Posted on 04/27/2008 9:05:18 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I am more than willing to give Barack Obama props for having gone on Fox News Sunday to discuss campaign issues with Chris Wallace. As most political observers know, the folks on the other side of the partisan divide don't particularly like it when any of their own go on Fox--they seem to think that it would be best to boycott the station and let it suffer in the ratings and in the revenue department. The fact that this plan has failed thus far does not deter them, but in any event, if you really want to get your message out on Fox, you ought to go on the show instead of boycotting the show and letting your political opponents completely dictate the tone and tenor of Fox's editorial content. (To the extent that Republicans stay away from interviews on NPR, I would focus the same criticism at them as well.)
But of course, Obama's actions cause a great deal of heartburn for his fellow Democrats. Greg Sargent is devastated and disconsolate. Jerome Armstrong is more temperate about matters, but cannot be pleased (perhaps Armstrong--a Hillary supporter--can be sanguine about Obama's appearance because he predicted its nature?). Matt Stoller graces the public discourse by informing us that "You can't trust the Obama campaign, they will lie to you to promote right-wing institutions." Fatuous nonsense, but hey, I am in favor of anything that keeps the nomination contest going and going and going and . . . you get the point.
The patron saint of the 2008 Democratic Presidential Nomination contest ought to be Orville Redenbacher. Honestly. We might even get a Cardinal to help advance St. Orville's case.
What are these people smoking?
Nothing that managed to get by his lips indicated he was a marxist-racist. One would have to be a bigoted racist not to see he's simply the new JFK with a tan. His message of hope and change has changed me, (I hope).
The question I have is: "What can my country do for me? And what do I have to do to get it?"
Perhaps she meant “Wright-wing institutions” ...
Your name is a play on words, isn’t it?
I looked at the author’s name and went, batcrap.
I thought Chris Wallace did a poor job of following up or even asking the best questions. One question begging to be asked:
How much more of the Federal tax burden should the top 1% pay (it is already 39%)? The top 10% pay 70%. The bottom 50% pay 3%.
Yes, mostly to explain why my posts tend to be short. :-)
That would make a lot more sense.
Good one.
“(To the extent that Republicans stay away from interviews on NPR, I would focus the same criticism at them as well.)”
For the author - hey, I occasionally listen to NPR, and watch CNN, MSNBC and PBS nightly, but I always know what I’m gonna get there (particularly in the case of PBS)- I just like to see what they’re saying on a given day. The difference between all the above and Fox News Channel is that with FNC, Fair and Balanced is not just a cliche. The loons I know who bash it haven’t even watched it (nor will they give it even one shot) - they just regurgitate the party line. FNC’s the only one that consistently has both sides equally represented on their shows, battling it out. None of the others can make that claim. ‘Oops, sorry - Glenn Beck is the shining exception to that, on HNN (CNN division).
Funny how we “mean” conservatives are much more open-minded than the “enlightened” liberals. Maybe it’s because we’re secure in our unshakeable knowledge of the truth. For the sake of my new friend, I forced myself to suffer through a full hour of Keith Olbermann. (Chrissie Matthews I can usually take - Keith-O? HELL NO). But my friend has yet to watch Hannity, O’Reilly or Beck. (Hmmm, maybe I should rethink this friendship :-))
He should be president 'cause he hesitates between words (a lot) apparently giving his responses much thought.What I wouldn't pay to hear his internal monologue when he's speaking... here's a taste:
“I thought Chris Wallace did a poor job of following up or even asking the best questions.”
Been wondering what you all thought of it. Yeah, I was really disappointed in CW. Maybe he was so thrilled by the Big Get (as they say in media-land) that he was happy to take it on any terms. Slick Barry had plenty of preparation time, and it was done on his turf, not in FNC’s studio. As usual, his “answers” were all convoluted fluff, which he got away with once again. CW CAN be hard-hitting -that’s what I expected, that’s what I wanted - so I hated what appeared to be a blatant sell-out.
What I wouldn’t pay to hear his internal monologue when he’s speaking... here’s a taste:
Obama: “The time has come for... ummm... [ violent revolution ... killing whitey ... submitting to the caliphate ] ...change. Because we can no longer afford... uhhh... [ private ownership ... American values ... white people ] ...the status quo.”
oh, hilariously right on!!! You’ve got Kevin Nealon doing the subliminal newscaster SNL sketches down pat. Exacto-mundo.
LOL!.............. spot on.
but BO talking to CW, and that was nothing. Wallace is a lefty-leaning kinda media guy anyway.
Certainly BO would not go under the questioning of BOR or hannity, because he knows they wouldn’t let him off the hook like wallace did
when i heard it was wallace doing the BO interview, it came as no surprise, but more of an affirmation that wallace belongs on cnn or such
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.