Thread: Someone is giving this administration bad advice.

Ha! Good one!!

Originally Posted by billyjeff2

Okay. I'll bite. Then do tell us what you meant by the "final goal".

Hitler's final goal was the extermination of Jews

Obama's final goal is the marginalization and silence of anyone that disagrees with him, so that he can solidify his control.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT OBAMA WANTS TO KILL JEWS.

This is my final post in response to anything you write in this thread.

"Hitler did not start off by killing the Jews (as well as gays/christians/...). he started off by marginalizing them. Now I am not equating Obama to Hitler in his genocidal desires, I am equating Obama's actions as the first step in obtaining the final goal."

So...you bring up Hitler when discussing Obama, but you weren't intending to suggest any comparison between Hitler and Obama except that they both "started off" or took a "first step". But you weren't trying to suggest any comparison otherwise.
I think I understand...

My philosophy is that if someone is being a bully it's only proper to call them out and whoop their ass. It's the only way to teach them manners.

Originally Posted by RazorPete

My philosophy is that if someone is being a bully it's only proper to call them out and whoop their ass. It's the only way to teach them manners.

I am not sure who you are calling the bully here. I know who I think is being the bully. I agree with the philosophy.

Originally Posted by avatar1999

I just love how people jump on the wagon and criticize a certain news agency of having it in for the administration, and say they lie about this and that, but...hmm...I don't recall anyone showing and PROOF that what they're saying isn't true.

See the first point in my first post. Want more?

He tripled the debt: hmm, to date he added less than $1T to the scheduled debt from the 2009 budget signed in 2008 by President Bush... that actually includes 6 months of funding for Afghanistan and Iraq that were not included in said budget. For comparison, prior to President Bush the debt was scheduled to hit $6.5T in January this year.

He has already spent more than all the previous presidents combined: when that statement was made by Fox News, the government was still running on Bush FY 2009 budget. How can somebody that hasn't yet have a budget to his name have outspent all previous presidents combined? Also, how come the debt has increased by less than 10% if he has spent more than all previous presidents (total budget, not just debt)?

Death panels in "obamacare": there was once a dodgy amendment introduced by a Republican, it was voted off by a Democrat. As the text stood at the time of the "scandal" about it, the text was the same text that was in "bushcare" (2004 medicare law).

Illegals getting covered in "obamacare": "bushcare" introduced a $250K per annum per hospital provision to cover emergency healthcare access to illegals. Joe "you lie" Wilson voted for it, under the existing Republican plan your tax dollars are paying for the healthcare of illegal immigrants.

One could spend less than 5 minutes checking for every outlandish statement by Fox and find it false, a gross exaggeration or only marginally true by being taken out of context. One could start by using thomas, opencongress or the many other places where the debated texts are displayed. One can see the complete history of the bill, who introduced which amendment and who voted for it... that is often enlightening.

A little grist for the mill:Top White House Official Says Obama Team 'Controlled' Media Coverage During Campaign - Political News - FOXNews.com
I wish I could find this story some where other than FOX but it appears no other network has the huevos to go up against the current administration.

BillyJeff, you disappoint me. I thought you were all for free speech and freedom of the press...at least that is the impression you left during the Bush administration.

Originally Posted by JMS

A little grist for the mill:Top White House Official Says Obama Team 'Controlled' Media Coverage During Campaign - Political News - FOXNews.com
I wish I could find this story some where other than FOX but it appears no other network has the huevos to go up against the current administration.

IMHO, the fact that you keep citing FoxNews.com just proves the opposition's point. You say that they're the only source because the other networks don't have the huevos -- I say it's because Fox is lying.

Dunn, from the video (~1m):
"...a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying."

(~2:20m):
"...Senator Obama himself did a lot of local television. We went to as much live television as possible, so it couldn't be edited when it came to him [Obama] -- it was live, so that he could speak in longer than a twelve second sound bite."

I'm not sure why anyone would bother writing an article about this on FoxNews.com. Oh, wait -- now I know. They're upset because they couldn't Photoshop his image and doctor his sound bites. The nerve!

I call that an intelligent strategy. And guess what? It paid off. DAMN YOU, OBAMA!

Little OT, but here's something about free media:

Reporters Sans Frontières

"BillyJeff, you disappoint me. I thought you were all for free speech and freedom of the press...at least that is the impression you left during the Bush administration."

Mark- If you'll read my posts carefully, you"ll see where I fully support the first amendment right of free speech. And you'll also see that my take on the recent Administration v Fox News debate is that it doesn't implicate any first amendment issues. Characterizing Fox news as being more commentary-driven than news driven raises no first amendment issues.You may feel differently (I have no doubt you do) but my understanding of the FA, and the cases that have interpreted its meaning/application, leads me to view this as a non FA matter.