DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Left-Wingers At It Again - Want to shutdown Fox News

Quote:

---

July 21, 2010
Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News


July 21, 2010
Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for National Public Radio, that isn’t what you’d do at all.

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”

Spitz’s hatred for Limbaugh seems intemperate, even imbalanced. On Journolist, where conservatives are regarded not as opponents but as enemies, it barely raised an eyebrow.

In the summer of 2009, agitated citizens from across the country flocked to town hall meetings to berate lawmakers who had declared support for President Obama’s health care bill. For most people, the protests seemed like an exercise in participatory democracy, rowdy as some of them became.

On Journolist, the question was whether the protestors were garden-variety fascists or actual Nazis.

“You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts?” asked Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer. “Esp. Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s.”

Richard Yeselson, a researcher for an organized labor group who also writes for liberal magazines, agreed. “They want a deficit driven militarist/heterosexist/herrenvolk state,” Yeselson wrote. “This is core of the Bush/Cheney base transmorgrified into an even more explicitly racialized/anti-cosmopolitan constituency. Why? Um, because the president is a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. But it’s all the same old nuts in the same old bins with some new labels: the gun nuts, the anti tax nuts, the religious nuts, the homophobes, the anti-feminists, the anti-abortion lunatics, the racist/confederate crackpots, the anti-immigration whackos (who feel Bush betrayed them) the pathological government haters (which subsumes some of the othercategories, like the gun nuts and the anti-tax nuts).”

“I’m not saying these guys are capital F-fascists,” added blogger Lindsay Beyerstein, “but they don’t want limited government. Their desired end looks more like a corporate state than a rugged individualist paradise. The rank and file wants a state that will reach into the intimate of citizens when it comes to sex, reproductive freedom, censorship, and rampant incarceration in the name of law and order.”

On Journolist, there was rarely such thing as an honorable political disagreement between the left and right, though there were many disagreements on the left. In the view of many who’ve posted to the list-serv, conservatives aren’t simply wrong, they are evil. And while journalists are trained never to presume motive, Journolist members tend to assume that the other side is acting out of the darkest and most dishonorable motives.

When the writer Victor Davis Hanson wrote an article about immigration for National Review, for example, blogger Ed Kilgore didn’t even bother to grapple with Hanson’s arguments. Instead Kilgore dismissed Hanson’s piece out of hand as “the kind of Old White Guy cultural reaction that is at the heart of the Tea Party Movement. It’s very close in spirit to the classic 1970s racist tome, The Camp of the Saints, where White Guys struggle to make up their minds whether to go out and murder brown people or just give up.”

The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down.

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

And so a debate ensued. Time’s Scherer, who had seemed to express support for increased regulation of Fox, suddenly appeared to have qualms: “Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?”

But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

Scherer seemed alarmed. “So we would have press briefings in which only media organizations that are deemed by the briefer to be acceptable are invited to attend?”

John Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, came down on Zasloff’s side, the side of censorship. “Pre-Fox,” he wrote, “I’d say Scherer’s questions made sense as a question of principle. Now it is only tactical.”

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/21/liberal-journalists-suggest-government-shut-down-fox-news/2/

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/21/journolisters-debate-endorse-govt-control-of-fox-news/

---

Quote:

---

media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework

---

Quote:

---

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “I hate to open this can of worms,” he wrote, “but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?”

---

This is an awful and misleading headline.

Quote:

---

Oh well... a few hate mongers show up some tea party functions and that must be what the whole group is about right?

So some liberal media types who hate Limbaugh and all things conservative go on a blog and spout a bunch of hate, they must represent the mainstream media too right?

This is what the discourse has become... the media used to moderate the debate, now the media has become the debate... and that is a big reason we are where we are...

---

Quote:

---

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

---

Quote:

---

I don't even know what to say to this..... how does anything even get done with the mass amount of finger pointing and never ending right wing/left wing debates?

America, you've got some great people, beautiful places and are home to the best gaddamn sports franchise in the world. But man, your political scene is MESSED.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I don't even know what to say to this..... how does anything even get done with the mass amount of finger pointing and never ending right wing/left wing debates?

America, you've got some great people, beautiful places and are home to the best gaddamn sports franchise in the world. But man, your political scene is MESSED.

---

You should have waited and made this your 1000th post.

---

I've never been one for patience...

Quote:

---

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

more on this here



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/docume.../#ixzz0uKhvwdu4


Link

---

Quote:

---

There are very few true journalists.

---

There are???

Can you nanme some for me???? LOL

Quote:

---

They should.

---

Don't worry, I'll be paying for your healthcare soon enough. Fox can't stop it.

Quote:

---

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

---

Quote:

---

Although, this thing with Shirley Sharood was really a black eye for Fox News IMO.. I mean, a little research would have proven that they were given bad info.., But the complete story wouldn't have fit thier agenda..

---

Quote:

---

FOX News plays into the fears of right-wingers. Even making up stories as in the recent case of Shirley Sherrod. A video of her was leaked that was edited to make her seem like a racist. When, in fact, she was talking about learning experiences.

---

Quote:

---

However, it's important to note that the Fox News Channel did not make any mention of this story yesterday on the air until AFTER Shirley Sherrod had already lost her job AFTER Secretary Vilsack had already drawn his own conclusions — conclusions that the president apparently agreed with.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,597324,00.html

---

Quote:

---

Although, this thing with Shirley Sharood was really a black eye for Fox News IMO.. I mean, a little research would have proven that they were given bad info.., But the complete story wouldn't have fit thier agenda..

---

Quote:

---

However, it's important to note that the Fox News Channel did not make any mention of this story yesterday on the air until AFTER Shirley Sherrod had already lost her job AFTER Secretary Vilsack had already drawn his own conclusions — conclusions that the president apparently agreed with.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,597324,00.html

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Although, this thing with Shirley Sharood was really a black eye for Fox News IMO.. I mean, a little research would have proven that they were given bad info.., But the complete story wouldn't have fit thier agenda..

---

Kinda like Dan Rather in regards to President Bush?

---

Quote:

---

Well, considering that we have a Socialist Police Department, Fire Department, etc...

I say those that are so avid against Socialism, like Limbaugh, Beck, etc...

They should see how "nice" it would be to have a Capitalist one. A Police and Fire Department that won't help you unless you pay them first.

---

Quote:

---

Also, in a Capitalist society where one is out for themselves. Why help somebody? You'll just be considered a Marxist.

"Free" is just another word for Communism, isn't that right Limbaugh, Beck, McCarthy?

---

See this is where liberals are completely wrong... You help somebody because its the right thing to do.. that's what most people on the left and the right choose to do.. they help people, they give of their own time and talents to help others, that's what has made this country great... the difference lies in which group supports a governments ability to MAKE you help other people... that is what makes you socialist, marxist, pick the term du jour.

Quote:

---

So I will have to ask....

WHAT IS YOUR POINT??????

---

Quote:

---

FOX News on Sherrod

also another thing from a Republican

Michelle Bachman wants McCarthyist Witchhunt

---

A McCarthy style witch hunt... She wants the NEWS MEDIA to do an expose on the beliefs of congressmen so the people can decide which ones they consider pro America and which ones are anti-America.. Talk about your misleading titles... Yea that's just like McCarthy in a not even close sort of way...

As for the Fox clip, I couldn't watch the whole 9 minutes, in the first couple minutes I saw a very civil panel discussion where two people defending her were given a chance to speak and Hannity (who I generally am not a big fan of) was asking rather straightforward questions.. so far, I see nothing wrong with it.. I also see that it occurred AFTER she was fired.. AFTER... AFTER... AFTER... yet the title is about ruining her life.. she WAS ALREADY FIRED.. by the Ag dept and the President so if you want to see who "ruined her life" look at them. I'll bet if that guy from Alabama was running the agriculture department he wouldn't have fired her. He would have stood up for her until he had all of the info because he's not a freakin coward... I know he would.

Quote:

---

A McCarthy style witch hunt... She wants the NEWS MEDIA to do an expose on the beliefs of congressmen so the people can decide which ones they consider pro America and which ones are anti-America.. Talk about your misleading titles... Yea that's just like McCarthy in a not even close sort of way...

---

Quote:

---

On FAUX Obama is continually paired with "antichrist","dictator","Hitler" etc...

FAUX inspires violence against Obama.

---

Quote:

---

July 21, 2010 - Obama Approval Drops To Lowest Point Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Independent Voters Turn On President Since Honeymoon

Word format

A year after President Barack Obama's political honeymoon ended, his job approval rating has dropped to a negative 44 - 48 percent, his worst net score ever, and American voters say by a narrow 39 - 36 percent margin that they would vote for an unnamed Republican rather than President Obama in 2012, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 48 - 43 percent approval for Obama in a May 26 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University and a 57 - 33 percent approval last July, just before the political firestorm created by opposition to his health care plan galvanized political opponents and turned independent voters against him.

In this latest survey of more than 2,000 voters, independent voters disapprove of Obama 52 - 38 percent and say 37 - 27 percent they would vote for a Republican contender in 2012.

American voters also say 48 - 40 percent Obama does not deserve reelection in 2012.

Anti-incumbent sentiment slams both parties as voters disapprove 59 - 31 percent of the job Democrats are doing, and disapprove 59 - 29 percent of Republicans in Congress. But voters say 43 - 38 percent they would vote for a Republican in a generic Congressional race.

American voters say 42 - 32 percent that Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, similar to the 43 - 30 percent who felt that way in January of 2010.

"It was a year ago, during the summer of 2009 that America's love affair with President Barack Obama began to wane. In July of 2009, the President had a 57 - 33 percent approval rating. Today, his support among Democrats remains strong, but the disillusionment among independent voters, who dropped from 52 - 37 percent approval to 52 - 38 percent disapproval in the last 12 months, is what leads to his weakness overall when voters start thinking about 2012," said Peter A. Brown., assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"In politics a month is a lifetime and we have 28 months until November of 2012. But politicians with re-elect numbers at 40 percent bear watching," Brown added.

American voters like Obama more than Sarah Palin, giving him a 49 - 45 percent favorability, while she gets a negative 35 - 49 percent.

Michelle Obama does much better, with a 55 - 19 percent favorability.

Twelve percent of voters say they are more likely to support a candidate for office, if Obama campaigns for the candidate, compared to 16 percent if Palin campaigns.

The country would be better off if John McCain had won the 2008 election, 37 percent of voters say, while 35 percent say the U.S. would be worse off. This compares to 37 - 35 percent who thought in January the U.S. would be worse off under McCain.

Asked to describe their feelings toward the President, 17 percent say they admire him; 33 percent are satisfied; 33 percent are dissatisfied and 15 percent are angry with him.

"The Republican tilt of the electorate little more than 100 days before the 2010 election is evident, but not overwhelming. Republicans hold a 43 - 38 percent lead on the 'generic ballot,' compared to a 42 - 34 percent Democratic lead in July 2009," said Brown. "What a difference a year makes."

Voter approval of the President's handling of some of the nation's problems shows:

* Disapprove 56 - 39 percent of his handling of the economy;
* Disapprove 46 - 43 percent of his handling of foreign policy;
* Disapprove 51 - 41 percent of his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill;
* Disapprove 58 - 30 percent of his handling of illegal immigration;
* Approve 46 - 34 percent of his nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.

"The massive disapproval of his handling of illegal immigration stems from voter opposition to his decision to have the government ask the federal courts to throw out the Arizona law. They say 60 - 28 percent the lawsuit is a bad idea," said Brown.

Support for the war in Afghanistan hit a new low with 48 percent saying it was the right thing to do and 43 percent saying America should not be involved. That's not much different from May's 49 - 42 percent support, but markedly down from 56 - 36 percent in April.

From July 13 - 19, Quinnipiac University surveyed 2,181 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 2.1 percentage points.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio and the nation as a public service and for research. For more data or RSS feed- http://www.quinnipiac.edu/polling.xml, call (203) 582-5201, or follow us on Twitter.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1478&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0

---

Of course not..how ever could a terrible approval rate, one that had 9 -point swing to the bad in about two months.have anything to do with that.

Fox News has nothing to do with people waking up and finding an empty suit...

Quote:

---

As I understand what she was saying, she was saying that she would love for the media to do an expose on their stances and opinions and let YOU decide which ones are anti-American..

And as a side note, she was saying she'd love to see it done .. she was in no way using her position as congressperson to call for one ..

---

Quote:

---

Charlie

my goodness do you even know what that committee was even for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy

What Joe McCarthy did wasn't right, however what your comparing it to is absurd. My dad (who is still living) served in the military during the 50's when McCarthy was doing this nonsense...you have no freaking clue what you are even talking about.

This lady is NOT demanding that Congressmen be drug into hearings in front a a Congressional Judicial Panel and forced to answer questions based on accusations against them that they are Communist or whatever with the result of the outcome being espionage or treason charges against them.

asking them about their positions on things in an open-ended manner without any threats of legal action or being punished is not a witch hunt..

McCarthy was trying to have men charged and jailed for espionage and treason which is much much different.

don't candidates already talk about their platform when campaigning? are they not supposed to state their positions?

which hunt...McCarthy...you have got to be kidding me!

---

Quote:

---

Man, silly me, here I thought she was saying that a media outlet should investigate people and expose them. How silly of me.

---

Quote:

---

left wingers, right wingers..

no love for the centermen or the goalies?

---

FTW!!!!