Barry's war on FOX News
That said, we have to question the wisdom and intelligence behind Barry basically declaring "war" on FOX News:
Calling Fox News "a wing of the Republican Party," the Obama administration on Sunday escalated its war of words against the channel, even as observers questioned the wisdom of a White House war on a news organization.
"What I think is fair to say about Fox -- and certainly it's the way we view it -- is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party," said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN. "They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."
Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente, who likens the channel to a newspaper with separate sections on straight news and commentary, suggested White House officials were intentionally conflating opinion show hosts like Glenn Beck with news reporters like Major Garrett.
"It's astounding the White House cannot distinguish between news and opinion programming," Clemente said. "It seems self-serving on their part."
In recent weeks, the White House has begun using its government blog to directly attack what it called "Fox lies." David Gergen, who has worked for President Bill Clinton and three Republican presidents, questioned the propriety of the White House declaring war on a news organization.
"It's a very risky strategy. It's not one that I would advocate," Gergen said on CNN. "If you're going to get very personal against the media, you're going to find that the animosities are just going to deepen. And you're going to find that you sort of almost draw viewers and readers to the people you're attacking. You build them up in some ways, you give them stature."
This shows exactly the intelligence that is running the show in DC. They don't like the fact that a major news outlet is actually reporting on what is being done in the White House. What the president did with regard to Chrysler and GM; what the president did regarding the banks and mortgage lenders; what the president is doing on the health care reform. FOX has reported on the arm-twisting that goes on behind the scenes.
But they're not the only ones doing that. Jake Tapper, who works for ABC News, has done yeoman's work being as fair and objective as possible in reporting on Barry's White House. He even has a running report on the FOX/WH spat. So FOX isn't the only target for the WH. Tapper's caught flak from the WH, as well. (There have been numerous times where Tapper has either asked tough questions of Bobby Gibbs or the president, and has either been "scolded" or had them tap-dance out of the question.) And speaking of Gibbs (this guy is so incompetent that he makes Scott McClellan look like a bloody genius) he doubled down on the war yesterday:
Tommy Christopher: How would you respond to criticism that the White House’s current posture toward Fox News constitutes some kind of bullying, or chilling of speech?
Robert Gibbs: (long pause) We…get questions throughout the day, seven days a week, about policies here at the White House, questions you guys want answered, and our goal is to make sure that you have the facts, that you do your job. That’s what we do for everybody.
TC: Well, specifically, the comments by Anita Dunn about Fox not being a real news network…
Robert Gibbs: I have watched many stories on that network that I have found not to be true. I think everybody in this room has been likely on the other end of a phone conversation with me when I’ve had issues with your stories. I don’t think that’s news.
Someone want to give Bobby G a note that tells him the difference between NEWS and COMMENTARY, please before this boob proves to the world how much of an obtuse ass he is?
The commentary shows -- Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Van Susteran with On the Record, etc. -- do tend to go a bit overboard at times; Beck most especially. But we can chalk that up to passion. The other networks have their passionate voices, but the difference there is that they blur the lines between news reporting and commentary. You put Chris "Tingles" Matthews, Keith "Worst person EVER" Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Schultz in the same room, and while they claim they're reporting facts, there isn't enough collective intelligence amongst that quartet to figure out the difference between fact and opinion. That's sad. Matthews is hardly an objective journalist. He was the one who stated it was job to help Barry's presidency:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah, well, you know what? I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work, and I think that --
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Is that your job? You just talked about being a journalist!
MATTHEWS: Yeah, it is my job. My job is to help this country.
What this comes down to is that the White House is very thin-skinned, and that's just an assessment coming from a pair of conservatives. The Nation has called the administration a bunch of cry-babies, which they are. As Michelle Malkin likes to chide, "Someone call the WAAAAAHMBULANCE!"
This isn't a smart move on the part of the White House. The last time they decided to declare war on a media figure was when Barry called out Rush Limbaugh, and we saw how well that went over. Rush enjoyed the jump in listeners, and Barry looked like a petulant brat that didn't get his way. The same thing is going to happen with this spat. FOX will get a jump in viewers -- not that it'll change much for them in the ratings; they're already kicking every other station's butt across the cable networks -- and Barry's reputation will take another hit.
We knew Barry was an absolute amateur. We knew he'd make mistakes, but we didn't realize just how embarrassing his mistakes would truly be. Instead of whining about the one network that isn't going to carry his water, wouldn't it be smarter to just stay silent on it, and enjoy the praise (or is it worship?) from the other networks?