White House: “We Controlled Press”

As I have known all along, the media has given the Obama administration glowing coverage from the day he began his run to the moment of which you are reading this. However, not even I thought that the top Communications guru for the WH would admit it: “Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” (Anita) Dunn said, admitting that the strategy “did not always make us popular in the press.”

Shocker folks! Of course this was told to a foreign crowd which begs the question what exactly is Obama doing? Wooing the French and Germans or actually taking the mantle of president of the United States. But back to the problem at hand. This is blatant deception folks. They are basically admitting that they are running a Stalinist or Chavez-like press and no one has a problem with this. Does anyone remember that Chavez basically shut down a critical TV station on Venezuela. I’m sure it all started with Chavez labeling them an opinion channel rather than a news channel. (See Obama Wastes Time Attacking Fox)

Now before you get all head up saying, “AHHHHH, he’s a racist, he says Obama is the next Castro!” Think again. I said they were trying to control the press like Chavez. Until I have concrete proof, I will not say Obama is the next Chavez. But he is starting to act like a despot when it comes to critical press. All he needs to do is say, “Fox News has been critical of me in the past, but I accept that because I want the American people to have both sides of the story.” The end. Finished. Even the left can agree with that. But by labeling a reputable news organization “opinion journalism masquerading as news”, that is something the president should not stoop to.

But back to controlling the press. The leftist press of MSNBC and CNN along with the network channels CBS, NBC, ABC etc. all willingly went along with the control. Fox is the only one that didn’t. So luckily America still has three outlets for actual news that is not controlled by Obama and his cronies. We still have Fox on television, talk radio which is overwhelmingly conservative, and the internet. While the other tv outlets are being controlled by Obama willingly, the truth will come out. And there is nothing Obama or the entire Democratic party can do about it.

Lastly, the White House details how they favored live speeches over taped interviews so that Obama’s words could not be edited or parts left out. The single most disturbing quote was this: “One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters. … We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it.” They don’t want Americans to hear everything that they say because much of what they say Americans oppose. So they only allowed us to hear what they thought we would like. Can you say that this is socialist in styling? More to come…

22 Responses to White House: “We Controlled Press”

  1. TranceGemini says:

    How is forcing “Christmas tree” on the public any better? Not everyone is a Christian, it may surprise you to know, and not everyone wants to be reminded of Christianity’s high holy days.

    I’m about as far from PC as you can get and still be verbal, tbqh, I just don’t understand forcing your beliefs on a country which was founded on freedom of religion and secular government. Thomas Jefferson (terminally vague, he’s been called) would be appalled.

  2. TranceGemini says:

    But the menorah was invented, as it is seen today, exclusively and only for the Jewish celebration of Hanukkah (go go Maccabees!). The “Christmas” tree was around for over a thousand years before it was adapted by Christian monks for their holiday celebrations. The two are incomparable. Add to that the fact that many religions use candles for their holiday celebrations–and, if you called a menorah “a holiday candle”, you’d be effectively right. So what’s wrong with calling a spade a spade–or, in this case, a “holiday” tree?

    • Well if you want to call it a holiday tree, go right ahead. But forcing holiday tree on the public when most people are perfectly happy calling it a ‘Christmas Tree’ is taking political correctness too far.

      • Zero says:

        Not at all. The government should not be favoring one religion over the other. Allowing a government display to be called a “Christmas tree” would be favoring Christianity. You don’t see Jews in an uproar when the Chanukah symbol is incorrectly referred to as a Menorah (the symbol of the days of the week) which as 7 (and only 7) candles. The symbol of Chanukah is the Chanukiah (the one with 9 branches). No one is preventing you from refering to your own private displays as a Christmas tree, the only request is that public displays which are sponsored for the public (not only the Christian public) are to be called “holiday trees”.

      • Alright, ask people on the street whether its a better idea to leave the name alone or call it holiday tree. I’m sure the majority of people will say they have no objections to it being called a Christmas tree. And I am sure a lot of people would be offended that they are taking the name Christmas out of the equation. I am also pretty sure that more people are offended by taking out Christmas than there are by leaving it in.

      • Zero says:

        Over the years I’ve asked numerous people and the prevailing choice is “why does it matter if it is called a christmas tree or a holiday tree?” The majority of people just don’t care one way or another. It is actually only a vocal few who advocate AGAINST calling it a Holiday Tree. There are quite a bit more people who are offended by calling it a Christmas Tree than there are by those who are offended by calling it a Holiday Tree.

        Seriously, where is your tolerance and acceptance? Where is your kinship with your fellow man? Why choose to be exclusive by limiting a public display (as in FOR THE PUBLIC) to just for Christians? Why not be inclusive and have it be for the whole of the public?

  3. TranceGemini says:

    6. I am an animist and I object to the use of a living thing, namely a tree, as a decoration for a holiday. Ok, no, not seriously, but I do object to your comments on it. Just because it’s widely accepted as a Christian holiday symbol does not drown out its original meaning. That’s like saying because black people call each other “my nigger”, the word no longer has a negative connotation. The “Christmas” tree comes from a pagan tradition; calling it a “holiday” tree is inclusive. Christianity shouldn’t be so exclusive of others–where’s all the love-thy-neighbor??

    • I’m glad you stumbled upon my humble blog, even if you disagree with me. It drowns out the meaning for the majority of people who do not practice pagan or other religions wherein the tree is used in its original pagan use. Calling the Christmas tree a holiday tree would be like calling a menorah a holiday candle. Most people see the tree as a celebration of Christmas, if not in the religious, Christ was born in Bethlehem way, than for the gift giving and peace on earth things. Taking away its name is just politically correct. I have not heard of a single person being offended outside of the ACLU. Christianity isn’t exclusive, this is a common-sense approach to the Christmas tree.

  4. Zero says:

    So wait….you are bothered by someone taking something he quoted out of context and trying to say that it meant what he wanted it to mean without the context? hmm…..who does that…..who does that….oh just about everyone on Fox “News” does that.

    So you admit to being against exactly the kind of behavior that the “journalists” on Fox “News” perform…

    • Oh come on. What proof do you have of Fox News doing that?

      • Zero says:

        Sean Hannity being hypocritcal
        [http://www.newshounds.us/2009/11/10/family_values_champ_carrie_prejean_admits_to_making_sex_tape_as_a_teenager.php]

        Host Neil Cavuto interviews Joe Wilson and allows him to spout random lies without any challenge or evidence to them
        [http://www.newshounds.us/2009/11/06/rep_joe_wilson_lies_on_your_world_and_neil_cavuto_lets_him_get_away_with_it.php]

        Fort Hood is the new 9/11? Why aren’t these claims challenged? Why isn’t there an opposing viewpoint SOMEWHERE in this interview?
        [http://www.newshounds.us/2009/11/07/ignoring_evidence_suggesting_otherwise_fox_news_military_analyst_ralph_peters_likens_fort_hood_shooting_to_911.php]

        Taking a quote from Vice President Joe Biden completely out of context and using it in a meaning opposite to what was meant
        [http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/16/fox-news-fundamentals/]

        large number of examples of unethical behavior from Fox
        [http://www.alternet.org/media/143541/30_reasons_fox_news_is_not_legit/?page=3]

        Oh no, it’s a “Holiday Tree” instead of a “Christmas Tree” those darn Christmas hating people, how dare they try to include other religions.
        [http://www.newshounds.us/2009/11/09/tis_the_season_for_the_war_on_christmas_.php]

        Want more? I got lots.

      • 1. The first one I agree with. Hannity blew that one. Prejean blew that one as well. However, that is not evidence of Fox News being a non-reputable channel.

        2. On this you’re shooting blanks. The whole idea of wanting bigger government is a bunch of baloney. Two governors won and both were conservatives with limited government. And the $175 tax is ridiculous, there are other studies out there and he was most likely citing those.

        3. There is evidence that Hasan was motivated by his Islamic religion. He had worshiped in the same mosque as the 9/11 hijackers, had tried to contact an person that was/is in Al Qaeda, he potentially posted extremist statements on a blog and he shouted Allah Akbar before he went and began shooting. For those less informed ‘Allah Akbar’ or ‘Allahu Akbar’ means, in Arabic, ‘God is great’. This is often shouted by terrorists before they begin their assault.

        4. The video was removed on your Biden quote but if that is true, I am appalled. It still does not mean the Fox News in unfair or unbalanced. MSNBC has little regard for showing two sides of the debate. I can list an endless supply of liberals that make no attempt to even hide their political leanings (Chris Matthews, David Shuster, Keith Olberman, Dylan Ratigan, Rachel Maddow etc.) but I can hardly think of one conservative on there. Maybe Joe Scarborough though he’s on at 6 in the morning. Even Hillary Clinton admitted during the primaries that Fox News treated her the most fairly out of all the news organizations.

        5. Thereby, as condemning every organization through the misdeeds of their people you are condemning MSNBC, CBS (for the Dan Rather piece which was a forgery) and every other new organization out there. While Fox may have some skeletons in their closet, MSNBC and others does also. You sir, are simply mentioning the organization that you personally dislike without acknowledging other news channels problems. I admit that Fox has done some unsavory things when it comes to journalism, however the organization as a whole is not as corrupt as MSNBC and others that are basically in the tank for Obama.

        6. Lastly, there has not and indeed is not any other holiday that celebrates with a tree other than Christmas. The Christmas tree tradition started in Germany and has spread around the world. Hannukah, Ramadan, Kwanza… none of these celebrate with a tree. And most people are happy and perfectly fine with the tree being called a Christmas tree because while not all share the reason for Christmas being Christ’s birth in Bethlehem, many love the traditions of giving gifts and spending time with family. What is there to be offended by? Nothing, yet the politicians and media go all PC on us and make it be called a Holiday Tree.

      • Zero says:

        1) we agree, and an example of one of the “star” anchors on the channel being disreputable definitely reflects upon the channel as a whole.

        2) But two democrats ALSO won therefore saying “the voters spoke” is hyperbole. Maybe the reasons for the elections were more for the specific policies in that state rather than a “big government vs limited government” debate? To say that the two GOP governors that were elected is “the voters speaking that they want limited government” is blatant exaggeration. If you like I can claim the voters want big government because of the two Democrats that were elected. Also, the CBO is a nonpartisan organization that did the accepted study. To quote $3,400 as the figure is just incorrect and wrong. If he’s referencing some other study then he should at least mention that the CBO came up with $175 and say why he disagrees with this accepted study. Therefore he was lying. But then again sure, he can lie. But why wouldn’t the news channel do it’s own research? Why not ask for proof? Challenge the assertion? Have someone with a different few point to discuss? That is my problem here. It’s BLATANTLY biased without even TRYING to be “fair and balanced.”

        3) Again, just because a specific interpretation of a religion results in what they deem to be “righteous slaughter” does not mean that is what the religion teaches. (Talk to a non-extremist.) Also all evidence so far found results in everyone who knew Hasan saying that he was by no means an extremist and no one had ever seen or heard him speak as such. But the investigation is still on-going. Also, no offense to the tragedy at Fort Hood but a soldier snapping and killing 13 comrades is by no means comparable to the tragedy of 9/11. Sorry.

        4) Showing your leaning, or outright doctoring evidence and changing it’s meaning….suuuuuuuure.

        5) Where is evidence of anything at all like this happening at other news networks? Show me. I’m not saying that every network other than Fox is great. All I’m pointing out is that Fox has no right to call themselves Fair And Balanced when you compare to other networks. Their news programs are just extensions of their opinion programming rather than actual news. There is no attempt to be fair or balanced, unlike others. Show me evidence like I’ve shown you of other networks.

        6) You are correct that the Christmas Tree tradition started in Germany, however it started with the Germanic Pagan tribes celebrating the winter-solstice. In addition the hanging of mistletoe and the burning of the Yule Log are also Ancient pagan customs that were integrated into the celebration of Christmas. Even the word “Yule” or “Yule-tide” that is used during Christmas time dates back to the Pagan Holiday of Yule which pre-dates Christmas as a winter time holiday of peace.

        You’ll find that many Christian “traditions” and even the timing of the holidays coincides very exactly with Pagan rituals and holidays. This is because that it was felt the easiest way to convert the “heretics” was to have the holidays coincide, that way they were already in the holy sanctuaries of their own volition when they started integrating the teachings of Christianity slowly into the traditional celebrations. The US has no official religion, the Tree is a sign of winter-celebration and peace, gifts, and family. Why object to calling it a Holiday Tree so that you include everyone in the holiday season, why exclude other religions? What harm to YOU is there by having a holiday season that is there for everyone instead of ONLY celebrating a single religion’s holiday?

      • 1. I guess then that means that Keith Olbermann is also dishonest, therefore making the entire MSNBC channel dishonest. Correct?

        2. I would disagree. One of the two Democrats that won, won only because the Republicans were split between the Republican and the Conservative. I have no knowledge of the other Democrat win. About the $175 tax, he should’ve quoted the CBO. However, you cannot claim he’s lying if you haven’t made sure there is no study with a $3,400 tag.

        3. You are wrong. I have shown you verses that deal with Islam and its charge to Muslims to slay and fight infidels. Most Muslims either have no knowledge of these verses or ignore them. But the ones that study strictly and follow all the teachings of Islam are extremists and fundamentalists. They follow the Koran strictly and to the letter.

        4. What???

        5. There is a link for you. Another?

        6. Indeed the Christmas Tree tradition may have a pagan influence or beginning. This does not take away from the idea that it is now a either Christian or non-religious symbol. Jews have their menorah so Christians should be allowed to call it a Christmas tree. No one is offended by Christmas and since Christmas is the holiday that the tree is for, why not call it a Christmas tree? What other holiday is there that is celebrated with a tree, or which one wants to be?

      • Zero says:

        1) I said it reflects upon the channel, not decides for it. The dishonesty of Hannity in addition to all the other transgressions is what decides what is wrong with the channel.

        2) Really? Because the Moderate Republican dropped out of the race. So the republicans were free to either vote for the republican or the democrat. If they were so against “big government” they would have voted for the conservative rather than the democrat, right?

        3) “Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors. And slay them wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter… But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful… If they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression” (2:190-193). Hmm that sounds like they should only fight in self-defence doesn’t it?

        (Qur’an 60:7-8):

        “It may be that God will grant love (and friendship) between you and those whom ye (now) hold as enemies. For God has power (over all things), and God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

        God does not forbid you, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for God loves those who are just.”

        Yup, definitely it sounds like they are given the righteous permission to defend themselves from persecution.

        The Qur’an describes those people who are permitted to fight:

        “They are those who have been expelled from their homes
        in defiance of right, for no cause except that they say,
        ‘Our Lord is Allah.’
        Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another,
        there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches,
        synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated
        in abundant measure…”
        -Qur’an 22:40

        Notice it specifically demands the protection of ALL houses of worship. the Qur’an also says, “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2:256). Forcing someone at the point of a sword to choose death or Islam is an idea that is foreign to Islam in spirit and in historical practice. There is absolutely no question of waging a “holy war” to “spread the faith” and compel people to embrace Islam; that would be an unholy war and the people’s forced conversions would not be sincere.

        4)How does the doctoring of evidence and obvious manipulation of facts in favor of the GOP not show they are not ‘fair and balanced’?

        5)The first link I’ll give you, it is blatantly wrong what they did yet it is relied on CNN to show the truth. The second link is pure propaganda. MSNBC criticising Obama and his administration where is this “left leaning bias” you claim? I watched the clip, I don’t see what is so horrible that they didn’t cover. He was sarcastic and he can’t just “write a check” because the check needs to be handled and dispersed correctly. Just blindly writing a check wouldn’t help too much, but I agree with the fact that FEMA and others have by no means handled the problems in New Orleans correctly, however where is the problem with the way it was covered? I don’t see it.

        6) “Or non-religious symbol” You say it yourself, it can be a non-religious symbol. The tree is a symbol of winter, peace, gifts, and family. Even some of the most reform Jews have “Chanukah Bushes” in honor of the older traditions. The problem with government sponsored trees being named “Christmas Tree” versus “Holiday Tree” is the separation of Church and state. Why should any government sponsored event favor one religion over any others? Calling it a “Christmas Tree” in public alienates anyone who is not Christian, calling it a “Holiday Tree” incorporates everyone and favors no belief over any others, bring everyone together regardless of religion. What logical argument can you honestly bring to tell me that it is wrong to call it a “Holiday Tree”?

  5. Zero says:

    But Fox news is not a reputable news organization. Their opinion programming feeds dissent and false rhetoric, then the “news” programs reiterate these lies under the guise of “people are saying.” Which incorrectly gives the impression that the opinions are fact.

    Instead of any kind of “fair and balanced” programming that Fox claims to be giving, they act like a propaganda machine for conservatives. News station all have their own small bias but will still report both sides of a story, Fox repeatedly ignores opposing viewpoints or sets up a situation where the opposing viewpoint is drowned out (2 conservatives + a conservative anchor + 1 liberal does not make a balanced debate). Fox’s opinion programming runs on fear mongering that is then proliferated by it’s “news” programming. It is despicable to claim to be journalists when they behave in this manner.

    • That is what opinion pieces do. What about Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and Ed what’s his face on at 6? The third actually masquerades as news. Yeah, the guy that got a ‘thrill up his leg’ when Obama spoke. REAL PROFESIONAL Chris.

      How about MSNBC constantly ranting about Fox when they themselves are ten times worse than Fox could ever be? At least with Glenn Beck, O’Reilly, Hannity etc. they all cite sources unlike the neo-hippies on MSNBC. That idiot David Shuster is a real fair and balanced guy himself isn’t he? Except for when bashing traditional marriage supporting beauty pageant finalist Carrie Prejean. “Can I vomit right now? I mean, literally, can I vomit?” Does that sound like a respectable journalist to you?

      Attacking Fox and hiding all the blather coming from the left wing propaganda machine is disingenuous at best and untruthful at worst.

      • Zero says:

        There’s a difference between claiming a source, and completely manipulating the meaning of what someone has said to fit your own purposes rather than showing the context in which it was said.

        Also Carrie Prejean is amusing, traditional marriage supporting, good christian girl, with a lot of hidden baggage like sex tapes, nude photo shoots, etc. Always great to see a loveable bible thumping young woman with a hidden lustful dark side. Just shows a little more proof that the beliefs are very repressive.

      • I did not say that Carrie Prejean is a model of Christian beliefs. I said Shuster was a snake in the grass for acting like an a** on national television.

      • Zero says:

        Lots of people act like asses in in public. I didn’t see you address my argument though. I’ll copy and paste here just for you:

        There’s a difference between claiming a source, and completely manipulating the meaning of what someone has said to fit your own purposes rather than showing the context in which it was said.

        so?

      • So? This man claimed a source, took the verse out of context and then tried to say that the source meant what he wanted it to mean without having any context and without the context of surrounding verses he could make it sound like whatever he wanted. He claimed that the verse ‘And God works in all’ or something to that effect meant that God was working in evil people when the context of the passage is dealing with spiritual gifts not evil people. That is what bothers me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: