20 Oct 09
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mcauliffe_on_white_houses_war_on_fox_news.html
Does anyone at the WH really think that people are going to say, "Well, gee, I'd love to watch Fox News, but the White House says it's biased and not really news, so I'll turn on Rachel Maddow instead??" Yikes!
The way you defeat Fox News, if at all, is by answering their claims and convincing people that they're wrong OR by ignoring them and getting out your message through your own communications, or one of your cable surrogates (like MSNBC). You could also try going on the station and being represented like Obama did on O'Reilly during the campaign (and brilliantly I might add).
Really, Dave, Rahm and Anita; this is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
20 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76Barack should treat Fox the same way I treat the loonies around here. Well, not exactly like I do. He should ignore them, but mocking Fox might come off as a bit elitist.
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mc is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76I hope the WH keeps it up. In fact I hope they ratchet up the rhetoric and start calling Fox racist and un-American for daring not to be wowed by Obama's personality cult. Fox's ratings will continue up, and Obama's will continue down. It's beautiful.
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mc ...[text shortened]... is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
20 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76The far left can't help themselves. Censorship is their middle name. In fact, they can't even stomach Rush owning a stupid football team. I suppose Obama could threaten them like he did the insurance companies to keep their mouths shut.
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mc is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by SleepyguyI think that a major problem for the Obama administration is that they're not used to hostile media. Most of the media couldn't stand Bush from the get-go; and so they were trained and experienced in the art of operating under a hostile media.
I hope the WH keeps it up. In fact I hope they ratchet up the rhetoric and start calling Fox racist and un-American for daring not to be wowed by Obama's personality cult. Fox's ratings will continue up, and Obama's will continue down. It's beautiful.
I'm sure the Hillary campaign (and what would have been the Hillary White House) would be just as adept.
Obama and his staff, on the other hand, are used to shills like Chris Mathews waxing poetic about how Obama's speeches give them chills and make them cry and shills like Keith Olbermann claiming Hillary advocated Obama's assassination just because she made a perfectly legitimate point about Bobby Kennedy's campaign.
You can see in that third link I posted how much smoother Terry Mcauliffe is at handling Fox news than David Axelord and Rahm Emanuel are. Of course, Mcauliffe worked for Hillary, so he's used to battling a hostile media.
Maybe the Obama administration should hire some Hillary and/or Bush PR people to handle the hostile media elements. Either that, or the President should do it himself; he's a lot better at it than his staff members are.
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76i thought Mathews said he got a thrill up his leg.
Obama and his staff, on the other hand, are used to shills like Chris Mathews waxing poetic about how Obama's speeches give them chills and make them cry ...
You can see in that third link I posted how much smoother Terry Mcauliffe is at handling Fox news than David Axelord and Rahm Emanuel are. Of course, Mcauliffe worked for Hillary, so he's used to bat ...[text shortened]... t, or the President should do it himself; he's a lot better at it than his staff members are.
20 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76But you assume that Obama and company want to "defeat" Fox News.
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mc is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
The strategy might well be to make Fox stronger (especially people like Beck) - because the more that the "opposition" can be linked to Beck and Limbaugh, the easier it will be to discredit them, especially when elections occur next year.
a good way to strengthen people like Beck and Limbaugh is to attack them (and people like them). These hosts and their base will respond vigorously - and will put that much more pressure on the rank and file GOP to kiss their rings.
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesIf that's their strategy, they don't have very good memories.
But you assume that Obama and company want to "defeat" Fox News.
The strategy might well be to make Fox stronger (especially people like Beck) - because the more that the "opposition" can be linked to Beck and Limbaugh, the easier it will be to discredit them, especially when elections occur next year.
a good way to strengthen people like Beck and L ...[text shortened]... orously - and will put that much more pressure on the rank and file GOP to kiss their rings.
In 1994, the GOP rode the strength of Rush Limbaugh and co. to a historic electoral victory. It would be foolish to automatically assume that couldn't happen again.
20 Oct 09
4 edits
Originally posted by sh76But in 1994, one of the GOP's really big themes was that the Dems had been in control of Congress (at least the House) for 40 years, and that it was time to give the GOP a chance. But now, the GOP has gotten their chance, and it produced the unpopular Bush administration. If that's all the GOP has to offer now, they have no chance.
If that's their strategy, they don't have very good memories.
In 1994, the GOP rode the strength of Rush Limbaugh and co. to a historic electoral victory. It would be foolish to automatically assume that couldn't happen again.
Also -- Limbaugh was a relatively fresh voice of rebellion back in the early 90's (at that time, all forms of rebellion against "political correctness" was very "in" ) -- but after 20 years of shrill hysterical ranting by Rush and his ilk, Americans in general have pretty much had their fill.
I see definite room for a centrist challenge (maybe from someone like Gregg?). And if the GOP gets its act together and starts making grown-up arguments, they can definitely make gains in 2010 and beyond. But Limbaugh and Beck can only do bad things for the GOP cause.
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76Yes, I agree. the white house needs to bEck off. Seriously, though, Rahm was a poor choice by Obama, the guy is so extremley partisan and has always been so. I see they have no problem with CNN or MSNBC because they are in the tank for Obama--you mean to tell me cnn and msnbc don't have a perspective too? It's just an attempt to divert our attention from Obama's mediocre presidency and broken promises (i.e. removal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan).
This bizarre new White House strategy of going after Fox News is simply not going to work.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/19/rahm_emanuel_on_white_houses_war_with_fox_news.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/david_axelrod_fox_news_not_really_a_news_station.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/10/18/rove_mc ...[text shortened]... is a losing strategy. Back off and try something else. Trust me. Would I steer you wrong?
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by NimzovichLarsenactually, MSNBC has been hammering Obama (and the centrist Democrats) for making too many compromises on healthcare, and not pushing hard enough for the public option. There's also been criticism on Afghanistan and Iraq.
Yes, I agree. the white house needs to bEck off. Seriously, though, Rahm was a poor choice by Obama, the guy is so extremley partisan and has always been so. I see they have no problem with CNN or MSNBC because they are in the tank for Obama--you mean to tell me cnn and msnbc don't have a perspective too? It's just an attempt to divert our attent ...[text shortened]... s mediocre presidency and broken promises (i.e. removal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan).
20 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76I really don't put much credence in the notion that the Limbaughs of the world won 2004 for them. Terrorism was to the GOP as the economic crisis was to the Dems in 2008. And boy were they milking that one to the fullest with all of those carefully timed "Orange Alerts"
If that's their strategy, they don't have very good memories.
In 1994, the GOP rode the strength of Rush Limbaugh and co. to a historic electoral victory. It would be foolish to automatically assume that couldn't happen again.