Who will win the war of words? ...

[Karen Kraft]

... between Fox News and the children in the White House?

I told you: the press loves the press even more than they love The Anointed One. The power of the 4th estate must be vindicated against all comers. -Thomas Carlyle

Richard Nixon (barf, puke) had just won re-election by an enormous landslide, in a world that was screwed down a lot tighter than it is now, and see how easily he made short shrift of taking down The Washington Post, New York Times?

I forget... how did that work out for him?

The insecure kids-in-a-panic should have read their history books a bit more carefully, particularly when it comes to attacking any major factor of the press. "[T]hose who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside." -JFK 1961

[koalabear]

The White House is it's own worst enemy.

[Karen Kraft]

Originally Posted by koalabear

The White House is it's own worst enemy.

I think they should send Gibbs back to the BeeGees and hire Alan Grayson as SpokesAnus. He has such a huey with words.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Ready to lead on day one...

Well, establish a directions committee...

Convene a panel to discuss the committee results...

Invite the panel experts to Versailles-style parties to establish a consensus...

Take the elements of the consensus to focus group experts to test and establish key phrases...

Take these key phrases and the TOTUS to the proper venue and deliver the key phrases of consensus in an all-knowing manner...

Lash out at Fox, Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh when the adoring masses balk at taking up shield and sword to blindly follow the determined leadership of his Pied Crusade.

He's too fucking big and important to fail.

Jackass...
__________________
Nemesis has caught up with him in oh so many ways. From what we can tell, he was not a serious student, but rather a glib and politically astute observer, who rode affirmative action, identity politics, and campus trends (I am now gleaning this from his own autobiography) right through Occidental and Columbia to Harvard Law—without much scholarship. He was given much more attention at Chicago Law School for what he represented than what he accomplished. He arrogantly thought he could glide into the racist cauldron of Trinity Church, and glide out as an authentic African-American organizer of the Jesse Jackson sort.

His Senate career was similar—long on soaring rhetoric, in perpetual campaign mode, predicated on white liberal guilt and ease with a charismatic “other”—and short on actual accomplishment.
Victor Davis Hanson

[miles]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Ready to lead on day one...

Well, establish a directions committee...

Convene a panel to discuss the committee results...

Invite the panel experts to Versailles-style parties to establish a consensus...

Take the elements of the consensus to focus group experts to test and establish key phrases...

Take these key phrases and the TOTUS to the proper venue and deliver the key phrases of consensus in an all-knowing manner...

Lash out at Fox, Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh when the adoring masses balk at taking up shield and sword to blindly follow the determined leadership of his Pied Crusade.

He's too fucking big and important to fail.

Jackass...

Every tyrant needs a scapegoat.

[Pookie]

The animosity between Democrats and Fox News is nothing new, and wasn't going to magically change with Obama winning an election. Both have their hardcore supporters and detractors. That's not going to change either.

So, who will win? Probably CNN.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

This is true, and maybe even justified Pookie.

But the last person to let the White House follow through on the hate of a pointed press was Richard Nixon and who brought him down if it wasn't the press?

Obama has brought a lack of dignity to the office and acts like a little child instead of a great leader.

He should not be responding to any of this, he just draws more attention to their criticisms and lends credence to the the idea that smoke and fire are somewhat related.

That's the fight he should have left back in the Senate...

He won DESPITE FOX, Hannity Limbaugh and Beck.

He's Eddie Haskell.

Jackass...

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

CNN?




Leave the comedy to me. You suck at it.

This has been a ratings bonanza for the enemies of Barack.

[miles]

Well, he finally delivered on one of his campaign promises: transparency.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by miles

Every tyrant needs a scapegoat.

Or a fainting goat to allow his escape.






Michelle, throw another one under the bus! The fire's getting hot...!

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

This is true, and maybe even justified Pookie.

But the last person to let the White House follow through on the hate of a pointed press was Richard Nixon and who brought him down if it wasn't the press?

Not a great comparison. The press was already on to likely illegal shenanigans that Nixon was up to. The stuff between Fox and Obama is really something different. I'll admit, it could backfire on Obama. But Fox had already been marginalized a great deal before this.

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

This has been a ratings bonanza for the enemies of Barack.

Ratings bonanza? Maybe somewhat in the short run. We'll see down the road. Just keep in mind that the enemies of Obama are a minority. Winning a majority of the minority is like being the prettiest ugly girl. Just sayin'

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by Pookie

Ratings bonanza? Maybe somewhat in the short run. We'll see down the road. Just keep in mind that the enemies of Obama are a minority. Winning a majority of the minority is like being the prettiest ugly girl. Just sayin'

Currently, if polls are correct (and you know how I feel about polls compared to ratings or voting), and the Congressional dithering is any indication, that subset, friends of Obama, is becoming a minority too as we watch him lash out and punish people who cross him.

He brought Chicago to the White House.

Lamar Alexander provides us a list of some of the retaliations made by this White House.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28549.html

He wasn't ready for day one. He needed executive experience somewhere and Joe Biden taking on Dick Cheney isn't going to get them anywhere either and Joe was the one supposed to be able to keep the ship from listing...

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Pookie, you have seen the ratings of the "marginalized" network, no?

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Currently, if polls are correct (and you know how I feel about polls compared to ratings or voting), and the Congressional dithering is any indication, that subset, friends of Obama, is becoming a minority too as we watch him lash out and punish people who cross him.

The latest polls I've seen don't really support your contention. But don't let me stop you from visiting the cherry orchard to find just the right one.

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

Pookie, you have seen the ratings of the "marginalized" network, no?

Did you read my post?

Ratings bonanza? Maybe somewhat in the short run. We'll see down the road.

Slow down the posting, AJ. Try to read what people say before replying.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by Pookie

Ratings bonanza? Maybe somewhat in the short run. We'll see down the road. Just keep in mind that the enemies of Obama are a minority. Winning a majority of the minority is like being the prettiest ugly girl. Just sayin'

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Slug_Esq

See. You actually saw my words when you took your time. It's post quality that counts, AJ. Not quantity.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Mark Steyn wins, Hanns Down...



NRO

Benjamin Disraeli’s most famous advice to aspiring politicians was: “Never complain and never explain.” For the greatest orator of our time, a man who makes Churchill, Lincoln, and Henry V at Agincourt look like first-round rejects on Orating with the Stars, Barack Obama seems to have pretty much given up on the explaining side. He tried it with health care with speech after speech after exclusive interview for months on end and the more he explained the more unpopular the whole racket got. So he declared that the time for explaining is over, and it’s time to sign on or else.

Meanwhile, to take the other half of the Disraeli equation, Obama and his officials and their beleaguered band of surrogates never stop complaining. If you express concerns about government health care, they complain about all these “racists” and “domestic terrorists” obstructing his agenda. If you wonder why the president can’t seem to find time in his hectic schedule of international-awards acceptance speeches to make a decision about Afghanistan, they complain that it’s not his fault he “inherited” all these problems. And, if you wonder why his “green jobs” czar is a Communist 9/11 truther and his National Endowment for the Arts guy is leaning on grant recipients to produce Soviet-style propaganda extolling Obama policies, they complain about Fox News.

The most recent whine — the anti-Fox campaign — is, apart from anything else, unbecoming to the office. President Obama is the chief of state of one of the oldest free societies in the world, but his official White House website runs teasers such as: "For even more Fox lies, check out the latest ‘Truth-O-Meter.’” It gives off the air of somebody only marginally less paranoid than this week’s president-for-life in some basket-case banana republic ranting on the palace balcony because his interior security chief isn’t doing a fast enough job of disappearing his enemies.

...

That attitude, while raising a bunch of other issues, is psychologically healthier. If you’re going to attack the press, you need a lightness of touch, not a ham-fisted crowbar such as the White House wielded on Thursday, attempting to ban Fox from the pool interviews with the “pay czar.” Another bit of venerable Disraelian insouciance, on the scribblers of Fleet Street: “Today they blacken your character, tomorrow they blacken your boots.” For two years, the U.S. media have been polishing Obama’s boots, mostly with their drool, to a degree unprecedented in American public life. But now it’s time for the handful of holdouts to make with the Kiwi — or else.

At a superficial level, this looks tough. A famously fair-minded centrist told me the other day that he’d been taken aback by some of the near parodic examples of leftie radicalism discovered in the White House in recent weeks. I don’t know why he’d be surprised. When a man has spent his entire adult life in the “community organized” precincts of Chicago, it should hardly be news that much of his Rolodex is made up of either loons or thugs. The trick is identifying who falls into which category. Anita Dunn, the communications director commending Mao Zedong as a role model to graduating high school students, would seem an obvious loon. But the point about Mao, as Charles Krauthammer noted, is that he was the most ruthless imposer of mass conformity in modern history: In Mao’s China, everyone wore the same clothes. So when Communications Commissar Mao Ze Dunn starts berating Fox News for not getting into the same Maosketeer costumes as the rest of the press corps, you begin to see why the Chairman might appeal to her as a favorite “political philosopher.”

So the troika of Dunn, Emanuel, and Axelrod were dispatched to the Sunday talk shows to lay down the law. We all know the lines from The Untouchables — “the Chicago way,” don’t bring a knife to a gun fight — and, given the “pay czar”’s instant contract-gutting of executive compensation and the demonization of the health insurers and much else, it’s easy to look on the 44th president as an old-style Cook County operator: You wanna do business in this town, you gotta do it through me. You can take the community organizer out of Chicago, but you can’t take the Chicago out of the community organizer.

The trouble is it isn’t tough, not where toughness counts. Who are the real “Untouchables” here? In Moscow, it’s Putin and his gang, contemptuously mocking U.S. officials even when (as with Secretary Clinton) they’re still on Russian soil. In Tehran, it’s Ahmadinejad and the mullahs openly nuclearizing as ever feebler warnings and woozier deadlines from the Great Powers come and go. Even Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize is an exquisite act of condescension from the Norwegians, a dog biscuit and a pat on the head to the American hyperpower for agreeing to spay itself into a hyperpoodle. We were told that Obama would use “soft power” and “smart diplomacy” to get his way. Russia and Iran are big players with global ambitions, but Obama’s soft power is so soft it doesn’t even work its magic on a client regime in Kabul whose leaders’ very lives are dependent on Western troops. If Obama’s “smart diplomacy” is so smart that even Hamid Karzai ignores it with impunity, why should anyone else pay attention?

__________________
Ayers wrote his book,
Harvard wrote his Review,
Apollo Alliance wrote his TARP,
Congress is writing his Health Care,
Nobel Committee awarded him extra credit...,

... and the Democrat Media is Wrighting his Legacy!

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Let's avoid the hated American Thinker and stick with they lying National Review...

Victor Davis Hanson

For 30 months the nation has been in the grip of a certain Obama obsession, immune to countervailing facts, unwilling to face reality, and loath to break the spell. But like all trances, the fit is passing, and we the patient are beginning to appreciate how the stupor came upon us, why it lifted, and what its consequences have been.

HOW OBAMA WON
Barack Obama was elected rather easily because, in perfect-storm fashion, five separate trends coalesced last autumn.

1) Obama was eloquent, young, charismatic — and African-American. He thus offered voters a sense of personal and collective redemption, as well as appealing to the longing for another JFK New Frontier figure. An image, not necessarily reality, trumped all.


...

I note all this at length because Obama seems to act as if this right-center country — one that polls oppositely to his positions on most of the major issues (deficits, spending, nationalized health care, homeland security, Guantanamo, cap-and-trade, etc.) — has given him a mandate for a degree of change not seen in nearly 80 years.

Apparently, Team Obama figured that with sizable majorities in both the House and the Senate, Obama would snap his fingers, Congress daily would pass bills redefining America, and Obama would stay in perpetual campaign mode to hope and change the country to accept his agenda. Governing would be like campaigning, as audiences fainted hearing the details of a 1,500-page health-care bill or of ever more sins from America’s past.

But, after just a few months in office, that proved not to be the case. Just as a number of planets had to line up precisely to allow an inexperienced hard-left ideologue to be elected president, so there would have had to be a similar configuration to allow him to govern successfully.

...

1) Obama had to match his unity rhetoric with brotherly action. In fact, he has done the opposite.

At one time or another, Obama and his supporters have, rather scurrilously, insulted doctors, insurers, the police, tea-partiers and town-hallers, opponents of his health-care plan, non-compliant members of the media, and a host of other groups as either greedy, dishonest, treasonous, unpatriotic, moblike, racist, or in general worthy of disrespect.

Fewer and fewer Americans now believe that Obama — after just nine months of governance — is a uniter. In Obama’s world, doctors carve out children’s tonsils for profit, racist morons rant at legislators about losing their private health care, and trillions in borrowed money must be paid back by the greedy rich whose capital was unearned in the first place.

When his base supporters lambaste him for softness, they are lamenting his inability to become an effective partisan — not a lack of partisanship in general. In surreal fashion, liberals demand that the ideologue Obama become more ideological precisely at the time his ideologically driven agenda is souring millions of non-ideological Americans.

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Here's the increasing danger for the Democrats as I see it and Mr. Hanson elucidates it:

As the midterm elections near, and his popularity bobs up and down around 50 percent, Obama can do one of two things.

He could imitate Bill Clinton’s 1995 Dick Morris remake. In Obama’s case, that would mean, abroad, cutting out the now laughable apologies for his country, ceasing to court thugs like Ahmadinejad, Chávez, and Putin, keeping some distance from the U.N., and paying closer attention to our allies like Britain and Israel. At home, he could declare victory on his sidetracked agenda and then start over by holding spending in line, curbing the deficit, stopping the lunatic Van Jones–style czar appointments, courting the opposition, and tabling cap-and-trade. I think there is very little chance of any of the above, whatever voters may have thought during the campaign.

Or, instead, Obama could hold the pedal to the floor on the theory that, as a proven ideologue, he must move the country far left before the voters catch on and stop him in his tracks in November 2010. That would mean more of the “gorge the beast” effort to spend and borrow so much that taxes have to soar, and thus redistribution of income will be institutionalized for a generation. He would push liberal proposals no matter how narrow the margin in the Senate. He would keep demonizing Fox News. In Nixonian fashion he might continue to hit the stump, ratcheting up his current “they’re lying” message and energizing his left-wing base by catering to the unions, gays, minorities — and liberal Wall Street special interests.

If he chooses the former, he might well be a more successful version of Bill Clinton given that his appetites are far more in check.

But if, as is likely, he chooses the latter, he will polarize the country in a way not seen since 1968, set back racial relations to the 1960s, do to the reputation of big government what LBJ did from 1964 to 1968, and, in the manner of what Jimmy Carter wrought, turn voters off liberal foreign policy for a generation.

He's going to choose #2. He's arrogant and self-absorbed.

Like I said all during the election as I voted for Bob Barr, I wanted Obama to win because that was the only cure to Pelosi's wing of the party...

You have to SEE Carter to believe Carter.

[rosco rathbone]

I don't think it was all that smart to fight Fox from the WH. Better to have a system of think-tanks, media outlets and other proxies fight for you and appear to be above the fray.

[phrodeau]

When did Obama mention Fox News by name?

I suspect Fox just decided that the shoe fit so they could become indignant.

[IrezumiKiss]

Originally Posted by phrodeau

When did Obama mention Fox News by name?

I suspect Fox just decided that the shoe fit so they could become indignant.

EXACTLY.

Everybody wants to be a crucified Jesus, but only with ropes to tie their hands and feet to the cross instead of nails so they can slip off during the night, sleep nice in their comfy beds and then get back up on the cross come morning to wail about suffering.

[koalabear]

Originally Posted by phrodeau

When did Obama mention Fox News by name?

I suspect Fox just decided that the shoe fit so they could become indignant.

“Most of you covered me; all of you voted for me,” Obama quipped on May 9. “Apologies to the Fox table.”