Neither the White House nor the “old media” could allow President Obama to appear on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. Given the closeness of the “old media” with the Obama administration I wouldn’t doubt that the strategy to avoid Wallace and Fox was a coordinated one. In fact, the old media could not have feigned integrity if Obama had been interviewed by Chris Wallace of Fox.
Unfortunately for Fox, they fell into the trap set by Obama and his old media sycophants. For a week now, Fox commentators and hosts have been obsessed with the fact that Obama didn’t appear on Fox News Sunday. They have incessantly pointed out how the White House was “punishing” Fox, with Wallace’s quote getting the most play: the Obama White House is the … “biggest bunch of cry babies that I have dealt with in my thirty years in Washington.” On O’Reilly last night, Dana Perino, the former Bush press secretary, now a Fox News contributor, attempts to explain the differences in press relations between the Bush White House and Obama’s. All of this is just noise and the Obama White House and the other media know that Fox missed the point.
Obama won and the old media won. Obama could not appear on CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS and also appear on Fox. It was not an option. If he had appeared on Fox, it would have destroyed any narrative the Obama organization was attempting to create. If Obama had appeared on Fox, the Obama people knew the narrative would be the difference in the depth of the questions asked by Chris Wallace on Fox as compared to those asked by the other Sunday morning hosts.
Interestingly though, if Hannity were asking the questions instead of Walllace, Obama would have been able to control the narrative to make Fox look bad. The story would have been Hannity’s edge and negativity. It would have been a contest, not an interview. Instead, with the moderate moderator Wallace, a totally different outcome would have resulted, one that neither Obama nor the old media could have withstood.
Wallace has an establishment pedigree and strong DC reputation. He has a style he learned from his father and he is not pegged with any specific animosity or dislike of the Obama administration. He is considered fair and civil, and conducts himself in a gentlemanly and respectful manner. Consequently, if Obama had interviewed on Fox News Sunday hosted by Chris Wallace, Obama would have been asked factually-oriented follow-up questions, something the other networks refused to do. The reality of Wallace’s interview would have poked major holes in the Obama sermon and, therefore, his raison d’être.
The media blitz on Sunday night and Monday would not have been George Stephanapoulas’ dictionary question and Obama’s disingenuous comment about his lack of knowledge of ACORN. Instead, the narrative would have been Obama’s failure to parry Wallace’s fair but probing follow-up questions. Furthermore, the press bias would have been so obvious in side-by-side comparisons of the four other media outlets with Fox and Wallace. Moreover, the old media passivity and, to some extent, worship, when compared to a straight interview on Fox, would have awoken another chunk of the American electorate to the old media phoniness. Among many, this side-by-side comparison would have accentuated the old media bias. To many still unaware of the bias, the debate would have been over. Media bias would be forever established in those still undecided about the media debate. There would be a realization, an uh-huh moment, one that continue the undermining of the credibility of the old-line, pro-Obama media for the rest of his term.
Think about it, Fox might have brought up the CBO’s Elmendorf when Obama stated that his plan would not raise health care costs. When Obama claimed that Republicans refuse to cooperate on important legislation, we might have heard about how cap and trade was killed by Senators Lincoln, Nelson, Dorgan and Conrad. Obama might have been asked about the pumps being shut off by environmentalists in the California fields, killing the crops, the soil and the jobs and, worst yet, he might be informed, along with the viewers, of the magnitude of the problem and a question as to why he has not gotten involved to save the jobs, crops, and businesses. We heard about none of this.
So, Obama won, and the old media won. The American people lost. But, Fox has yet to figure out exactly what went on.
Paul Porter is the host of ThePaul Porter Show on WFOY AM 1240 (3 – 5 pm) in St. Augustine, Florida, a show that hopes to Bring Back America One Day at a Time by educating the audience about the spiritual principles that underlie the US Constitution.
Technorati Tags: ACORN, bias, Chris Wallace, Fox, Fox News Sunday, Hannity, media, Obama, old media
The Democrat media machine, also known as the “Old Media” and no longer known as the “Mainstream Media”, has created the narrative of Racism in America, and that all opposition to President Obama is not principled. Rather, the opposition is a lingering “Jim Crow” racism – hateful, despicable and unprincipled. That is the mantra that is the media narrative. Now that the Obama policies have fallen dramatically in their acceptance by the broad middle of America, it must be racism because, surely, it cannot be the policies. Jimmy Carter chimed in two nights ago, aided by the politically-biased and corrupted General Electric subsidiary, the NBC news organization and the former Carter intern, Brian Williams of NBC News.
Remember, Jimmy Carter was the first former President to speak out against the foreign policy of a successor President in an overseas venue. What made that violation of established US protocol for former presidents shocking was that his criticism overseas was specifically directed at a US President who was administering not one, but two, wars. Such an egregious failure to uphold time-tested tradition concerning past presidents, in general, and criticizing the US in time of war overseas, earned Jimmy Carter the Nobel Peace Prize, a prize he coveted, like his neighbor’s wife, and one that had eluded him for any substantive performance in his own right. Remember, Jimmy, if you lust in the heart, it is the same as committing the act. Well, you lusted for Mr. Nobel and you committed a horrible act to satisfy your sinful desires.
As the former Carter Northeast Finance Director in 1975, the former budgeter of the general election campaign against Ford, the former Deputy Finance Chairman of the Democratic National Committee during the ’76 election, a White House consultant during the early months of the Carter Presidency who wrote the Cities in Schools program plan for national replication, and a Presidential Delegate to Guinea, Africa with Andrew Young, I was around long enough and close enough to see Jimmy Carter’s character flaws early. And I exited his administration early because those flaws were obvious to me and soon became obvious for all to see, earning him “worst President of the 20th Century.
Tuesday, President Carter reached a new low in what has always been his major flaws, a general lack of class and an all-powerful personal ambition that overrode whatever spiritual principles he says he lives by. I say “he says he lives by” because his spirituality has never been obvious to me. And I traveled frequently throughout the campaign and after with his mother, Miss Lillian, and his sister, Ruth. I was close, real close. During a softball game on the field in Plains, Georgia in 1975, I realized then and there that Jimmy Carter had no heart. I realize now that I was wrong. He must have had some heart then because he really has none now. He is, to quote Mr. Carter, “a disgrace to the human race.”
Now, those in America who do not want socialism, they know this is not about race. Even Rachel Maddow, who constantly says it is about race, knows it is not about race. On her program recently she played a montage of all of the “right-wing nuts” and “reactionary organizations” that confronted the same socialist agendas of Roosevelt, Truman, JFK, Carter and Clinton, and now Obama. Maddow says it is racist and then says “it has been the same for every democrat President.” So, which is it Rachel? The other guys were white – not racism.
Now, thanks to the media and Jimmy Carter, the racism charges are working to lower Obama’s ability to govern, causing the White House to deny the Carter charges. The White House recognized that Carter’s “racist” slur on top of the existing distrust caused by President Obama’s himself regarding health care and other policies are too much to overcome in the short term and maybe, if the racism anger stick, long-term, thus dooming his Presidency early. George Will summed up the distrust well in Newsweek this past week.
People used to trust government. Now, the middle class knows it only rewards the rich and the poor. The great middle is paying for subsidizing the rich’s mistakes – the bailouts of the Hamptons, the bankers, investment bankers, insurance magnates, and automobile upper crust while providing ACORN, Van Jones’ green jobs organization, and other pseudo-welfare organizations with tens of billions of taxpayer money that is being used to subvert the great middle class. The ACORN videos and executive bonuses highlight the subversion of taxpaying America.
Now, to be robbed and then called racist, that is the unkindest cut of all, as Bill Shakespeare would intone. And Americans, real Americans who believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, are fed up.
Paul Porter
Paul Porter is the host of ThePaul Porter Show on WFOY AM 1240 (3 – 5 pm) in St. Augustine, Florida, a show that hopes to Bring Back America One Day at a Time by educating the audience about the spiritual principles that underlie the US Constitution.
Technorati Tags: ACORN, Jimmy Carter, Rachel Maddow
Even the non partisan CBO admits we can’t continue the way we are. And for all the dems who will blame this spending somehow on Bush, Obama has spent more than Bush has already, and is now talking about asking for a second stimulis. Read the report below
http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=328
Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy. The following chart shows our projection of federal debt relative to GDP under the two scenarios we modeled.
——–
So what do you think we should do to fix this problem? Is raising taxes inevitable? Will choking our economy to fight global warming be the answer?
@ TrainingWheels:
"No problem. Just raise taxes on the rich.
If a person is making over $250,000 he can afford to chip in a bit more."
250k isn’t even a whole lot of money, especially in places like California, for a household, comfortable at best.
The new health bill does include a tax increase on suchfamilies.
They already pay 57% tax, what do you want 100%?
Trust me, if you start this witch hunt, you will be next once the rich are bled dry.
The problem is a complicated situation that can be summed up rather simply:
The government is spending more than they are taking in.
The only form of revenue the government has is tax dollars, so it is pretty obvious they have to come up with more money in taxes. It is inevitable. The only warning I have, is that they cannot tax the rich too much. There are many emerging economies that would be happy to take some of our wealthy investors — and we do not want to push those people out of America.
The other part is we have to cut government spending. UHC is pretty much the opposite of this… The government needs to cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security spending as it is out of control. Removing troops from overseas conflicts would save money and we need to cap welfare and unemployment benefits as well.
Americans need to become self sufficient again. As much as the federal government is a burden to some of us, we are a burden on the government looking for them to pay for and solve all of OUR problems. Now it is finally failing.
What 1868 change to the US Constitution made much of the bill of rights applicable to state governments as well as the federal government?
The 14th Amendment "incorporated" the Bill of Rights to apply to the States. Before the 14th Amend., the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal gov’t.
I am starting a local talk show, and I am interested to see what teens would like to see on a talk show. I am trying to make it fun, and yet powerful. I want to have two things happen:
Have it be funny and fun
Have guests to talk about strong issues.
And i am interested in hearing what you would like to see on TV? I am just brining things to the table for my first meeting with the producer.
I would like to see all the young, popular teen celebs, eg.
Robert Pattinson, cast of iCarly and other Family channel shows, comedians, etc. Nothing about health or diets or blah blah blah.
Lots of color! But like a really modern set, cool chairs (egg), bright, eye-catching colors that coincide nicely.
Random events, lots of talking, HUMOR, giveaway packages (unique, OOAK) and yeah, I would like to see lots of randomness and teen humor that would actually make me laugh.
The Democrat media machine, also known as the “Old Media” and no longer known as the “Mainstream Media”, have created the narrative of Racism in America, and that all opposition to President Obama is not principled based on substance, but instead is based on nothing more base and hateful than unprincipled racism. That is the mantra that is being pounded daily, hourly, and minute-by-minute now that the Obama policies have fallen dramatically in their acceptance by the broad middle of America.
Jimmy Carter chimed in last night, aided by the politically biased and corrupted General Electric subsidiary, the NBC news organization and the former Carter intern, Brian Williams of NBC News. Remember, Jimmy Carter was the first former President to speak out against the foreign policy of a successor President in an overseas venue. What made that violation of established US protocol for former presidents was that his criticism overseas was specifically directed at a US President who was administering not one, but two, wars. Such an egregious failure to uphold time-tested tradition concerning past presidents, in general, and criticizing the US in time of war overseas, earned Jimmy Carter the Nobel Peace Prize, a prize he coveted, like his neighbor’s wife, and one that had eluded him for any substantive performance in his own right. As a former White House consultant during the early months of the Carter Presidency, one who saw Carter’s character flaws early and then exited, I commented that former President Carter had reached a new low in what has always been his major flaw, a general lack of class and an all-powerful personal ambition that overrode whatever spiritual principles he says he lives by, though his spirituality is not obvious to even the most casual observer and, to the more interested observer, like myself, it never has existed. I can attest to that based on my experience with him on a softball field in Plains, Georgia in 1975 — he has no heart.
Now, the America who does not want socialism, they know this is not about race. Even Rachel Maddow, who constantly says it is about race, knows it is not about race as she played on her program recently a montage of all of the “right-wing nuts” and “reactionary organizations” that confronted the same socialist agendas of Roosevelt, Truman, JFK, Carter and Clinton, and now Obama. So, Maddow says it is racist and then says “it has been the same for every democrat President. So, which is it Rachel?
Now, the racism charges are working to lower Obama’s ability to govern even more than the mistrust he has garnered through his repeated distortions in his public utterances about what was actually in HR 3200, or what he called, though non-existent, his “health care plan.”
People used to trust government. Now, the middle class knows it only rewards the rich and the poor. The great middle is paying for subsidizing the rich’s mistakes in banking, insurance and automobiles while providing ACORN, Van Jones’ green jobs organization, and other pseudo-welfare organizations with tens of billions of taxpayer money that is being used to subvert the great middle class as evidenced in the ACORN videos being released over the past week.
Now, to be robbed and then called racist, that is the unkindest cut of all, as Bill Shakespeare would intone. And Americans, real Americans who believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, are fed up.
Paul Porter of the Paul Porter Show
Technorati Tags: ACORN, Carter, Democrat, media, middle class, Obama, Rachel Maddow, racism
How did the US Constitution expand upon the basic ideas about government that the colonists had developed up to the time of the Constitutional Convention?
Mayflower Compact, the Magna Carta, the Social Compact theories of JJ Rousseau. All of these ideas were seized upon to create a document that would elicit a guaranty to the people of a certain framework of government. Each state had a charter, compact or eventually constitution which specifically embodied not only a framework of government, but individual rights.
These were the things not guaranteed by any sovereign to commoners up to that point.
Up to that point, the peerage, or those who were in gentrified service to the crown, had some rights.
Under the concept of the social compact, the rise of constitutionalism; personal rights became paramount. The concepts of equality, as rough and bigoted as it was for its time, still was quite broader than what was available at the time.
I’m 16 and the idea of a radio talk show host came into my mind and I loved it. I’ve been researching on how to get to be a radio talk show host and how much i would get paid but I’m not having any luck. Help?
If you got a job at the radio station, you would be paid minimum wage (for your state) if you do not have any special education or qualifications.
I would look into getting a communications degree from a community college or state university.
I need to know when US Constitution was first drafted, how was it supposed to protect the interests of the states since the states gave up a significant part of their sovereignty?
Carolyn – yes but the Bill of Rights protects more the individual liberty. My question is since the states gave up a huge portion of their sovereignty because of some provisions of Constitution which would reflect the interests of states rather. What were those provisions?
The dates should be easily accessible in your textbook.
It’s true that they gave up part of their soverignty but many states wouldn’t ratify it without the Bill of Rights which guaranteed more protection than the actual Constitution. Plus, they realized that the Articles of Confederation did not give the federal government enough power so changes had to be made.
Are you asking what provisions of the Constitution actually took rights away from the states that they originally had in the Articles of Confederation?
I know that the Fairness Doctrine is supposed to force stations to air opposing views. A Libertarian is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. So a conservative show or a liberal show wouldn’t "balance" Libertarian views. As far as I know, there aren’t any talk shows that have a fiscally liberal and socially conservative host.
I listen to a Libertarian talk show in the mornings (Neal Boortz) and I was just wondering how the government would try to balance out those views.
There is no definitive answer to this. That is the biggest problem. What some may view as liberal others may view as conservative and vice versa.
First someone would have to define Liberal and Conservative, for their to be a balance. That simply can’t or won’t happen.
Liberal talk shows don’t work and the Senator from MI or wherever who is pushing for this happens to be married to the someone high on the food chain of the bankrupt "Air America"! LOL!!!
NO conflict there! Air America is proof that liberals viewpoints just don’t want to be heard. If people did want to hear them they wouldn’t go bankrupt.