Obama declares war on Fox News

[PSGator66]

He has had the luxury with backing of the main stream media and labeling anyone who disagrees with him as a racist. He now is proactively going after the one source who actually questions his policies - Fox news! I hardly consider this healthy leadership but I am sure that the likes of Fredsandford, River and 108 think it is great that their messiah is working on having his cake and eating it too.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/29/obama-vs-fox-news-behind-white-house-strategy-to-delegitimize-news-organization/

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I thought you were joking, but he declared an actual war. The Navy is mobilizing outside of their office!

[wgbgator]

Good thing women are allowed in combat, now Megan Kelly can grab an M-16 and man (er woman?) the barricades.

[108]

wish people would just stop watching the political talking heads who first and foremost are in it to make money for themselves and their corporation

i just don't understand why people care so much about what they think....these people are no more human than you and I, except they are biased and clouded by $$$

obviously there are a few exceptions that primarily inform, but its far and few

end rant

[gatorpa]

I thought you were joking, but he declared an actual war. The Navy is mobilizing outside of their office!

Similar to the alleged mobilization of troops against Women by the Pubs?

[exiledgator]

wish people would just stop watching the political talking heads who first and foremost are in it to make money for themselves and their corporation

i just don't understand why people care so much about what they think....these people are no more human than you and I, except they are biased and clouded by $$$

obviously there are a few exceptions that primarily inform, but its far and few

end rant

I approve of this post.

I find that trying to form my own opinions is way more fun.

[rivergator]

Similar to the alleged mobilization of troops against Women by the Pubs?


except one involves making laws and the other doesn't.

[MastaG8r]

except one involves making laws and the other doesn't.The Republicans' so-called War on Women involves making laws? Which laws are those?

Or more to the point (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/29/obama-vs-fox-news-behind-white-house-strategy-to-delegitimize-news-organization/)...on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most pathetic, just how pathetic does your president look for calling out a particular news network by name because they have the audacity to serve as a forum for opposition to his policies? I give him a perfect 10.

In a recent interview with The New Republic, President Obama was back to his grousing about the one television news outlet in America that won’t fall in line and treat him as emperor. Discussing breaking Washington's partisan gridlock, the president told TNR,"If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News...for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it."

Alas, the president loves to whine about the media meanies at Fox News. To him, these are not people trying to do their jobs. No, they are out to get him. What other motive could a journalist have in holding a president accountable? Why oh why do Ed Henry and Chris Wallace insist on asking hard questions? Make them stop!

The president seems more comfortable talking to "real journalists" such as Chris Hughes, who asked the question in the TNR [The New Republic] interview that elicited Obama's reflexive Fox hatred. Hughes is the new owner of TNR and is a former major Obama campaign donor and organizer who was featured on the cover of Fast Company, with the headline, "The Kid Who Made Obama President." You can't make this stuff up.

[rivergator]

One law:

Last week, she introduced a bill that, read literally, would make it a third-degree felony for women to terminate pregnancies resulting from rape — by classifying such abortions as “tampering with evidence.” Here’s the exact phrasing: “Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain abortion, of a fetus that is the result or criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.”

link (http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/where-abortion-bans-lead/)

[MastaG8r]

One law:



link (http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/where-abortion-bans-lead/)Oh okay. So the commanding general of the War on Women is...a woman? An obscure state legislator from New Mexico who introduced a bill proposing a bizarre law to prohibit aborting fetuses conceived from rape because they could be "evidence" against the rapist? That's the best you could come up with in your feeble effort to hijack this thread about 0bama's War on FOX News? I'll say this about your example - or rather, you'll say it:

single examples never prove anything.

[rivergator]

Oh okay. So the commanding general of the War on Women is...a woman? An obscure state legislator from New Mexico who introduced a bill proposing a bizarre law to prohibit aborting fetuses conceived from rape because they could be "evidence" against the rapist? That's the best you could come up with in your feeble effort to hijack this thread about 0bama's War on FOX News? I'll say this about your example - or rather, you'll say it:

you asked for an example of a law. you got one. or another

A proposed abortion bill introduced in Arkansas this week would ban all abortion services after a fetal heartbeat is detected — which can occur as early as six weeks, before some women even realize they’re pregnant — and charge doctors who perform abortions after that arbitrary cut-off with a Class D felony, punishable by up to six years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.

link (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/01/29/1508241/arkansas-republicans-fetal-heartbeat/)

and your attempt to use my 'single example' theory is absurdly flawed of course. See, if I were to claim that "most Republicans have declared war on women" and presented a single bill, that would be a valid argument. As with Dave's example of one opinion piece proving media bias.
But a single bill does certainly prove that such bills exist. And that was your question, now wasn't it?

personally, i think the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration.

[fredsanford]

I wish we had broadcast laws like Canada's where Fox News can't go because they admit that they lie in their so-called news programming.

[rivergator]

I wish we had broadcast laws like Canada's where Fox News can't go because they admit that they lie in their so-called news programming.

nah

[MastaG8r]

you asked for an example of a law. you got one. or another



link (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/01/29/1508241/arkansas-republicans-fetal-heartbeat/)

and your attempt to use my 'single example' theory is absurdly flawed of course. See, if I were to claim that "most Republicans have declared war on women" and presented a single bill, that would be a valid argument. As with Dave's example of one opinion piece proving media bias.
But a single bill does certainly prove that such bills exist. And that was your question, now wasn't it?

personally, i think the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration.My request was for examples of laws that demonstrate the existence of a Republican War on Women. I asked: "The Republicans' so-called War on Women involves making laws? Which laws are those?"

So if you really did think "the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration," then right there would've been the time to say so. Instead you responded with what you (wrongly) thought was an example validating a term that you now say is "a pretty big exaggeration."

These bills introduced by state legislators do not serve to support your claim that 0bama's War on FOX News is different from the Republican War on Women because, "one involves making laws and the other doesn't." No, they are different because the former "war" does exist and the latter does not, or at best it is "a pretty big exaggeration." Right? Or do you now disagree with yourself?

[MastaG8r]

I wish we had broadcast laws like Canada's where Fox News can't go because they admit that they lie in their so-called news programming.
Claim: The FOX News Channel has been banned in Canada.

http://www.bonamiciforcongress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/false.jpg (http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/foxcanada.asp)

:no:

[rivergator]

My request was for examples of laws that demonstrate the existence of a Republican War on Women. I asked: "The Republicans' so-called War on Women involves making laws? Which laws are those?"

So if you really did think "the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration," then right there would've been the time to say so. Instead you responded with what you (wrongly) thought was an example validating a term that you now say is "a pretty big exaggeration."

These bills introduced by state legislators do not serve to support your claim that 0bama's War on FOX News is different from the Republican War on Women because, "one involves making laws and the other doesn't." No, they are different because the former "war" does exist and the latter does not, or at best it is "a pretty big exaggeration." Right? Or do you now disagree with yourself?

As I said, I think the term 'war' is a big exaggeration. For both the Republicans and women and Obama/Fox. It's more than ridiculous that you think Obama saying "If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it" is somehow equal to war.
But what you asked for was examples of what's been called the war on women. And that's what you got.

[g8orbill]

the 47%ers prez is pathetic in his lack of leadership- and it is pathetic for him to attack an American Company because they do not like his views-I cannot say anymore without getting banned

[fredsanford]

My request was for examples of laws that demonstrate the existence of a Republican War on Women. I asked: "The Republicans' so-called War on Women involves making laws? Which laws are those?"

So if you really did think "the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration," then right there would've been the time to say so. Instead you responded with what you (wrongly) thought was an example validating a term that you now say is "a pretty big exaggeration."

These bills introduced by state legislators do not serve to support your claim that 0bama's War on FOX News is different from the Republican War on Women because, "one involves making laws and the other doesn't." No, they are different because the former "war" does exist and the latter does not, or at best it is "a pretty big exaggeration." Right? Or do you now disagree with yourself?

Quality goalpost moving.

How about the ongoing efforts in the HOR to pass laws differentiating "fun rape" from "rapey rape"?

[gatorpa]

you asked for an example of a law. you got one. or another



link (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/01/29/1508241/arkansas-republicans-fetal-heartbeat/)

and your attempt to use my 'single example' theory is absurdly flawed of course. See, if I were to claim that "most Republicans have declared war on women" and presented a single bill, that would be a valid argument. As with Dave's example of one opinion piece proving media bias.
But a single bill does certainly prove that such bills exist. And that was your question, now wasn't it?

personally, i think the term 'war on women' is a pretty big exaggeration.

Funny your two examples of "Laws against Women" are actually for women, considering about what 52% of babies are female?

Amazing that it is thought of by some as a "War on Women" is actually an attempt to protecting a life that has few laws to protect it.

[JerseyGator01]

If I had a dime for every thread with the word "war" in the title that didn't involve war ...

Never underestimate the power of media brainwashing. War this, war that ...

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

I thought you were joking, but he declared an actual war. The Navy is mobilizing outside of their office!

People that use "literally" wrong figuratively drive me crazy!

[rivergator]

It is funny to see conservatives claiming that Obama is 'threatening' Fox.

[MastaG8r]

As I said, I think the term 'war' is a big exaggeration. For both the Republicans and women and Obama/Fox. It's more than ridiculous that you think Obama saying "If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it" is somehow equal to war.
But what you asked for was examples of what's been called the war on women. And that's what you got.gatorpa got here first and beat me to it: Attempts to tighten restrictions on abortion do not constitute a "war on women." And certainly when the attempts consist of a few random bills proposed by individual state legislators, there is no justification for the patently ridiculous claim that the Republican Party is orchestrating some sort of coordinated war on women.

Meanwhile 0bama's most recent comment about FOX News is not the sole basis for saying his administration is waging a war against FOX. He and members of his administration have called out that network by name on multiple previous occasions. The overwhelming majority of the news media unabashedly worships 0bama to the point that he openly jokes about it. So it comes across as extraordinarily thin-skinned and small-minded for him to repeatedly whine about the one single network that doesn't eat out of his hand.

It's quite obvious that if 0bama could snap his fingers and make FOX go away, he'd do it. As would you, if your own frequent whining about it is any indication. Because progressive ideas don't hold up well to the kind of scrutiny they receive on no other news network but FOX.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

It is funny to see conservatives claiming that Obama is 'threatening' Fox.

Actually, the Fox person claiming that is one of Fox's few liberal commentators.

[MastaG8r]

Quality goalpost moving.

How about the ongoing efforts in the HOR to pass laws differentiating "fun rape" from "rapey rape"?Who's moving goalposts? And what laws are you talking about? And why did you lie about FOX News being banned in Canada? I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were simply wrong about that, but I've seen you corrected on it with the Snopes.com link before. Yet still you repeat something that you know is false. Why? Did you think nobody would notice? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were simply wrong about that.

[ncgatr1]

Does it really matter now? The Dems have now seize control with the use of their puppets which are the minorities, old, and uninformed youth. I don't think Obama should worry himself with FOX. Wait until the well runs dry, both financially and intellectually. These parasites will turn on the upper echelon of the Democratic Party.

[cocodrilo]

Why is Fox News distinguished from "mainstream media"?

Isn't Fox News watched just as much or more than CNN or the news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC?

I define mainstream media has the media through which most people get their "news" every day. And I can guarantee you that Fox News is just as censored by, and lapdog to, the government as anyone when it comes to the government's most despicable and dangerous-to-talk-about crimes, like the JFK hit and complicity in 9/11.

Bill O'Reilly, perhaps Fox's biggest star, even has a best-selling book out that says Oswald did it. If he had the gonads to say it was a coup d'etat, his star would be a burnt-out cinder overnight.

As for whether Fox leans right or CNN leans left on this-or-that social or political issue that won't get you killed or ruined, I imagine that the government doesn't really give a crap.

[rivergator]

Actually, the Fox person claiming that is one of Fox's few liberal commentators.

who's that?

link (http://nation.foxnews.com/fox-news-channel/2013/01/28/obama-singles-out-fox-news)

[rivergator]

gatorpa got here first and beat me to it: Attempts to tighten restrictions on abortion do not constitute a "war on women." And certainly when the attempts consist of a few random bills proposed by individual state legislators, there is no justification for the patently ridiculous claim that the Republican Party is orchestrating some sort of coordinated war on women.

Meanwhile 0bama's most recent comment about FOX News is not the sole basis for saying his administration is waging a war against FOX. He and members of his administration have called out that network by name on multiple previous occasions. The overwhelming majority of the news media unabashedly worships 0bama to the point that he openly jokes about it. So it comes across as extraordinarily thin-skinned and small-minded for him to repeatedly whine about the one single network that doesn't eat out of his hand.

It's quite obvious that if 0bama could snap his fingers and make FOX go away, he'd do it. As would you, if your own frequent whining about it is any indication. Because progressive ideas don't hold up well to the kind of scrutiny they receive on no other news network but FOX.

You asked for the laws involved in the (your words) "so-called war on women." You got them.

So what exactly constitutes Obama's war on Fox? Oh, yeah, he said Republicans are too obedient to it. Brutal. Clearly the stuff of war.

[DaveFla]

I wish we had broadcast laws like Canada's where Fox News can't go because they admit that they lie in their so-called news programming.

Why stop there? I understand China has a pretty good control over non-government approved "lies" too...

[MastaG8r]

You asked for the laws involved in the (your words) "so-called war on women." You got them.No I didn't. All I got was yet another example of typical riverdancing: It's a big exaggeration to say that Republicans are waging a War on Women...but oh by the way here are some examples of it. :roll:

And of course neither of your two examples have anything to do with any kind of supposed war on women. You could just as easily call them examples of a war on men, if you have the sickeningly twisted belief that protecting unborn children is a "war" on anything.

So what exactly constitutes Obama's war on Fox? Oh, yeah, he said Republicans are too obedient to it. Brutal. Clearly the stuff of war.Wrong again. You're no better than shabadoo, repeating falsehoods after being corrected.

[g8orbill]

the 47%ers prez has to demonize Fox and continue to use the class warfare so he can get a totally dem controlled Congress-then he can make himself prez for life

[fredsanford]

the 47%ers prez has to demonize Fox and continue to use the class warfare so he can get a totally dem controlled Congress-then he can make himself prez for life

You're losing it.

[gator1986]

GO MERICA!!

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

who's that?

link (http://nation.foxnews.com/fox-news-channel/2013/01/28/obama-singles-out-fox-news)

Oh dear;

The White House war on Fox News hasn’t stopped at all, writes liberal Fox contributor Kirsten Powers today in a column published by the network. After getting rebuked by other news agencies for ham-fisted attempts to exclude Fox reporters from coverage of the Obama administration in 2009, the White House seemed to give up on their one-sided war. Not so, says Powers — they’ve just become more subtle at their attempts to delegitimize Fox:

In a recent interview with The New Republic, President Obama was back to his grousing about the one television news outlet in America that won’t fall in line and treat him as emperor. Discussing breaking Washington’s partisan gridlock, the president told TNR,”If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News…for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it.”

Alas, the president loves to whine about the media meanies at Fox News. To him, these are not people trying to do their jobs. No, they are out to get him. What other motive could a journalist have in holding a president accountable? Why oh why do Ed Henry and Chris Wallace insist on asking hard questions? Make them stop!

The president seems more comfortable talking to “real journalists” such as Chris Hughes, who asked the question in the TNR interview that elicited Obama’s reflexive Fox hatred. Hughes is the new owner of TNR and is a former major Obama campaign major campaign donor and organizer who was featured on the cover of Fast Company, with the headline, “The Kid Who Made Obama President.” You can’t make this stuff up.

[rivergator]

Oh dear;

I think my point was that it wasn't just one commentator, giving that it was the headline on Foxnation.com

[g8orbill]

I am not losing anything shab- I happen to think that is the .......... plan

[rivergator]

More on Fox's phony hysteria over Obama's comments:

Brian Kilmeade fed Johnson the appropriately sensational opening lines: "After going after the Second Amendment, President Obama, unhappy with freedom of speech, is going after the First Amendment.” Indeed he is, agreed Johnson, as the chyron shouted FIRST GUNS, NOW FREE SPEECH. “The imperial Presidency playbook is open." The First Amendment is "seriously in doubt,” he added, when the President embraces those that echo his talking points, and brands anyone who seeks to “foster debate” as an “enemy of the state.” GOING AFTER FREE SPEECH, the chyron hollered.

link (http://www.newshounds.us/the_president_is_going_after_the_first_amendment_a nd_free_speech_screams_fox_20130129)

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

I think my point was that it wasn't just one commentator, giving that it was the headline on Foxnation.com

oH

[fredsanford]

I am not losing anything shab- I happen to think that is the .......... plan

Then you are as far removed from reality as those were that thought Bush wouldn't leave office after 8 years.

And I'd love to know what a Dem congress could do exactly to allow him to do that.

[gator421]

the 47%ers prez is pathetic in his lack of leadership- and it is pathetic for him to attack an American Company because they do not like his views-I cannot say anymore without getting banned

Is the ACA, immigation reform, etc. an example of his lack of leadership? I need a clarification on what exactly leadership is. I'm thinking it will have something to do with someone doing what you want. But, I'm only guessing.

[gator421]

Why is Fox News distinguished from "mainstream media"?

Isn't Fox News watched just as much or more than CNN or the news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC?

I define mainstream media has the media through which most people get their "news" every day. And I can guarantee you that Fox News is just as censored by, and lapdog to, the government as anyone when it comes to the government's most despicable and dangerous-to-talk-about crimes, like the JFK hit and complicity in 9/11.

Bill O'Reilly, perhaps Fox's biggest star, even has a best-selling book out that says Oswald did it. If he had the gonads to say it was a coup d'etat, his star would be a burnt-out cinder overnight.

As for whether Fox leans right or CNN leans left on this-or-that social or political issue that won't get you killed or ruined, I imagine that the government doesn't really give a crap.
That's a good question. Haven't been able to figure that out myself.