Now is not the time for the faint of heart to abandon Obama! Yes, he is having trouble standing up to the Iranians, but I think it is important for all of us to support our President, unthinkingly if need be, against the real enemy - Glen Beck and the rest of Fox "News".
And I am here to help. Rather than belabor Fox News, let me suggest a way for loyal American journalists to indicate their commitment to stamping out dissent as the lowest form of treason. Let's rally the media loyalists that have carreid Obama this far with a promotional button and slogan that the real heroes of the news business can wear and recite with pride.
Here we go! I picture this iconic image on buttons, posters, billboards - anywhere loyal journalists want to show their commitment to continuing the Good Fight for Hope and Change:
Obama is happy to see yet another friendly face in the media! And when Obama is happy and the media is happy, America is happy!
When we see Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper proudly wearing these buttons we will know that America's opinion leaders are going to Stay The Course To Victory!
I feel safer already.
STRANGELY UNCONVINCING! The always-interesting Mickey Kaus has a first draft of some thoughts about fair and balanced media; this bit on Fox News ended in a ditch:
I think Fox is also not neutral (which, again, doesn't bother me) but it's also not independent (which does). This isn't because it's owned by Rupert Murdoch--moguls are, typically among the more independent sorts. It's because it's run by Roger Ailes. I have zero faith that Ailes is independent of the Republican party or, specifically, those Republicans who have occupied the White House recently--the Bushes. As I said, I think if Karl Rove called Ailes in 2003 and said "We don't want so much coverage of X" it's extremely likely that X would not be covered on Fox. A ... suggestive example of Fox's loyalty is the debate on immigration, in which Ailes' network initially seemed to try valiantly--against the beliefs of most of its audience--to push the Bush White House line in favor of "comprehensive" legalization (while brushing aside its viewers' views).
Immigration reform? The McCain-Bush de facto open borders approach was favored by Big Business Conservatives before Bush was a gleam in Karl Rove's eye; Fox wasn't exactly breaking out of a distinct segment of the right-wing mainstream by supporting it.
I don't know the answer but I can suggest a better place to look for signs of Fox's fealty to Bush - how did they handle the conservative rebellion in early 2006 over both Harriet Miers and the Dubai port deal? If Fox was truly in the tank for Bush, as opposed to holding a conservative point of view, they would have tilted in favor of Harriet and Dubai. Did they? I have no idea! But maybe Mickey's second draft can tell us.
THE DRAFT IS IN, AND I AM OUT: Mickey's has an UPDATE pegging Fox as a bastion of Miers dead-enders. Hmm, I may have to retreat to Dubai.
I don't know if that convinces me that Fox News is more of a party organ than the NY Times, but it certainly cuts against any case for Fox independence.
TaggartChris Matthews: God darnit, Mr.LamarrObama, you use your tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore.Posted by: Neo | October 21, 2009 at 03:28 PM
Wasn't he Managing Editor in DC?
I'll bet he was. He is no more.
That word definitely doesn't mean what you think it means.
"your" or "atheism"?
Or "definitely"?
Posted by: bgates | October 21, 2009 at 03:30 PM
I'd also love for Kaus to pontificate on whether or not the stories that FOX News broke first before all the other media sources means as far as independence.
Don't forget the GWB DUI story in 2000.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 03:34 PM
"atheism"
Atheism. Go look it up, there's a good boy.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 03:37 PM
Watchdog excoriates execution of TARP
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 21, 2009 at 03:40 PM
Charlie, why are you being an asshole?
Posted by: bgates | October 21, 2009 at 03:58 PM
Charlie, why are you being an asshole?
Why are you bgates? Get over your beef with Charlie, he's one of the good guys, at least in my book.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 21, 2009 at 04:09 PM
And, unlike A-Rod, they didn't need steroids, either!!! See LUN. :-))
Posted by: Thomas Collins | October 21, 2009 at 04:30 PM
--Why are you bgates? Get over your beef with Charlie, he's one of the good guys, at least in my book.--
Even Charlie admits he's a cranky son of a gun. Bgates' is just using a synonym.
Posted by: Ignatz | October 21, 2009 at 04:41 PM
My limited understanding is that Buddism does not have a deity, but the common meaning of atheism would not apply.
Posted by: boris | October 21, 2009 at 04:53 PM
Look, Russert was a big shot. He was an executive at NBC News after his stint as Chief of Staff to Daniel Patrick Moynihan. He left that gig to become NBC News Washington Bureau Chief in 1984. He took over as moderator of MTP in 1991.
Most everything you need to know about Russert can be explained in the "Education of David Stockton". You protect the few, the proud, the sponsors of the show.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | October 21, 2009 at 05:06 PM
How does Kaus get through his assessment without broaching Jorno-list (sp?)? We KNOW that prominent Democrats and prominent left leaning journalists huddle each morning. Kaus GUESSES that Ailes does the same with prominent Republicans.
Posted by: EBJ | October 21, 2009 at 05:14 PM
Russert was a big shot.
Yes, he was.
My limited understanding is that Buddism does not have a deity, but the common meaning of atheism would not apply.
OK. Is there something about Buddhism that prevents a Buddhist from just saying he's a Buddhist? Is that where "Fight Club" got the idea?
Question for any religious scholars in the audience - which line best exemplifies the principles of Buddhism:
"That word definitely doesn't mean what you think it means."
or,
"Go look it up, there's a good boy."
Posted by: bgates | October 21, 2009 at 05:35 PM
because they're always poking along.
Do I need to even point out the effects of marijuana on driving skills?
And speaking of bumper stickers...
Is it just a central VA moonbat thing, or is it nationwide: liberal bumperstickers are always crooked in relationship to the vertical and horizontal lines of the vehicle. As if they were put on in a hasty fit of pique. Because if you're not OUTRAGED (GRRRRRRRR), you're not paying attention.
Posted by: Soylent Red | October 21, 2009 at 05:48 PM
Kaus GUESSES that Ailes does the same with prominent Republicans.
Definitely not. Does anyone think the Republican media strategy is that good? I don't. These clowns were giving away "green" elephants last fall for donations to emphasize how ecologically sensitive the party was. What Kaus doesn't understand is that all you have to do is use the same curiosity you had before you got brainwashed and...voila...independent journalist! It's a pretty short step from independent to libertarian or conservative, though, as anyone who has enough brainpower to formulate his own questions is almost never a liberal.
Besides, one media guy huddling with party members is not the same thing as 400 media guys huddling with each other.
Posted by: Fresh Air | October 21, 2009 at 05:53 PM
OT. but a real green shoot: a company in my general area, Nanosphere, went public and raised $35 million. So the IPO market is not totally moribund; it is at least twitching a bit.
Posted by: DrJ | October 21, 2009 at 06:01 PM
Whether Buddhism is atheistic seems to be a question that Buddhists themselves are still deciding.
Perhaps that word doesn't mean what some Buddhists think it means either.
Posted by: Ignatz | October 21, 2009 at 06:03 PM
Here is a gem. E-mail from Jesse Jackson I got today:
The historic election of President Barack Obama unleashed a new era of hope for change all across America.'s mid-day, high noon, in our politics-but change will not come easily. We, the people, must become the agents of change. We must personally and directly work for the change we believe in.
Already this year, the conservative opposition is mounting an aggressive counter-assault against comprehensive health care reform, economic recovery, and racial equality. They are packing town halls and filling the radio and TV airways to block the change we need.
We cannot let our guard down. More than ever before we must rise up, organize, and make our voices heard. We must meet the conservative outrage at the point of challenge. We must organize around OUR agenda. must raise our voices for OUR issues. must rise up again. It's no time to sit idly by while the conservative opposition seeks to roll back the clock on progress.
Now where did I put my robe and white hood?
Posted by: Fresh Air | October 21, 2009 at 06:08 PM
FA - did Jesse make some words darker in the email, to show that they're more important?
And are you sure it was him and not Rev'm Al?
Some people have trouble telling them apart.
Posted by: bgates | October 21, 2009 at 06:37 PM
Charlie, why are you being an asshole?
Funny, I seem to recall someone calling me an atheist. I wonder who that might have been?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 06:58 PM
This one:
"That word definitely doesn't mean what you think it means."
But then you didn't call me a Buddhist, did you?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 07:01 PM
Perhaps that word doesn't mean what some Buddhists think it means either.
Ah, but then he wasn't asserting that Buddhists are atheists, he asserted that I am.
As far as Buddhism and atheism go, Gautama basically said when asked about the topic that thinking about that wasn't conducive to enlightenment. he used a lovely Prakrit phrase that means, basically, "that isn't a well-formed question."
Me, I'm more or less a transcendentalist. Now go look up Scotius and Emerson.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 07:08 PM
Actually, as far as that goes, Gautama's last words were basically "now go find out for yourself."
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 07:09 PM
"that isn't a well-formed question."
Sounds like a Gibbs response to Tapper.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 21, 2009 at 07:11 PM
We should do this...
We must personally and directly work for the change we believe in.
Unless it takes the form of this...
They are packing town halls and filling the radio and TV airways to block the change we need. [As defined by Obamunists]
These are not people who are rooting for more public engagement in the political process. They're rooting for a monopoly on free speech and thought.
I really hate these people.
Posted by: Soylent Red | October 21, 2009 at 07:14 PM
Sounds like a Gibbs response to Tapper.
Actually yeah, to some extent: Buddha's teachings are about freeing yourself from frustration in daily life. He clearly didn't think "What is the nature of God" was all that helpful.
But the phrase is more like a compiler error: the syntax isn't correct.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 07:16 PM
These are not people who are rooting for more public engagement in the political process. They're rooting for a monopoly on free speech and thought.
I think that's really the key point here: they really are essentially authoritarian, totalitarian, fascistic, in attitude.
"Monopoly on ree speech" is sort of an oxymoron though.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 21, 2009 at 07:17 PM
Just so ChaCo...
Let's try, "Free for me, but not for thee."
Posted by: Soylent Red | October 21, 2009 at 07:20 PM
I love Chaco and bgates and if they don't stop pulling eachother's chains, I'm getting out my Ralph Lauren designed a yeshiva boy's deam of the West bandoliers.
Posted by: clarice | October 21, 2009 at 07:30 PM
Actually, as far as that goes, Gautama's last words were basically "now go find out for yourself."
Hmmmm... An early iteration of "go Google yourself." :-)
Posted by: Blue | October 21, 2009 at 07:37 PM
Clarice can you translate your last post into English? Thanks. :)
Posted by: jimmyk | October 21, 2009 at 07:49 PM
"now go find out for yourself."
"Ah. You don't know, then."
Posted by: PD | October 21, 2009 at 07:50 PM
I imagine this iconic image on buttons, posters, billboards - anywhere loyal journalists want to show their commitment to continuing the Good Fight for Hope and Change:
Good Nite
Posted by: Rocco | October 21, 2009 at 09:23 PM
**a yeshiva boy's dReam od the West bandoliers**
I'm asking those two to stop fighting. Bandoliers are ammo holders usually draped on the gunfighter.
My view of Ralph Lauren who was a yeshiva boy (a student of a Jewish parochial school) is that he has concoted a dream version of Gentile America in which everyone from the preppy Eaterner to the Western cowhand dressed far more elegantly than they ever did in real life.
Rather like the old time studio heads, immigrants from Eastern Europe's shtetls created a loving and romantic version of America for us and the world to see and believe in.
Posted by: clarice | October 21, 2009 at 09:25 PM
--Me, I'm more or less a transcendentalist. Now go look up Scotius and Emerson.--
Emerson I know and find a little droll.
Looked up Scotius, as directed, but it is not clear if you are a follower of the Marvel comics Scotius or the Tasmanian millipede Scotius.
Please clarify.
Posted by: Ignatz | October 21, 2009 at 10:45 PM
The ability for the White House to achieve any success in the "War with FoxNews" is roughly equivalent to the "War on Team America" that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il attempted after it's creators made him look like a fool in the movie, "Team America: World Police".
It was said that Kim Jong Il had ordered that the writers, Trey Parker and Matt Stone (still alive), be assassinated, a step that I don't think Obama is ready to take, but of course like Nancy Pelosi said, the war of words could inspire terrible violence which could reflect badly on the President.
Posted by: Neo | October 21, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Sheppard Smith?
Juan "Porch" Williams?
Mar Liasson?
Bill "I hate Big Oil" O`Reilly?
I`d prefer my Right Wing Talking Points made from sterner stuff.
Posted by: daddy | October 22, 2009 at 03:03 AM
Rocco:
Good Nite
And Good Luck
Posted by: hit and run | October 22, 2009 at 09:01 AM
Fox news has news reporting and opinion content. Their journalism is straight down the line. Period.
Their opinion content is confused by hacks who can't tell the difference. That's because the competing networks are incapable of providing news without opinion.
Posted by: Donald | October 22, 2009 at 09:59 AM
That's an elegy for the media, there, Donald.
==========================
Posted by: We appreciate your elegant pithiness. | October 22, 2009 at 10:19 AM
"That's because the competing networks are incapable of providing news without opinion."
Exactly.
Posted by: fdcol63 | October 22, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Here's an email I sent to Kaus yesterday. Of course he ignored me.
To:
mickey_Kaus@msn.com
Let's see: NBC and MSNBC are owned by GE. GE got $74 billion in bailout money. The CEO of GE is Jeffrey Immelt. Jeffrey Immelt is one of Obama's economic advisers. Immelt has ultimate authority over the decision to pay Keith Obermann $7.4 million a year to bash Obama's critics. You call that independent? You call that presenting both sides of the issue, when you say MSNBC is independent yet fail to mention the above connections?
And Ailes? He's run by the Bushes? What proof? Any money ties, like NBC has to GE and GE has to the WH? ($74 Billion!) Maybe Ailes is run by the Bushes, but you fail to show any connection, like the connection MSNBC has to the WH.
Posted by: david | October 22, 2009 at 12:06 PM
I thought the Buddha's last words were "Decay is inherant in all corporate things." And according to one of the gazillion sutra's this was shortly after he accepted the piece of meat from the peasant to eat, even though he knew eating it would kill him, yet still he thanked the peasant as he knew this would free him from the cycle of rebirth. At least that's what I remember from some old college Buddhism class...but I thinkl I also remember my prof saying there were 23 different schools of Buddhism within 20 years of the Buddha's death. Karma Neh?
Posted by: daddy | October 23, 2009 at 05:06 AM
I used to respect Kaus, but no longer. He's just another Obamabot who hates anyone to the right of Dede Scozzafava.
Posted by: CatoRenasci | October 23, 2009 at 06:58 AM
The McCain-Bush de facto open borders approach was favored by Big Business Conservatives ..
I'm not a fan of this habit of describing everybody in the GOP as some sort of conservative. We've got big government conservatives, small government conservatives, small business conservatives, big business conservatives, theo cons, social cons, libertarian conservatives, and a dozen more. Is it so hard to accept that many of these people are not really "conservative" in any sense?
Posted by: SteveM | October 23, 2009 at 08:05 AM
My version of the stamp of approval.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy | October 23, 2009 at 05:22 PM