Conservative media fearmonger that Fox News is part of White House "enemies list"
Following White House criticism of Fox News for its ideological slant, conservative media figures are again fearmongering that the White House has an "enemies list," and that Fox News is -- in the words of Glenn Beck -- "another enemy" that "warmongers" in the Obama administration would fight with "missiles pointed right at Fox." Sean Hannity claimed the White House is "promising retribution," and conservative radio host Mark Levin said, "[L]et me be clear -- there is an enemies list, a political hit list that this administration has. Just as Castro did, and Chavez and Stalin."
Conservatives claim Fox News is on a White House "enemies list," suggest "retribution," "assault"
Glenn Beck: There are missiles "pointed right at Fox." On his Fox News show, Beck stated, "What a bunch of warmongers we have" in the White House, and that the United States is "fighting Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and now, these people have taken on another enemy -- Fox News." After purporting to point out Fox News' location on a map of Manhattan to indicate "where the enemy is" and saying there are "missiles pointed right at Fox," Beck stated: "[T]here was that enemy list with Nixon, but I think the enemy list -- I believe that whole thing, that was just who's not coming to state dinners. Could be wrong. I don't think that they've used White House resources, your tax dollars, to target the media before." Beck then claimed that "free speech [is] under attack," and that he planned to show viewers "how this administration is consolidating power, and how your right to speak out and your right to hear, simply opposing voices, people who are asking legitimate questions, are all under assault." [Glenn Beck, 10/12/09]
Sean Hannity: "[Y]ou'd think they would have ... a little bit more in terms of their priorities rather than attacking a news organization and creating an enemies list." On his Fox News show, Hannity said to Fox News contributor Mark Steyn, "What do you make of Anita Dunn in the propaganda office, in the White House attacking the Fox News Channel? You know, I would think that, you know, with unemployment at 9.8 percent, a general asking for 40,000 troops, and you know, a lot of problems this country has, you'd think they would have, you know, a little bit more in terms of their priorities rather than attacking a news organization and creating an enemies list." [Hannity, 10/12/09]
Hannity: "The White House declared war on the Fox News Channel." On his Fox News show, Hannity claimed that "the White House declared war on the Fox News Channel" and suggested it placed Fox News on an "enemies list" along with PricewaterhouseCoopers for its "flawed" analysis of the Senate Finance Committee health care bill. After Fox News contributor Dana Perino contended that "hey, this is politics," Hannity said: "What you're saying is that if you disagree with this White House, that they have an enemies list, that they're promising retribution," and suggested Perino would be "immediately on the enemies list" because she appeared on Fox News. Later in his show, after bringing up the White House's purported "payback" for the health care report, Hannity said: "That sounds like an enemies list. I thought -- I thought liberals were against enemies lists. Do you want a Republican administration going after NBC? Targeting them? Do you want an administration going after MoveOn.org or any -- or you or anybody else by saying, quote, 'There may be some retribution, because you speak out against them?' " [Hannity, 10/13/09]
Bill O'Reilly compared situation to Nixon enemies list. On Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly said that "the White House is not happy with Fox News because it believes it favors, the White House believes, it favors the Republican Party. There is scant, s-c-a-n-t evidence to support that, but the White House made a big deal out of it anyway." He subsequently said to Fox News contributor Monica Crowley, "Now you worked for Richard Nixon," adding, "And he had a Nixon enemies list. The difference was the White House pretty upfront about this. I mean, they're not secret. They don't like us. And Nixon -- that enemies list when he was in the White House was kind of private, right?" Crowley replied that the "lesson" for Obama was that Nixon's list "backfire[d]" and, "When you try to isolate a certain news organization, and say that's it, we're going to freeze them out, we're tossing them off the press plane, not just on a temporary basis for a week or two as a punishment because he didn't like a story or certain coverage. But for a long, protracted period of time like Obama's doing to Fox News in the last year." [The O'Reilly Factor, 10/13/09]
Mark Levin: White House has an "enemies list," "just as Castro did, and Chavez and Stalin." On his show, conservative radio host Mark Levin said: "The White House has made it clear that Fox News is on the enemies list -- and so let me be clear -- there is an enemies list, a political hit list that this administration has. Just as Castro did, and Chavez and Stalin. Oh, Mark, and Nixon -- well, maybe so, and the media used to hate Nixon. But have you heard a single, liberal media outlet object to this? No, and you won't. Have you heard a single so-called civil liberties group object to this? No, and you won't. This administration is at war politically with its opponents, and it seeks to silence them and defund them and destroy them. That's what's going on. When he talks about redistributing wealth, Obama doesn't just mean economic wealth, he means giving power and rights to his allies and denying them to his adversaries. This is a real battle for liberty."
Hotair.com: "Being number one on the White House enemies list must be worth millions in free publicity." Discussing the contention between the White House and Fox News on the conservative blog Hotair.com, blogger Allahpundit wrote: "Exit question: Did Roger Ailes slip [White House adviser David] Axelrod a briefcase full of money or something at that tete-a-tete last month in return for his promise to keep demagoging FNC? Being number one on the White House enemies list must be worth millions in free publicity."
Conservative media have previously touted "enemies list" conspiracy theory
Conservative media previously claimed email recipients may be on WH "enemies list." Conservative media figures previously baselessly suggested that people who reportedly claimed to have received unsolicited email from Axelrod may have been added to a White House "enemies list" after emails they sent that were critical of the Obama administration were purportedly forwarded to flag@whitehouse.gov. These media figures, such as Rush Limbaugh, Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade, and Fox News' Bill Sammon, failed to provide any credible evidence in support of this conspiracy theory.
Never mind.
I can't stand these paranoid, whining little sissy hypocrites. They think the rest of the world is as petty and vindictive as them, so they assume we would go to the extremes that they actually have in the past.
Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity and every Republican who listens to them, truly suck at life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not ME, but most...
Exactly. Unless of course, Fox is going to add to that enemies list; Nickelodeon, ESPN, DIY, HGTV, The Cartoon Network, Style Channel,SciFi,Disney Kids, The Game Show Network, and many others.
Obama has not, as far as I know, done exclusive interviews on any of these stations. The Fox Fans may point out the distinction that Obama didn't turn down requests from any of these, but I'd say that all that shows is that these other channels are a bit more self-aware and grounded in reality than Fox. They understand they're not legitimate news networks.
We've saw with the ACORN videos that they failed to vet those tapes, and then released them piecemeal to exploit their ratings value, and the videographers wouldn't appear anyplace but FoxNews for the longest time.
This looks like a classic case of projection to me. FoxNews has an enemies list, and so they accuse others of doing the same thing they're doing. But as we know, they're the ones exhibiting disreputable journalism.
Fox News: Socialist Obama is like Hitler?
White House: Fox News is opinion journalism
Fox News: Why are you so mean, White House?
Your text to link here...
THAT'S RIGHT - I SAID IT. NOW, GET OFF MY COMPUTER, YOU DOPE!!!!
(My best paraphrase of Levin's screech.)
Conservatives really revel in victim status.
I think it is a genius idea to agree with Fox News when they call themselves the opposition. Portray them as the opposition. Portray them as the Republican party.
Fox News has no good name. They are watched by the "true believers" or dittoheads and those are the only people who take them at all seriously. It has been proven there are not enough of them to even sway a Republican primary, nonetheless a countrywide election. The rest of us just shake our heads in disgust at how far the Republican party has fallen. If you still don't think it's a good idea poltically, take a look around this site. Who would you rather have as your opposition - you, Dex, etc. or stark, fakeliberal, etc.? It is an easy choice. What I cannot believe is that the Republican party continues to allow themselves to be marginalized along with Fox News.
I can't stand these Republican hypocrites.
The other option is for them to act like FOX is legitimate, and the benefits of that aren't readily apparent. Do you think that they should do that, just because FOX is going to have a fit otherwise?
Any "punishment" the WH dishes out to Fox for being partisan, which I don't dispute at all, by not granting interviews, which as I said they have in the past, only come across as weak, scared and reluctant to take on hostile or even unfair interviews. As I said, if the lies are so blatantly obvious and easily refuted, then appearing on shows to shoot them down should not be difficult. And please don't give me the excuses that their mikes will be cut or their interviews edited. That is just an excuse.
The WH needn't get into a tit for tat with Fox. They won't win because then it's Fox that is controlling the message, exactly what they want. Any communications director that advises the Obama administration to after them should be fired. They are just playing into Fox's wheelhouse, anyone can see that. As I said, leave it to MMfA and other media outlets, that is where this should be fought.
But you don't think refusing to mention them will be "seen" in the same way? I'd say it's better to not go on a propaganda network, and take the occasional opportunity to mention, clearly, why.
The Fox talkers can always find a way to play the victim, I think you're underestimating their shamelessness.
Your WH > "Fox is a partisan opinion journalism, blah,blah,blah....." Weak, reluctant, scared, excuses, dodging.
I prefer the first option, you like the second. A simple disagreement.
Right-on, please don't attempt to explain your position any further. It's all just excuses.
Hey, that's fun!
Wow, that is a lot easier than making sense.
Right ON, you are "Right OFF your rocker.
To use one of YOUR tactics, you are, as Olbermann has said of Limbaugh, a "Big bag full of mashed-up jackass."
Fighting idiocy wherever I find it,
Byte Man
"So let me get this straight. Democrats should go on FOX because FOX can spin things as they like. So if they do go on, then they can never decide to do something differently because they've already proven that FOX is legitimate?"
It's really not that complicated, and it was a direct response to what you wrote.
It's really not that complicated of a question. First question requires Yes or No. Second requires a simple explanation.
That is what Fox is and will say, then come on and defend yourself. They won't have to defend their lies because Obama won't go on there to confront them. Just public vague declarations doesn't cut it.
I'm not sure where the dichotomy of "vague declarations" vs. "Obama personally going on FOX" comes from.
Obama does not have to answer to Fox News. He can point and laugh at them. Like the rest of us do.
And your constant references to them being legitimate or Obama refusing to appear on Fox. I have heard neither of these things from the White House. They are not a legitimate news organization. They are, however, the opposition. The opposition should be treated as such. Get it?
Again, where does this assumption of vagueness come from? Who said that? They can provide specifics as to why FOX is not legitimate.
I'm not seeing how going on there is supposed to play out anyway. If he has conditions about being live, then as I said, he'll be portrayed as questioning FOX's integrity. Playing the victim, as you said. So why wouldn't they just forget about it and then blame Obama for the failed attempt at an interview? Why is that spin any less persuasive than what they're doing right now?
Exactly. Perfect example of RightOn arguing from his emotions rather than a place of intellectual debate. Just plain childish and petty.
What it got the Democrats? It got them the White House and majorities in both houses. This is somehow playing into the Republican's hands? No, it's playing into Fox's hands? Perhaps. It is actually using Fox News to bring down the Republicans. Pretty simple.
If I didn't think before that liberals were victims of their own emotion, you certainly made me believe it now. Wow.
Have you now switched from "Obama is not spending enough time and energy on Fox" to "Obama is spending too much time and energy on Fox" ?
I love it when you get carried away by your emotions to the point you can't even remember what you were arguing.
Your emotions are probably getting you confused.
That is absolutely what is happening and it is brilliant politics. And it is working. Republicans are becoming the fringe. And they have Limbaugh and Fox News to thank for it. No reason for you to get so emotional and work yourself up into a lather. Obama has been using the Republicans' own nonsense against them for a few years now. You'd think you guys would be used to it by now.
So next time you throw out the emotional angle, be sure you understand it.
"So you are happy with the POTUS spending energy trying to sink a publicly owned media enterprise in this country?" - RightOn
OK. See the difference there? I said Obama was doing his best to sink the Republicans' good name along with Fox's. And you somehow tried to make that become Obama is trying to sink (or destroy) Fox. Do you see how your emotions clearly got the better of you in that exchange and made you come off as petty and silly? If not, then your emotions are still getting the better of you.
Punishment? The White House does not wish to punish Fox News. Fox News has shown itself to be a wonderful thing for the Democrats and a disaster for the Republican party. Fox News has been marginalized and they continue to revel in it as long as it brings them ratings. This has been proven for at least 2 election cycles and continues to be. Would Obama have such high approval ratings if there were actually a significant number of Americans who believed he was a socialist/fascist/communist czar? Of course not.
The moderate adults in this country stopped taking Fox seriously as a news outlet years ago. Now Obama is simply doing his best to sink the Republicans good name along with Fox's. It is pretty simple actually and pretty basic politics. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how the Republican party seems so happy to align themselves with Rush and Fox. They have no credibility with the unbiased elecorate. Of course the White House wins when their opposition is Fox News. This is obvious and should not need to be explained again. The election proved it. This is not about Fox News - this is about using Fox News against the Republicans. And it is a brilliant idea.
Really? Do you have some documentation or inside information that is what Obama is doing? That with all on his plate that he is also trying to sink the Republicans and Fox, is that actually the claim that you are making. Because if what you say is true, and I don't believe it is, then I'd would rather have my president working on important issues that affect our lives instead of spending one teensy moment trying to sink a cable news network that he doesn't like.
But if you stand by what you said.
It seems hard to believe that a spokesperson pointing out that FOX is a political operation is going to make the administration run late on any policy issue. Besides, refusing to spend time appearing on FOX opens up more time in his schedule, so it's a net gain.
Take a breather.
Apparently not, because the emotion of sticking it to Fox outweighs any ramifications, that is what I am seeing. Sorry.
[url=Obama after Fox, bad idea]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/white-houses-fox-news-war_n_319587.html[/url]
Is there any explanation as to what the ramifications are supposed to be, outside of making people who already won't support Obama feel isolated? Are moderates supposed to give a damn, or what?
I don't understand why dealing with idiots should be nearly as hard as dealing with principled opposition where real battles occur. Look, it would be far easier for me to deal with someone who acts like a jacka$$ on these boards and do nothing but snipe because I could shoot them down with ease - rather than argue with you who is intelligent. I choose not to go after the idiots and mostly ignore them, Obama should do the same.
You would think Reid is a peripheral character in the Senate rather than the leader. Compare his incessant need to get over 60 votes for every bill when compared to Bill Frist. Do you think Frist would be waiting around for over 60 votes for a bill that Bush was in favor of? Of course not. He would be daring people to vote against cloture. He would have gotten a bill with a public option passed already.
You don't need to convince me of the left's constant need to please people who despise them. That's where you gotta give Pelosi credit. She has shown herself to be a leader for her party - just as the right has always done.
Did you read and comprehend what I wrote? Obama is not trying to "sink" Fox News. Fox News is doing him a great service. He is using Fox News against the Republicans.
Fox News, as a news channel, is a joke to be laughed at. However, the Republican party is the oppostion to be dealt with and beaten. If you can make them become one in the same, then the Republicans become something to laugh at. Get it now? This is really not that complicated. It is politics at its best.
The Republicans used Fox News for years at arms length to make baseless attacks against Democrats. Now, by Fox News and the Republican party becoming the same thing, the Republicans actually have to answer for the craziness they support and allow to go unchecked on Fox News each and every night. Time to pay the piper.
"I'd would rather have my president working on important issues that affect our lives instead of spending one teensy moment trying to sink a cable news network that he doesn't like" - RightOn
No, you wouldn't. That is what he is doing. He is dismissing them as the opposition. You would have him go on and debate Beck and O'Reilly. Have you even read your own posts. Would you like me to quote them?
I apologize for the "sink" comment, I misunderstood.
But Fox News and Limbaugh are big names. And, to the general public, they are not good names. Now, if Obama can tie the Republican party to Fox News in the minds of voters it is a win for the Democrats - in my opinion.
I think it has been proven that Limbaugh and Fox News have lost any electoral sway they may have once possessed. As their ratings have gotten stronger and more loyal they have also become altogether crazier. Tune into Fox News any night. Listen to Glenn Beck with his crazy-a$$ chalkboard. Average Americans that stop by this channel are saying "Is this a joke? Who believes this crap? What the-?". This is what Obama wants the voters to think of when they think of Republicans.
It will probably bring higher ratings from Fox News's crazy niche market. Good. Allow them to become the fringe and take the Republicans (his opposition) with him. This is a good play for Obama. And he cannot lose. What's the worst that can happen - Fox News goes after him? I think that card has already been played.
If you're new here, it may take a day or two for your posts to show up. Take the tinfoil hat off,and climb down offa that cross, it's standard procedure for everybody, you can lower the Fascism Alert Flag.
Not that that was the only think wrong with your post, I just thought that might be the easiest to help you with. Comparing Obama's opinion of Fox with Nixon's paranoid behavior, and using the word "legitimate" to describe Fox News, tells the rational person that you may be pretty far gone.
But he hasn't been thin-skinned to the criticism, and FoxNews hasn't been doling out legitimate criticism!
MMFA doesn't screen any legit criticism either! You're full of it.
And we do believe in freedom of the news media. But that doesn't mean that they're free to lie and distort without someone calling them on those problematic comments.
This is a comment strawman argument from those on the right, Rush Limbaugh, et al.
Please feel free to show examples. When you make these, what seem to be serious, accusations at least bring some ammo. Otherwise, you just sound like a wingnut.
"The fact that MM screens legitimate comments by subscribers in a way to avoid criticism is pathetic." - quidpro
Once again, your persistent victim mentality is showing. All of us had our posts screened by MM. Also, I still have some that hit the censor from time to time without any idea what it was I wrote that triggered it. The difference: I don't always assume the whole world is out to get me because a few times I had to re-post something on a media watchdog website. Get over yourself.
"I guess this is probably how fascism really begins. If you would really believe in free speech it would not make you seem like you were up to no good. I have less faith in this administration as time goes on. Now you can go and use the race card if you like. It only works to prove Beck and Hannity correct. MM is obviously more biased then those whom you criticize. If only you could pretend to really believe in freedom of the news media." - quidpro
There you are. I was wondering how long it would take you to get there. Obama is a fascist because Beck and Hannity told me so. Is this your example of "close analysis"? Pathetic. Please provde an example of Obama's fascism. You can even use an example that Beck or Hannity told you to believe as long as you can prove it is true. Try not to wet your pants while you think about.
Be afraid....be very afraid. My goodness, when did the far-right become such a bunch of crybaby sissies? Have they always been this bad and I just failed to notice?