Wallace v. Clinton

[owl]

Fox chief: Clinton response an 'assault' (AP)

 

In this handout photo provided by Fox News Sunday, former President Bill Clinton responds to host Chris Wallace during a taping of an interview for 'Fox News Sunday', in a file photo from Sept. 22, 2006, in New York. (AP Photo/Fox News Sunday, Michael Simon)AP - Fox News chief Roger Ailes says former President Clinton's response to Chris Wallace's question about going after Osama bin Laden represents "an assault on all journalists."

 

I definitely think that news outlets like Fox are willing to over-emphasize minor issues to distract viewers from bad news on the right. Fox also has a tendency to focus on a lot of non-news, which gives them a much narrower window for actual news, as well. I'd guess that it's just more like an unwritten accepted role as a right-wing propaganda machine, vs. a conspiracy, though. They're happy to divert the attention from issues like the ones you cited, but they're probably doing it (mostly?) on their own volition.

 

I find it pretty ridiculous, though, that the Fox chief would call the Clinton rebuttal an "assault" on journalists, considering his own team of journalists, and the actual arrests of U.S. journalists under the guise of national security.

 

As far as Fox, try watching any Fox interview show with a liberal making rebuttals. That's when Fox is interrupting, contorting, and misrepresenting answers, and abusing the interviewee by saying things like "So. You've admitted that you disagree with Bush policy. Given that, do you support reinstating Saddam Hussein??!?! Answer the QUESTION!!!!!" (They also seem to interview mostly bumbling left-leaning weenies or retards to make the Fox interviewers always the winners.)

 

In this Clinton case, they didn't pick a left-wing weenie. Instead, they picked Bill Clinton, an eloquent, well-reasoned, and intelligent former President who didn't want to (but was forced to) dignify a recent series of thinly-veiled (and sometimes pretty blatant) accusations. Why wouldn't he expect to get the same accusations on Fox News of all the possible outlets? Of course he was ready for it!

 

To call it an "assault" is hard to stomach. Poor Fox News, always the victims??

 

There is an assault on journalism in this country, but it's coming from the Bush White House.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

2+2=5

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15035936/site/newsweek/

[owl]

Sigh.

 

At least the article isn't titled "Bush Says Everything Fine" and then the writers spend the first half reiterating Bush's bogus statements before revealing the truth about the findings.

[c53x12]

He accused me of having a smirk at one point. Frankly, I was in wonder at this kind of tidal wave of emotion on his part.

Chris Wallace has a case of permasmirk. I'd have been happy to see old Slick Willie reach over and smack him one.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

Remember when the Duelfer report came out and the Bush administration said it confirmed everything that they had thought about weapons in Iraq?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...5-2004Oct6.html

 

They were successful in spinning it so that a good portion of Bush voters thought that the report said nearly the exact opposite of what it actually said.

 

http://www.heartheissues.com/differentworlds.html

 

"To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies

[Edie]

Retread bullshit

 

As many a bumper sticker has said, Clinton's mistake didn't kill anyone.

 

Plus, if old George would get some good head, maybe he'd loosen up a little. I don't see prissy Laura doin' it, if you know what I mean.

[EL the Famous]

i'll just say that Clinton was kind of on point w/ getting upset under the auspices of why he was there, but lobbing a few hardballs at him should have been expected. if this was somebody else doing the same to W, my guess it'd be a different story.

 

That said, I wish he could have stayed in slick mode a little more. obviously, democrats like myself can get a little energized at the fact somebody is showing some balls ...but you know the republican spin machine can (and will) take this and make it into another dividing point.

 

As far as Fox goes, they're obviously biased...but anybody who doesn't see that by now or doesn't know how to take pieces of what you seen in the press to form your own educated position is too far back for help at this point. Hardly worth getting all up about it, especially w/ Stewart/Colbert putting them in their place nightly.

[owl]

I have to announce a change of heart on my part--perhaps we should all give President Clinton a break. It's probably much harder for him to get really good intern blowjobs these days, and the pent-up pressure had to exit at some point...

 

 

My guess is that this is not the predictable right-wing response because it's the only thing on which they can criticize him; rather, I believe right-wingers just like to periodically envision Clinton in the nude.

 

But don't stop believin,' dude. Maybe someday you'll get to give a blowjob.

 

As far as Fox goes, they're obviously biased...but anybody who doesn't see that by now or doesn't know how to take pieces of what you seen in the press to form your own educated position is too far back for help at this point. Hardly worth getting all up about it, especially w/ Stewart/Colbert putting them in their place nightly.

 

 

True, true.

[Guest carlos]

It's amazing how you people can't take a fucking joke if it has anything to do with your beloved clinton or your much-hated Bush. I just poked fun at both of them within 5 minutes, but you have to get your panties in a wad because of a--God forbid--Clinton blow-job joke.

 

Grow up.

"you people"

[ction]

you people

 

Thanks for another racist, hate-filled post.

 

"you people"

 

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editor...ment-editorials

 

The problem with the legislation

[MattZ]

It's amazing how you people can't take a fucking joke

Grow up.

 

I can take a joke. Your jokes arent funny.

[Guest carlos]

yes, the people who chose to criticize my post.

"the people"

[Edie]

Perfectly fine. I take no offense to a post that says "sorry dude, joke's not funny."

 

What I'm sick and tired of is the individuals who claim to be so open-minded and liberal-thinking who can't tolerate a differing opinion.

 

 

Thanks.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

"The United States is neither in a state of rebellion nor invasion. Consequently, it would be problematic for Congress to modify the constitutionally protected writ of habeas corpus under current events," Kenneth Starr, the former independent prosecutor on the Whitewater investigation during the Clinton presidency, wrote in a letter to Specter.

 

Ken Starr: this bill violates the constitution.

[Atticus]

 

Thanks.

 

 

There's no room at this table for my opinions. I thought I'd make a light-hearted stab at Bush, since he has basically thrown the idea of a transparent, democratic government out the window of late, and then followed it up with a harmless Clinton blowjob joke. As a result, I get lambasted. Every freakin word I choose gets critiqued to death, edited or twisted. It's just not worth it. I entered this thread learning from other posts and actually smiling, and now I'm simply disillusioned. So I'm out on this one. posts stricken. Flame away...

[EL the Famous]

gerace?

[Edie]

There's no room at this table for my opinions. I thought I'd make a light-hearted stab at Bush, since he has basically thrown the idea of a transparent, democratic government out the window of late, and then followed it up with a harmless Clinton blowjob joke. As a result, I get lambasted. Every freakin word I choose gets critiqued to death, edited or twisted. It's just not worth it. I entered this thread learning from other posts and actually smiling, and now I'm simply disillusioned. So I'm out on this one. posts stricken. Flame away...

 

 

I wasn't lambasting you. I said that the Clinton blowjob joke is old ("retread bullshit"). Then I went on to say that George needs to get one -- and his wife may not be a willing participant.

[MattZ]

It's amazing how you people can't take a fucking joke

Grow up.

 

There's no room at this table for my opinions. Every freakin word I choose gets critiqued to death, edited or twisted. It's just not worth it. I entered this thread learning from other posts and actually smiling, and now I'm simply disillusioned. So I'm out on this one. posts stricken. Flame away...

 

Bro, I gotta be honest. I am reading through these posts and, at the risk of stating the obvious, it looks like you are the one that cant take a joke.

[bjorn_skurj]

Now the president has the power to say, yep that is true and toss any of those who oppose his policies into prison without the right to a trial, without the right to hear the evidence against them, and without any rights normally granted by the constitution. The right will invariably say that will not happen, but how much protest was there when Miller and cooper were in jail? How much protest was there when the Bonds reporters were jailed? It is a very real possibility that I would never have thought could occur in this country.

Throughout the history of journalism in America, prosecutors and judges have tried to get reporters to divulge information they vowed to keep secret. If this happens to you as a journalist, you take your lumps and go to jail. Any journalist who caves is viewed as a total pariah in the profession and couldn't even get a job delivering the newspaper. And your average American doesn't really get heated up over the fate of reporters, unless they're really hot, like Katie Couric or Soledad O'Brien.

[John Smith]

Throughout the history of journalism in America, prosecutors and judges have tried to get reporters to divulge information they vowed to keep secret. If this happens to you as a journalist, you take your lumps and go to jail. Any journalist who caves is viewed as a total pariah in the profession and couldn't even get a job delivering the newspaper. And your average American doesn't really get heated up over the fate of reporters, unless they're really hot, like Katie Couric or Soledad O'Brien.

 

But has the press previousle ever been under assault the way it is with this administration? Has any adminsitration ever had the tools that this administration now has? Has this administration earned our trust enough for us (we the people...) to grant them these powers? No, no and no.

[bjorn_skurj]

But has the press previousle ever been under assault the way it is with this administration? Has any adminsitration ever had the tools that this administration now has? Has this administration earned our trust enough for us (we the people...) to grant them these powers? No, no and no.

Sure; the government and press haven't fought this much since the days of the Alien and Sedition Acts. New York has a Shield Law that allows journalists to protect their confidential sources. There is no such law on the federal level, and there won't be as long as the GOP is in charge.

(What I said before is true, though. Working journalists are expected to take whatever the government can dish out, without whining. For life, if necessary.)

[owl]

It is interesting, though, how people like the NRA decry gun control based largely on preservation our constitutional rights, yet could obviously give a shit about something like freedom of the press.

[MattZ]

It is interesting, though, how people like the NRA decry gun control based largely on the preserving our constitutional rights, yet could obviously give a shit about something like freedom of the press.

 

You mean sort of like the Republicans who forced Clinton to focus on Whitewater and impeachment threats rather than focus on more important issues like running the nation? And now criticize Clinton for not doing more to stop Osama?

 

I wouldnt say its interesting. I would say its typical, its transparent, and its ridiculous.

[owl]

Well, that certainly was bullshit, but I'm talking more about people who portray themselves as grand heroes who only want to preserve our constitutional rights- when they actually don't give a shit at all, except when it comes to something that threatens them.