
list of people who recently attended a 2-1/2 hour off-the-record briefing with President Obama at the White House:

Eugene Robinson
E.J. Dionne
Ron Brownstein
John Dickerson
Rachel Maddow
Frank Rich
Jerry Seib
Maureen Dowd
Keith Olbermann
Bob Herbert
Gloria Borger
Gwen Ifill
Once again it looks like the White House has time for its troops in the media but not our troops in Afghanistan.

Nope...no bias here!
Two legs bad! Four legs good!

Posted by: luca_20009 | October 22, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

csaether , line up with the other Left wingnuts and those Right wingnuts. We have another batch of new straight-jackets here and our new batch of syringes are filled and ready.

Nurse Cratchet! We have some more misguided wingnuts to heal!

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

I am totally amazed at some of the comments here that support a President of the USA and his minions daring to squash and suppress any criticism. And it is getting unbelievable to see these stations and the liberal media marching to be slaughtered. Remember that the same has happened with other regimes through history with catastrophic results.

That this President dares to do so without much criticism is unacceptable and the media better learn this mistake before it is too late.

MSNBC and CNN have heavy agendas and they are routinely lying and misrepresenting facts. Fox News continuously is on top of every news item and reports it very accurately. Their opinion commentators very seldom misinform.

The President and his minions are getting afraid because Fox is bringing up their dirty laundry and its hurting them. Also, it could be that there will be some possible unravelings that has the POTUS quite nervous and he needs to discredit Fox.

What a shame that not one news organization reported on Vice-President's Cheney most recent speech. Evidently our POTUS has made calls to this newspaper. You can certainly refer to www.canadafreepress.com to get to read this speech and while at it look into the investigations of Douglas Hagman and Judy McLeod. They certainly do better investigative work than any of our so called journalists. WHAT A SHAME!!!

So, I salute you Ms. Marcus!

Posted by: Hispana | October 22, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

luca_20009, That list was compiled by the heir to Dr Joseph Goebbels. Why do you appear surprised?

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Many americans have already concluded that Obama will be only a ONE TIME PRESIDENT!!!
And that is if the TRUTH OF HIS PRESIDENCY is not revealed earlier!!!

Posted by: Hispana | October 22, 2009 5:14 PM | Report abuse

For all of the criticism that George Bush has received, I do admire that he had CLASS, certainly this current President needs to do some major learning from his predecessor.

Posted by: Hispana | October 22, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

To the recent comments on Fox promoting ideological news:

Do a little flipping with CNN and specially MSNBC and you will realize the truth!!!

Posted by: Hispana | October 22, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

But don't you know that Mika's father is an advisor to Obama and hence the telephone call?

You are right that MSNBC is creepy and reminds us of all these totalitarian regimes!!!

Posted by: Hispana | October 22, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

For all of the criticism that George Bush has received, I do admire that he had CLASS...

I suppose if you define "class" as making a big funny joke out of the fact that your country is at war thanks to falsehoods you told by making a video of you searching for the "missing WMD's" under the desk in your office, making a funny out of an error in judgement that had at that point cost thousands of lives, yes, that would be really "classy". Or maybe you think "class" is defined as smirking and joking about how a woman on death row has begged for mercy: "please don't kill me."

Yes, classy all around...

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

"GOD DAMN AMERICA!GOD DAMN AMERICA!I SAID GOD DAMN AMERICA!"

Classy all the way around.

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/02/obama-bush-comparisons-10-ways-barack.html

Obama=Bush=12 years of the same ol Shinola..

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Not really dumb. The Dems in the Senate and House want Obama to come out and back the government option so they can have "cover" for what their constituents would think of as a "bad vote". Just like that Obama gave the entire MSM "cover" so they no longer have to worry about NOT reporting things that do not favor Dems. For instance yesterday ACORN was caught again. Another tape was released that proved that the ACORN worker in Philly did not kick the pimp and prostitute out and did, in fact give them advice on how to get away with breaking the law. Yes, Obama gave the MSM "cover" when he picked his fight right at a time when his community organizing group is having legal problems. The cry of racism is getting old so he had to be inventive.

Posted by: cjones210 | October 22, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Fox is NOT a news organization.

They are a tabloid sensationalist outlet for conservative propaganda and infotainment. And the Simpsons and Family guy. Both of which have more veracity than Fox faux-news.

Posted by: onestring | October 22, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

And in a roundabout way, cjones, your comment typifies why this country is having the problems it has right now. You reserve your concern about government collusion running amok to very small potatoes when you focus on ACORN, even if it was "(Obama's) community organizing group." No doubt that ACORN has some idiots working for them. But they're getting what, literally ones of millions of dollars in federal funds each year? Meanwhile the bankers and Wall Street have pulled off the biggest federal heist in history while we bicker over whether or not it's fair to private business if we decide there are certain necessities of life that they should not be allowed to corner in the market, because it's driving the rest of us into poverty. So by all means, let's focus on ACORN's transgressions - running them down isn't going to put any pennies back into your pocket the way health care reform will, but the right's agenda has never been about helping people - at least not people like you - it's all about punishing people that you don't like for whatever reason. Me, I'd rather have dollar in pocket.

The Bible mentions this phenomenon when it refers to "swallowing camels while straining at gnats."

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 22, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Marcus, Broder, Krauthammer, Gerson, Will, Kristol.

And the Post circles the drain.

Posted by: branfo4 | October 22, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Fox is a political opponent and should be treated as such. They have misled the American people long enough...wake up sheeple!

Posted by: nursehope | October 22, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

So, in summary, Ruth:

You admit that Bush *did* do this, and you can't name a single mainstream journalist who condemned it. And that is proof that your critics are overly-sensitive.

Or, to summarize the summary:

You were both wrong and unfair, and have too much pride to admit it.

"Imagine" that.

Posted by: edta | October 22, 2009 9:47 PM | Report abuse

edta ,
Please line up over there, we have a nice, new, very clean straight-jacket for you. And plenty of very nice meds to calm you down. We recognize that you have the Extreme Wingnut disease and we have the world's best mental illness experts here to help you. Thank goodness that Obama and crew were not successful in instituting UK style 19th century government controlled care on you.

You will be fine, just step over there by the Right wingnuts and we will provide you with the critical mental care you require.....

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:20 PM | Report abuse

nursehope, meet Nurse Cratchet. We will provide you with the mental care you require. Just calm down. We're hear to help you....

Posted by: Guilden_NL | October 22, 2009 11:22 PM | Report abuse

I have long perceived Fox "news" was biased in favor of conservatives and Republicans, as well as against liberals, most Democrats. The network news reporting and commentary seemed biased toward favorable coverage of the Bush-Cheney regime.

However, anyone who is honest has to acknowledge most of MSNBC "news" coverage, especially in 2008, was anti-Bush, anti-Cheney, somewhat anti-Clinton and very pro-Obama. This did not bother me as this line of reporting and commentary reflected then by own perspective.

However, Obama and his White House advisors are taking Fox too seriously, being hypocritical in not objecting to the slant in MSNBC "news" coverage and commentary, as well as appearing to be trying to intimidate or stifle strong dissenting opinions about the Obama administration, which should concern anyone who supports a free press, freedom of speech in this country. Obama and his staff, regardless whether this is their intent. appear to be in the position of wanting only favorable coverage by the media.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | October 23, 2009 12:09 AM | Report abuse

With all due respect, progressiveindependent, there's a world of difference between MSNBC and Fox. Sure, Olbermann and Maddow tilt left (some would say way left), but theirs are opinion shows, not straight news broadcasts.

I'll agree that there is an equivalency as soon as MSNBC starts organizing and promoting partisan political protests, as Fox has already done. Or if they start making a habit out of putting up pictures of disgraced Democrats and "accidentally" misidentifying them as Republicans during their newscasts, as Fox has done. Or if they start video editing previously taped interviews with Republicans in order to bolster arguments that they said the exact opposite of what they actually said.

Until then, there's no equivalency.

Posted by: JennOfArk | October 23, 2009 1:31 AM | Report abuse

I'm saddened that journalism has crumbled to the point where opinion shows are doing better research than reporters. This weirdness from the White House makes the president look petty, weak, and very defensive.

Posted by: washingtonpostviewer | October 23, 2009 6:24 AM | Report abuse

If only Obama could eliminate Fox,talk radio,and the 100 million people who don't like what he is doing then we could start a new GOLDEN AGE of OBAMA,where people are paid for being poor,white males become the new slave class,and everybody gets healthcare for free.

Posted by: mikem12 | October 23, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

If only Obama could eliminate Fox,talk radio,and the 100 million people who don't like what he is doing then we could start a new GOLDEN AGE of OBAMA,where people are paid for being poor,white males become the new slave class,and everybody gets healthcare for free.

Posted by: mikem12 | October 23, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

If only Obama could eliminate Fox,talk radio,and the 100 million people who don't like what he is doing then we could start a new GOLDEN AGE of OBAMA,where people are paid for being poor,white males become the new slave class,and everybody gets healthcare for free.

Posted by: mikem12 | October 23, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

If only Obama could eliminate Fox,talk radio,and the 100 million people who don't like what he is doing then we could start a new GOLDEN AGE of OBAMA,where people are paid for being poor,white males become the new slave class,and everybody gets healthcare for free.

Posted by: mikem12 | October 23, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

If only Obama could eliminate Fox,talk radio,and the 100 million people who don't like what he is doing then we could start a new GOLDEN AGE of OBAMA,where people are paid for being poor,white males become the new slave class,and everybody gets healthcare for free.

Posted by: mikem12 | October 23, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

MSNBC is a joke. If it helps the "agenda" they will report it. But if it makes the administration look bad, they sweep it under the rug and don't report it, unless of course, Fox blows it out of the water and then they have no choice but to report it, and even then they mention it once, maybe twice. I don't think Fox is extreme, they ARE fair and balanced. They do lean more to the right, but hey, the right makes sense...it is logical. Fox ALWAYS reports the truth. They don't sugarcoat it, they report it and that is the way news should be told, raw and true. And if it makes the administration look bad, oh well, it's the truth! That is why they have picked a war with Fox, they are being exposed and it is ruining their plans. This is the most corrupt administration I have seen. Bush was bad too, but obama is out of control.
I am sure my comment is going to make some people huff and puff. The reality is, if you don't like the truth, you attack, it doesn't make the truth and common sense disappear. It just makes you look like an immature person out of touch with reality. Do your own research...I do, and Fox is ALWAYS on the money.

Posted by: MaryJ0604 | October 23, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

You should be ashamed for contributing to The blurring of the real world with manufactured imagery. The BS between the White House and Fox it is not a friggin war.
we are fighting 3 wars ~ Iraq, Afghanistan,and the one in the nation where drones are flying into ~ Pakistan ~
wars involve dropping bombs and killing "real" human beings with "real" lives...
good lord.
I suspect what you are doing is NOT unconscious .. if you and your ilk can get folks to start thinking in this manner and not acknowledge the pain and suffering
the terms collateral damage and boots on the ground the propaganda tool of the government that used to be the 4th estate will condition the citizens to stop thinking of the dead human beings as real people, our next door neighbors or family members.
you suck;

Posted by: AmericanSpirit | October 23, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

At least Obama is not threatening to criminally prosecute any journalists like Bush did, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/21/AR2006052100348.html.

Nor has he shot missiles at a hotel with hundreds of journalists, as Bush did, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83503,00.html

Nor has Obama held a cameraman prisoner for 6 years without charging him or even showing that the cameraman was in any way a terrorist, http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/prisoner_345.php?page=1.

Posted by: PKK333000 | October 23, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

So whether or not Obama is *correct* that Fox News is unfair is not worthy of examining.

It's only worth the time to predict that Obama is making a tactical/political mistake here... even though doing so is pretty much a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Ever wonder why the news industry is going bankrupt? Perhaps because journalists -- rather than gathering the facts so we can react intelligently -- are too busy telling the public how the public will react.

Would it be so hard to actually find out whether or not this is politically harmful before reporting that it is?

Posted by: TGChicago | October 23, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

We are in the middle of a war, a depressed economy and trillions of dollars in debt, and our President is fighting with a television network?

Does anyone besides me find this stupid?

Posted by: mlimberg | October 23, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

People, This is about the rights given by the first amendment of our constitution. Fox News is a private organization not owned by the Federal government. Fox has the right to air news segments and opinion shows just like any other news outlet. If the federal government tries to silence a news organization, just because they are critical or negative at times, then that is a clear violation of free speech and the 1st amendment. If the facts that the opinion shows on Fox are presenting are wrong, then the White House should specifically address why those facts are wrong and not use generalizations.

This reminds me of a incident I read about in early Mormon LDS history, where the Church's founder, Joseph Smith (who also happened to be mayor of Nauvoo, Illinois), had destroyed a printing press office in Nauvoo because the newspaper was printing news stories that Smith found too slanderous and thought would hurt his church. Similar incidents happened to Anti-Slavery newspaper offices in the 19th Century as well by angry pro-slavery mobs who vehemently disagreed with that newspaper's slant. These historical events eventually led to further violence and needless bloodshed.

President Obama please don’t destroy the press (Fox) and throw it in the river.
Instead, grow up and take the negative, as well as, the positive coverage of your administration. Therefore, whatever Fox dishes out towards your administration should be seen as constructive criticism and used as a tool to help improve certain issues within your own administration.

Posted by: johnny1929 | October 24, 2009 2:02 AM | Report abuse

Any journalist with a shred of integrity would avoid Fox News like the plague. Unfortunately, money and media exposure have a way of bending the morals of weaker mortals. The two great icons of Fox News - O'Reilly - the man who wanks off while stalking female employees with obscene phonecalls and Beck - the drunken druggie who admits he's a clown. This is the best the Right has now. Pity for them.

The larger picture is this: The Republican party is shattered. Roundly beaten in the last election, clinging to dishonest, money hungery talk radio "clowns" for guidance. Fractured down the middle between the birther/deather/Palin/Limpbaugh/Fox extremists and the rational conservatives.

Have a look at the latest demographics for the Republican party and see the future. The Republicans have done a fantasitic job of alienating virtually every demographic except the fat, old, white, southern men (Limpbaugh's audience). A majority of women, blacks, hispanics, the young OPPOSE the Republican Party. A measley 20% of Americans embarassingly identify themselves as Republicans.

Ask yourself why.

Posted by: Richard18 | October 24, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

What the Obama Administration is doing with Fox News is worse than Nixon's feud with the press. Nixon got a perpetually bad treatment from the press and there was no "Fox News" or talk radio then to help get him a fair shake or to present his side without a total leftward slant from the media at the time. The difference between then and now as I see it is that Nixon had the vast majority of the people on his side but the press was against him, and today Obama has the press totally in his hip pocket - with the notable exceptions of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and talk radio - but a minority of the people on his side. Think about it. It's true. Any politician is sensitive to criticism from the press, but Nixon received far harsher treatment from the media and essentially took it, yet Obama's people squeal like stuck pigs when Fox News and Rush points out his flaws and socialist agenda for America.

Posted by: BenH | October 25, 2009 2:17 AM | Report abuse

Fox "News" doesn't deserve to be defended by anyone. Until they state the obvious, that they deliver editorials and opinions 24/7, they're unworthy of using the term "journalism".

Posted by: denisestro | October 25, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

October 26, 2009

Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group


PRINCETON, NJ -- Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.

Changes among political independents appear to be the main reason the percentage of conservatives has increased nationally over the past year: the 35% of independents describing their views as conservative in 2009 is up from 29% in 2008. By contrast, among Republicans and Democrats, the percentage who are "conservative" has increased by one point each.

As is typical in recent years, Republicans are far more unified in their political outlook than are either independents or Democrats. While 72% of Republicans in 2009 call their views conservative, independents are closely split between the moderate and conservative labels (43% and 35%, respectively). Democrats are about evenly divided between moderates (39%) and liberals (37%).

2010 & 12 Cannot Come Soon Enough!!

Posted by: FraudObama | October 26, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Ruth,

You are most right when you explain the name of the game--that process, out of sight of the public, in which any Administration rewards or penalizes journalists for their bad faith or poor stenography.

You're pretty much right when you say they're "dumb" to go public with this. Maybe Rahm Emmanuel is in the wrong job and needs to switch to a more overtly political job in the White House.

I can't agree with the characterization of the dumb policy as "Nixonian"--illegal manipulation of government agencies to get at one's enemies--or "Agnewesque"--whiny mouthing by a graft-ridden hack. Maybe "JimmyCarterian", and for a Democratic administration that wants to get re-elected, that's plenty bad enough.

Posted by: chinshihtang | October 26, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company