Obama's Declared War with Fox News Channel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No reasonable person can argue on behalf of the Tea Parties... not substantively. You can argue that we're lucky to live in a country where anyone, even those people, can assemble (and that is true!), but you can't argue substantively that they are a reasonable group of people with a reasonable point who should be taken seriously.

ummmm, thanks for telling me what is reasonable. some of us think a huge expansion of the federal govt (and the obvious huge increase in taxes that will soon follow) is reasonable cause to disagree.

[Anonymous]

There are certainly reasonable grounds on which reasonable minds can differ. I don't think the Tea Party folks have reasonable grounds or reasonable minds, though. Sorry if you're one of them, but even the smart Republicans do not take the Tea Parties seriously.

[Anonymous]

smart people don't do a lot of protesting, period. ummm, except for community organizers I guess. But whether I take them seriously or not is a far cry from an elitist view that they have no reasonable arguments whatsoever.

I think 99% of the protests on the mall are ridiculous, but don't think i've ever been nearly as dismissive to any as you just were with these folks. so you see NO reasonable basis, even if you disagree politically and personally, for criticism of obama's program? probably the most liberal president in at least 70 years is not going to rub conservatives the wrong way? you know 100% of the tea party individuals and their reasons for protesting? come on.

[Anonymous]

There are plenty of things to disagree with Obama about. The ones who choose to do it Tea Party-style, though, are unreasonable fringe types. The smart, thoughtful conservatives are not participating in the Tea Party, Fox News, Glenn Beck idiocy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of things to disagree with Obama about. The ones who choose to do it Tea Party-style, though, are unreasonable fringe types. The smart, thoughtful conservatives are not participating in the Tea Party, Fox News, Glenn Beck idiocy.

I see. So the most popular news network and the most popular cable news show are to be excluded, so I'm guessing the conservatives you approve of watch MSNBC and read the Post? Got it. thanks for being so reasonable.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:so you see NO reasonable basis, even if you disagree politically and personally, for criticism of obama's program? probably the most liberal president in at least 70 years is not going to rub conservatives the wrong way?

The reason we don't take them seriously is because they believe things like that. Obama is a moderate Democrat. He has actually pissed off most of the left wing of the Democratic party. He won't stop yapping about bipartisanship despite getting stiffed by the Republicans time after time. He neutered his own stimulus plan by including tax cuts to please the right wing (not that it did any good). He totally rejected single payer as a health reform alternative. His tax proposal is to return income tax levels to where they were under Clinton (which was lower than the levels under Reagan). It's just not possible to take seriously people who are detached from reality.

[Anonymous]

Oh come now. Let's not call Glenn Beck a "news" show! The only thing newsworthy about him is that some people seem to listen to him.

But just because people watch it doesn't mean they agree! And just because a bunch of people agree with each other doesn't mean they're reasonable.

If you think Glenn Beck is smart, then I think you're not smart. Simple as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:smart people don't do a lot of protesting, period. ummm, except for community organizers I guess. But whether I take them seriously or not is a far cry from an elitist view that they have no reasonable arguments whatsoever.

I think 99% of the protests on the mall are ridiculous, but don't think i've ever been nearly as dismissive to any as you just were with these folks. so you see NO reasonable basis, even if you disagree politically and personally, for criticism of obama's program? probably the most liberal president in at least 70 years is not going to rub conservatives the wrong way? you know 100% of the tea party individuals and their reasons for protesting? come on.

That's just it. They're not protesting policy in ways that can be taken seriously. Unless there's some sort of hidden code referring to policy in these.


[img]

[Anonymous]

so clueless. of course obama has to appease the bluedogs ... doesn't erase his background, his associations and his agenda.

[Anonymous]

Ha... you are one of them! Well, bless your heart.

Please PLEASE expand upon his "background, associations, and agenda." Are you a Birther, too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:... probably the most liberal president in at least 70 years ...

If you check out the O'Reilly - Miller tape in "why aren't Republicans funny?" thread, you'll see that those two agree with us liberals who feel Obama has not changed very much of what was going on under Bush.

[jsteele]

If anyone is still buying the claim that Fox News has slanted opinion programs but "fair and balanced" news, watch this:

[Anonymous]

thank god fox news covers those controversies since the leftist media won't touch it. I can do the exact same thing with respect to the wash post and ny times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so clueless. of course obama has to appease the bluedogs ... doesn't erase his background, his associations and his agenda.

This is the argument I find fascinating. Some people before the election worried that Obama was really far left and I, a far leftist, reassured them that he was nothing of the sort. Now he gets into office and acts pretty much as I thought he would act -- not moving forward on a bunch of his liberal promises and now instead of being assuaged that Obama isn't as left as previously believed, there are still people like you who think he must just be waiting for the moment that everyone lets their guard down and he'll take the country right down the Cuba highway.

It's true that some of the liberal pps on this thread are being overly harsh towards the tea party protesters. There are always wackos at protests, whether left or right. But there were were also more than just a handful of wackos who had signs indicating they believed that Obama is a Marxist or a socialist (I know -- I went and observed and I saw sign after sign emphasizing this point) to the point where I do think Obama, more than other presidents, has come to be seen as a scarey bogeyman. He could abolish Medicare and TANF and income taxes tomorrow and people would still call him a socialist and sure he was going to sell us out to Russia (which by the way, people, let's remember is no longer socialist).

[Anonymous]

no doubt he has governed more as a centrist than as a far-leftist. I think that is due to health care. He needs the center to pass health care, so he didn't want to anger the middle by going too far left too quickly.

i'm basing him being left (which isnt an insult, just a description) because of his being named the most liberal senator in his only term in the senate, based on his writings and his comments. community organizing in south chicago is not exactly the proving grounds for most moderates. this isnt a news flash! compared to southern governors like Cater and Clinton I don't see any comparison. we really haven't had too many liberal presidents - who was more liberal? JFK and LBJ? hah! Look at their foreign policy. Truman? please. I go back to FDR, if only for his (at the time) radical social programs.