With the mid-term elections around the corner, knowing that the Democrats are going to suffer heavy losses, President Barack Obama has once again set his sights on Fox News, one of, if not the only news network that is being critical of this administration. In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, another “water carrier” for this White House, Obama made it clear that he viewed Fox News is “ultimately destructive” to the future of the United States of America. David Zurawik of the Baltimore Sun’s Z on TV, has more on this, even the quote which ignited this new conflict between the White House and Fox News…
Obama: Look, as president, I swore to uphold the Constitution, and part of that Constitution is a free press. We’ve got a tradition in this country of a press that oftentimes is opinionated. The golden age of an objective press was a pretty narrow span of time in our history. Before that, you had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition – it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world. But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number-one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.
Give the rest of Zurawik’s article a read, it is fairly well done. The Baltimore Sun’s columnist does make the point that previous attacks on Fox News has backfired. While I did make mention of this in a previous post, Zurawik clearly points out how destructive this was to the Obama administration by highlighting Anita Dunn’s loss of employment as the White House’s communications director (though she wasn’t “thrown under the bus” like others who have made such mistakes). With Democrats and Democratic supports backing away and criticizing the previous attack on Fox News, one would think that Obama wouldn’t try such a disastrous political move again. However, ignoring the lessons of last year, we find ourselves now scratching our heads over this new attack on a media outlet critical of this presidency.
The first question is why? Why retry such a failed political strategy? Desperation. Doug Powers at Michelle Malkin’s blog who is also commenting on this, made the point that this is a poorly planned political move to shift the blame of the suffering economy on Fox News, an organization which is thriving in a country which is struggling financially. This is the same kind of empty argument Wallace C. Turbeville was making at New Deal 2.0, that Fox News’ success must come at the expense of those who are suffering. Just like Turbeville, the President has no proof of this correlation and forwarding such a misguided premise is done for purely political reasons. Only those who aren’t already “exhausted” with defending this administration’s policies, would believe such nonsense.
Why would the President himself make such remarks? The answers is simple, I don’t know. With his poll numbers as bad as they are, why would he give the American people another reason to question his leadership. Surely Rahm Emmanuel or Robert Gibbs could have made similar remarks without drawing this kind of attention. Gibbs had previously echoed Dunn’s remarks when he said Fox News puts out false stories, and the gossip from Washington is that Emmanuel is already stepping down from his position as White House Chief of Staff. With this already starting to backfire, it would have been better for Obama to let someone else make such a statement. For the President himself to do such a thing in an interview with a magazine like Rolling Stone reeks of poor planning.
So how does this look to the average American? Those who already believed Obama wanted to limit freedom of speech have more evidence of this, while those questioning his defense of the First Amendment have been given more reason to doubt he will uphold it. To state that, while you are a defender of freedom of speech, but you feel that some people shouldn’t have it because it is “ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country” does sound more “Nixonian” than Richard Nixon. As for Rolling Stone publishing such an interview, does it surprise anyone at this point that the so many Americans distrust the media? Instead of asking the tough questions, Rolling Stone gave Obama a platform and he got carried away. Instead of reporting on this, the majority of the media has remained silent. I have yet to find a anything on Obama’s statements, and instead of even mentioning the interview with Rolling Stone, CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux has put out a “puff piece” about how the President gave a speech in front of Sandy and Jeff Clubb’s house in Des Moines, Iowa.
With so many people watching Fox News over the various other media outlets, it won’t be long before this story makes the rounds and the Obama administration is once again in trouble for targeting the freedom of speech of a news organization that has been critical of this White House’s failed policies… Pathetic…
UPDATE: Jeff Poor at NewsBusters.org has Greg Gutfeld’s, the host of Fox News’ ‘Red Eye’, response to Barack Obama’s comments. I recommend my modest readership give it a watch, it is good for a laugh, and it makes you think.
UPDATE: I had forgot to put in the video from ‘Drinking with Bob’ concerning Barack Obama’s latest attack on Fox News. For those just scrolling through this post, if you want to know how I feel about this “in a nutshell”, here it is…
