Thread: Someone is giving this administration bad advice.

Originally Posted by mhailey

I could respond, but this would take the thread completely off topic, and it would be like talking to the Berlin Wall.

to bring this thread back on topic, do you feel the Obama Administration should be trying to discredit a new agency that is critical of it?

There's a difference between being critical and lying. You chalk things up to typos when they aren't. That's how Fox seems to work, which is where I found the humor.

I say, "well, those aren't typos" and you completely disregard that and start focusing on the Mao bit. Anita Dunn calls them for what they are, and instead of trying to prove her wrong, Beck say "She supports Mao!" -- as if that has any bearing on whether she's correct or not. I think it's an error to continue the debate publicly, but I also agree with what she said.

Originally Posted by mhailey

Does Anita Dunn = Joseph Goebbels????

No she isn't. Comparing her to Uncle Joseph is absurd.

Originally Posted by commiecat

There's a difference between being critical and lying. You chalk things up to typos when they aren't. That's how Fox seems to work, which is where I found the humor.

I say, "well, those aren't typos" and you completely disregard that and start focusing on the Mao bit. Anita Dunn calls them for what they are, and instead of trying to prove her wrong, Beck say "She supports Mao!" -- as if that has any bearing on whether she's correct or not. I think it's an error to continue the debate publicly, but I also agree with what she said.

Like I said, talking to the Berlin Wall. Bringing it back on topic was to avoid the continued statements regarding Mao.

here it is, from CNN: "Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not…a small thing; it's a big thing," Bennett said on CNN. "When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she's deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that -- I mean, that is crazy."

So should the Administration be attacking a news organization? I'll make it easy for you:


Check one: _______ Yes

_______ No

Optional credit: The reason I answered as I did is as follows:

Originally Posted by Sailor

No she isn't. Comparing her to Uncle Joseph is absurd.

Comparison as being cheif propogandists for an Administration/person.

Not that Anita is calling for the extermination of any one ethnic group.

Originally Posted by mhailey

Like I said, talking to the Berlin Wall.

here it is, from CNN: "Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not…a small thing; it's a big thing," Bennett said on CNN. "When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she's deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that -- I mean, that is crazy."

So should the Administration be attacking a news organization? I'll make it easy for you:


Check one: _______ Yes

_______ No

Optional credit: The reason I answered as I did is as follows:

Hey, the Berlin Wall can't copy and paste:

Originally Posted by commiecat

I think it's an error to continue the debate publicly, but I also agree with what she said.

JMS: Here's a question with supporting article...
MichaelP: Here's my answer with some supporting screenshots...
sparq: How are those screenshots relevant?
MichaelP: Here's a link to the original article saying that they're relevant.
mhailey: Oh hogwash! Those are just typos!
commiecat: Well, actually they're not typos. lol.
mhailey: SHE SUPPORTS CHAIRMAN MAO AND YOU LAUGH?!
commiecat: Not really relevant, but what about those typos?
mhailey: You're the Berlin Wall

That's this conversation from my point of view.

Originally Posted by commiecat

Hey, the Berlin Wall can't copy and paste:


JMS: Here's a question with supporting article...
MichaelP: Here's my answer with some supporting screenshots...
sparq: How are those screenshots relevant?
MichaelP: Here's a link to the original article saying that they're relevant.
mhailey: Oh hogwash! Those are just typos!
commiecat: Well, actually they're not typos. lol.
mhailey: SHE SUPPORTS CHAIRMAN MAO AND YOU LAUGH?!
commiecat: Not really relevant, but what about those typos?
mhailey: You're the Berlin Wall

That's this conversation from my point of view.

So answer the question. I tried to make it easy for you.

YES OR NO

"error to continue the debate publicly" is not an answer. Should the Administration try and silence or marginalize a news outlet that is critical of it?

Originally Posted by mhailey

Comparison as being cheif propogandists for an Administration/person.

Not that Anita is calling for the extermination of any one ethnic group.

Got the point. Still think comparison is unfair or sad, as Goebbels did little more on his office, even without counting for his influence on destruction of certain ethnic groups.

I do not have a change to watch US media here from TV and i'm far too uninterested and lazy to watch it from the internet, so i can't have an opinion on the way or the other. However for what i understood is Anita Dunn told her opinion about the Fox news. No need to fear that the statement would turn into gulags for some time

In Russia the goverment is closing independent media. People there have really something to worry about.

Originally Posted by mhailey

"I think it's an error to continue the debate publicly" is not an answer.

It is an answer. I'm not going to break simple sentences down to monosyllabic words to appease your FOX News mind.

Originally Posted by Sailor

Got the point. Still think comparison is unfair or sad, as Goebbels did little more on his office, even without counting for his influence on destruction of certain ethnic groups.

I do not have a change to watch US media here from TV and i'm far too uninterested and lazy to watch it from the internet, so i can't have an opinion on the way or the other. However for what i understood is Anita Dunn told her opinion about the Fox news. No need to fear that the statement would turn into gulags for some time

In Russia the goverment is closing independent media. People there have really something to worry about.

If I knew of another well known chief propogandist off the top of my head I would have used him/her, and not Goebbels, as that man was a monster.

Originally Posted by commiecat

It is an answer. I'm not going to break simple sentences down to monosyllabic words to appease your FOX News mind.

You are correct in that it is an answer. It is a non-responsive answer, but it is an answer.

Edit: your answer said that you don't think they should publicly debate the marinalization or silence of Fox news, not whether or not you think the Administration should or should not undertake such a venture.

Do you think the Administration should try and silence or marginalize Fox News in such a way that is out of the public debate?