RSS Feed MenuMichael Wolff has a sharp theory:
I am revising my theory of what the Obama administration is doing in its frontal assault on Fox: I think they want us to take sides. Are you a Fox person or not a Fox person? And I think they want to identify Fox as the standard bearer of American conservatism. If you’re a conservative, you’re for Fox (ie, is that who you want to be?).
It’s a perfect convergence: What is good for Fox is good for Obama, and what is good for Obama is good for Fox, and their mutual victim is the Republican party.
johnmarzan // Oct 21, 2009 at 10:59 am
[quote]It’s not a smear. It’s a fact based attack…
b) If you make s**t up, you should expect to be marginalized. You are not a serious voice in any debate. You are the boy who cried wolf….
I’m glad the White House is calling out the liars.[/quote]
foxnews lied about van jones, acorn, the NEA scandal, and anita dunn’s mao comments? that’s the reason why they’re really upset at fox right? they got hurt by all these scandals.
sinz54 // Oct 21, 2009 at 12:30 pm
lfc: If you make s**t up, you should expect to be marginalized. You are not a serious voice in any debate. You are the boy who cried wolf. The White House has made it clear to these types of groups; don’t expect to be engaged by serious people until you yourself present serious points of view.
Ahmedinijad has denied that the Holocaust ever took place. How come Obama isn’t working just as hard to marginalize him?
It seems that Obama is working hard to marginalize his domestic critics (who are still U.S. citizens with the right to free expression), while he goes out of his way to engage Putin and Iran. An open hand to Iran, a clenched fist to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Unbelievable. And pathetic.
To me, those priorities are inverted. Iran needs to be marginalized a whole lot more than the U.S. Chamber of Commerce does.
They are also inconsistent with Obama’s promise during the campaign to be willing to listen to domestic criticism and multiple points of view.
Arch // Oct 21, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Fox doesn’t have a nuclear program.
Yet.
LFC // Oct 21, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Ahmedinijad has denied that the Holocaust ever took place. How come Obama isn’t working just as hard to marginalize him?
One is the president of Iran, the other a PR outlet. If you can’t tell the difference, maybe you should just stick to talking points. As to public statements by Obama about Ahmadinejad , how about this one:
“I found many of the statements … appalling and objectionable,” Obama told reporters.
He could easily say the very same thing about Fox News.
ottovbvs // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:02 pm
ireign // Oct 21, 2009 at 2:21 pm
“Along the same lines — Obama is willing to talk with Castro, Ahmedinijad, and Kim Jong-Il but evidently finds it hard to have a conversation with Fox News??? This is “change we believe in!” Nice to see that this President is a “uniter.”
…….More bumper stickers from ireign……is this actually your job in the Republican noise machine?
ireign // Oct 21, 2009 at 10:27 am
“……And from a guy that has about 200 x more savvy than you do.”
“Good one, ottoBS. 200 x more savvy? Why not make 400? Or about 500?”
………..I was giving you the benefit of the doubt
ottovbvs // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:11 pm
…….As David points out and some of the more intelligent and realistic commentators here (see below) endorse, it’s all actually a very neat piece of gamesmanship by the Obama political team……note they’ve been very careful to avoid getting into this until the perception of Republican nuttiness is firmly imprinted on the national frontal lobes……as moderate points out all they have to do now is say
“There they go again.”……and a vision of men in white coats hustling away Limbaugh and Beck floats into the national consciousness.
moderate // Oct 20, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Frum’s conclusion that what is good for Fox is bad for the Republican party defies logic. It’s a tv channel. Fox’s ratings doesn’t hurt the GOP.
On the contrary, his conclusion is quite logical.
1) Fox News is strongly associated with the Republican Party; right or wrong, this is the public perception.
2) Fox News cares more about their ratings than the fortunes of the Republican Party.
3) “Bad” behavior (sensationalism, screaming, attacks) is good for ratings, and therefore is good for Fox.
4) Fox’s “bad” behavior reflects poorly on the Republican Party.
Frum has made this argument many times before.
sinz54 // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:20 pm
lfc: One is the president of Iran, the other a PR outlet. If you can’t tell the difference, maybe you should just stick to talking points.
I can tell the difference:
Obama is afraid of Iran and what it might do.
He’s not afraid of Fox News.
Fox News is easy for him to bully.
Iran isn’t.
sinz54 // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:24 pm
ottovbs:
When he was campaigning in 2008,
Obama promised to “change the tone in Washington.”
Whatever happened to that?
Tens of millions of Americans voted for Obama because they were sick of the rabid partisanship, and Obama acted like someone who would be beyond that and try to bring us together.
Evidently, Obama lied through his teeth. He’s a rabid partisan doing everything he can to stick it to his domestic political opponents, while his rabid supporters are gleeful and high-fiving one another.
I figured as much. On the left-wing blogs like HuffPo, all the lefties were saying to each other “Obama has to sound conciliatory to get elected–but just wait till after he’s inaugurated!”
So much for “changing the tone in Washington.”
All lies.
And you’re a willing part of it.
You better hope you guys never lose an election again.
Payback’s a bitch.
ottovbvs // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:55 pm
sinz54 // Oct 21, 2009 at 5:24 pm
ottovbs:
“When he was campaigning in 2008,
Obama promised to “change the tone in Washington.”
………Sinz……there have been a host of polls on this and by large margins Obama is perceived to have made an effort to reach out to the Republicans while they are perceived as being obstructionist and nutty most of the time……..add in the fact that on a personal level he’s very well liked rather as Reagan was by many democrats…….in other words the Republicans are the perceived bad guys in this…….why else do you think they are donw at 20% id?……..Obama is Mr Nice Guy…..the Republicans (Limbaugh, Beck, Bachmann, Steele, Palin, Gingrich et al) are the nuts…..one day you may get it!
ottovbvs // Oct 21, 2009 at 6:12 pm
ireign // Oct 21, 2009 at 6:07 pm
“LFC, I think you should ask your community college for your tuition back since you obviously didn’t learn anything”
……..Obama’s outflanking you again……..you obviously haven’t yet learned to recognize it…..so the process will continue……how unfortunate
Conservative Intellectual // Oct 21, 2009 at 8:22 pm
A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.
I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.
johnmarzan // Oct 21, 2009 at 11:43 pm
the fox all star panel talks about obama’s war against insurance companies, foxnews and the US chamber of commerce… aka the enemies of the state.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,568923,00.html
balconesfault // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:49 am
Along the same lines — Obama is willing to talk with Castro, Ahmedinijad, and Kim Jong-Il but evidently finds it hard to have a conversation with Fox News???
When you find us the interview that Bush conducted with the NY Times between 2000 and 2009, we can consider this a serious criticism.
And yet – the NY Times was one of the papers that most publicized the fraudulent Whitewater claims … can you point out the investigation into a sitting Republican President that Fox has ever pushed?
balconesfault // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:50 am
Sinz: Obama promised to “change the tone in Washington.”
It is hard to change the tone of a discussion when all your opponent wants to do is to scream back at you.
Eventually, one’s patience wanes. Worse yet, people start labeling you as ineffectual and wimpy for taking the abuse without fighting back, and even your supporters start to soften on their support.
balconesfault // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:54 am
the fox all star panel talks about obama’s war against insurance companies
Ahh – the war against insurance companies.
And now the Democrats are threatening big insurance with the prospect of removing their Anti-Trust exemption.
I look forward to the Republicans being the party of wanting big insurance continuing to have their Anti-Trust exemption over the next 4-6 years, as insurance premiums increase by 50% and more and more companies start dropping employee insurance benefits as being too expensive to maintain.
Barroom brawling works until you run into an opponent who knows what they’re doing, and isn’t afraid of you. Increasingly it looks like Obama is that opponent, and Republicans aren’t figuring out that brawling won’t cut it anymore.
sinz54 // Oct 25, 2009 at 6:52 pm
balconesfault: It is hard to change the tone of a discussion when all your opponent wants to do is to scream back at you.
The President of the United States works for the American people.
We have the right to scream at him.
He does not have the right to scream at us.
Because he works for us.
You can be chewed out by your boss.
But if you start chewing out your boss,
expect to be fired.
sinz54 // Oct 25, 2009 at 6:55 pm
conservative-intellectual: I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism.
Considering global warming a myth is the “very basis of conservatism”???
When did politicizing climatology become part of conservatism?