Why are people not up in arms!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter rednour1
  • Start date Start date
R

rednour1

Guest
ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.

MORE

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff



Could you imagine if GW would have done this. The Libs would have rioted. They are going to steam roll this through, then we will all be in trouble!!!!!
 
So how is this any different than any other broadcast from the White House? They happen all the time, with the sitting President, whomever it is, pushing his point of view to the public in an attempt to bypass Congress. It is a very powerful tool of the presidency to appeal directly to the public. Fair? Heck no! Ronald Reagan was an expert at this. Probably some before him, but I remember his speeches being especially good. He was a great communicator. This has just become part of the norm IMHO.

You must also remember that getting your slant on this from the Drudge Report or from Rush is not necessarily a fair view. They get paid megabucks to inflame those who subscribe to their shows. Once again, IMHO, there are way, way too many people trying to get rich by dividing this country! Blame is an easy thing. Finding fault with someone else is way easier than doing something yourself.

This country has plenty of problems without trying to stir up more.

Lastly, political junk ruins otherwise great relationships. I have quit corresponding with friends from college when they got too radical for me, and have also quit other forums because the members assumed that their political views should be appreciated and applauded by everyone. I know that not everyone agrees with my views, and you need to know the same thing!
 
The media is a finicky B**ch ! They're in love with our current POTUS - no doubt. And Karl is right - all of the past leaders have taken advantage when they were able. But, remember this "the media" is in it for the money - nothing more - nothing less. If they the so-called liberal media finds it profitable to turn on their current swoon - they will be their worst nightmare. Ask any politician (big or small) - their bane is the media. Look what they did to Clinton. ABC knows that they will make millions from their programs, just as NBC did a couple of weeks ago. So, all the noise about biased media is just that - noise. The media is in it for money. I could prove it to you 10 different ways - but in the end you have to consider the source for almost every single bit of information these days - there's almost always a "backstory".
 
True, But even after the state of the union (yes even after everyone of Regans), the opposing party always gets their rebuttle. When you only allow one side to be stated, it is a scary thing.

Drudge, typically is links to other news organizations. If you want slant tune into MessNBC (MSNBC). Check out the mainstream media, and all you hear about is the anointed one!!!

The paddoc is the place for discussions like this, so I was told. If you don't care for it, don't read it. No offense meant to anyone. I honestly feel this is trouble no matter which political party is doing it, and I don't care which one.
 
I completely agree. The paddock is meant for conversations like this. That is why it is in this area and not others. As a matter of fact the moderators placed a warning saying just that at the heading of this area. Now. I personally have strong political views, but I am tired of the e-mails, comments, etc about how the USA has now disappeared and we are entering a socialist state. Are there things that I worry about with the present administration, YES! Are there things that drove me crazy with past administrations absolutely! But more importantly it is time to worry about my family and my business.

I don't care what anyone says the government has not and will not ever determine my success or failure in business, that is completely up to me! I as a matter of fact has stopped reading much of the nonsense that comes in e-mail because it is harmful to my attitude. For example I received an e-mail recently that showed RECENT pictures from London. I first received that e-mail November 2001, but it somehow the same protest and same pictures just happened again. Funny how that works.

Until recently I was just as bad as anyone, addicted to the laptop, desktop and crackberry, but now I tune these out and guess what the last three months my business is up over 50% and I am happier at home. Not because anything special, just my attitude.

Back on topic does the current political environment scare me absolutely! It is a proven fact that our political system and economy run the best when there is a checks and balances system in line. As a matter of fact the best economic pairing is a Democrat President and a Republican Congress, followed closely by just the opposite. IF, however we has one party in power the economic system collapses. Capitalism allows for tremendous success but the flip side is incredible failures. This is no different. We made our bed now we have to sleep in it. All republican was bad now all democrat will be bad.

Rant over.
 
Snopes.com has great rebuttals for most of the stuff you get via e-mail. And if you search enough news, independent or national, you will eventually find one that agrees with your views on things. I, like you Brandon, concentrate more on the things I directly control. I can change my attitude, change my work habits, and change how productive I am to succeed at work. What the current administration is doing to affect that? Not much that I can see. I do see that Osama succeeded with taking down the great American economy. Maybe we needed the 2001 wake up call. The news hasn't been news for years. I think it stopped with the Vietnam war and possibly the Kennedy administration. As with anything printed or on the internet, who knows how factual it is?
 
Oh, btw, regarding the Paddock, you are correct.

Some here have to accept that not all people have the same views. If you know it is something that will drive you away from the club, please don't read it. The purpose of the club is the cars and driving them, not political discussions. However, the more you see opinions of others about their views, the more you know a person and the better time that can be had with them. Which, is the reason for the Paddock, to have the more "radical" DISCUSSIONS amongst others with similar, but not the same views. I know my eyes have been opened to many things discussed here. End of this part of the disussion, back to the topic at hand. Thanks.
 
CK, PV, I agree. One way or the other scares me. PV, I also agree, it is discussions that not everyone agrees on, can discuss, and then we all go for a drive, or drink a cold one that makes us friends. Keeping things cold,so we don't hurt feeleings, and not expressing our true selves in makes us aquantances (sp)

I do try and read all sides, these days you can never tell what is truthful with any media outlet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You know it's weird. For whatever reason the demographic make-up of Cobra owners is about 95% Conservative republican/libertarian - don't know why - don't care. We do have a few liberal/democratic members here. Just want to make it clear - "friendly" debate on any topic is OK in The Paddock.

That said, it seems that so many threads devolve into Obama bashing - like this thread is headed. I reality, this thread started as a media bashing thread. A fine topic for discussion.

The problem here is really - drifting off topic. So, staying on point is key.
 
The reason Obama was mentioned is the apparent lack of control or the want for control of the news and how it is spun out of the white house. I agree, a little down the side road, but connected nonetheless. No bashing yet, I don't see after going back. No, I didn't miss spell, I meant to say Osama, not Obama.

Anyway, so does anyone else see each network being described as liberal? Democratic? Republican? CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS, and ABC - what do you think?
 
My biggest concern is, one year ago all you heard about was the Democrats wanting the fairness doctrine to try and control talk radio. This seems the exact opposite of that.

To me the free market "could" (read should) dictate. If people wanted to listen to liberal talk radio, Al Franken would be more popular than anyone on the radio.

The double standards that come from both sides infuriate me.

I also personally cannot sit by and do nothing. How to do something about it, I'm still trying to figure out. To me that is part of the problem. There is the old saying, somthing about "they came for the jews and I was not jewish, so I said nothing, then they came for (fill in the blank)......it ends with when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up.

If people don't talk about this, and try to make a difference, it will be too late to make a difference. I do know that by discussing things like this, and getting others opinions, is a great way to educate not only myself, but others as well.
 
Back to topic: It continues:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...althcare_informercial_despite_abc_promis.html

The Republican National Committee isn't buying ABC News' assurance that its day-long focus on the Obama administration's health-care package will be unbiased.

Indeed, the RNC will open up its television studio in Washington next Wednesday - the day of ABC's programming - and foot the bill for House and Senate Republicans to do interviews with stations in their home districts.

The RNC made the offer in a memo Wednesday that was obtained by the Daily News.

"The RNC will absorb the costs of the satellite time and offer assistance in setting up the satellite interviews with the local affiliates," it said.

The move is the latest attempt by Republicans in response to ABC's decision to broadcast multiple programs on the White House's new health-care program.

On Wednesday, ABC will air an interview with President Obama and the First Lady on "Good Morning America." It will also have Charles Gibson anchor "World News" from the White House and will air a prime-time, hour-long town-hall-type special with the President fielding questions on health care from Gibson, Diane Sawyer and a panel of guests.

ABC News officials have said the special will be balanced, with opinions and pointed questions from all sides on the issue.

Earlier this week, in a letter to ABC News President David Westin, Ken McKay, chief of staff of the RNC, said he was concerned that "this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this prime-time infomercial should be paid for out of the [Democratic National Committee's] coffers."

Kerry Smith, senior vice president of ABC News, responded in a letter to McKay in which he wrote: "ABC News prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers - of all political persuasions - even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum."

ABC News officials vow they have full control over the selection of the audience and questioners at the town-hall meeting.

They also noted that having a one-sided discussion doesn't make for good television.

Meanwhile, it seems it's not just the RNC that's upset with the network.

Yesterday, the advocacy group Conservatives for Patients' Rights lashed out at ABC for refusing to accept its paid advertising.

Rick Scott, chairman of the organization, called it "unfortunate - and unusual" that ABC would turn down the ads.

According to an ABC spokeswoman, it's not unusual - in fact, it's a policy.

"ABC as a network does not accept advocacy advertising, and never has," the spokeswoman said. "This is for all divisions, including news, prime, etc."


Won't even let them purchase a commercial?
 
Hmmm, so is this move to the white house permanent or just something that they are trying much like Matt Lauer on NBC does on location reports?
 
It's not that earth shattering. They won the election. They get to hold the megaphone for a while.
 
Hey guys,

I have just caught this thread and wanted to not read it but there are some interesting points in here.

The mainstream media for the most part has been left of center for as long as I can remember and have followed politics (since the late 80's). When Bush (the elder) tried to get relelected they used the "read my lips...no new taxes" speech against him in the '92 campaign...and then the love afair with Clinton began. Be the end of the 2nd Clinton term he was tainted bcause of the adultery, lying, and inappropriate behavior while in office. Bush the II had a rough go of it from the stary due to the contested election, with final ruling by the supreme court over the hanging chads. Then 2001 happened. The rest is history. After his first term I did something my father still can't believe, I changed party affiliations. There I said it. I'm one of the 5% I guess if you go by Mark's statistics.

As for how Obama is being treated right now, well, it's his first year. His own admittance is he wanted to pass as much legislation as possible during the first part of this year while he has the support of the public, which let we all forget, did elect him by a majority over the Republican candidate. This is also typical of a new party taking control. Mid-term elections will be next year, and the Dems know they may not have control of the house, senate and public favor then. We were also on the doorstep of another depression. I don't know if anyone would say we are out of the woods yet, but it does seem like things are getting better instead of worse.

I personally lived through a huge downturn in my industry and had to relocate to another part of the country to maintain the standard of living we had achieved through hard work over the years. My wife still can't find a job in her industry, and is now looking to go back to school and switch careers.

What does any of what I say have to do with Craig's original post? A lot. We are living through tought times. We live in a political society. If you don't like it, get out there and run for office, support someone who is that you think can make a difference, and vote. I personally am sick and tired of the media bashing - whether it is Rush bashing the Dems, or the major networks so called reporting on the failures of the past government and all of the screw ups with big business.

I have a big feeling the media were a big contributing factor to this mess we got in. Sure, banks were doing some screwy things with lending practices which may or may not have been crammed down their throats to open up the ability for more people to be homeowners. It's this 24/7 reporting on current events that has really made the media as influential as they are. Does that make sense? You can't avoid seeing what is happening in the media. Open your web-brouser, and what do you see? MSN home page has newspdates. When I go to the cafeteria at Honda R&D, we have flat panels all over the place with CNN on all day long.

Like CK said, you either get sucked into the vortex of this frienzy, or you shut it off, and decide to live your life without worrying about this s$%t.

I myself am sick of it. Nobody is going to be perfect at being president. It's a job I can only think you have to be crazy to want to fill, or driven to lead our country? I'm not calm enough to be in politics, that much is certain.

Well...that's my $1.50 worth, of course adjusted for inflation.

Scott
 
Last edited:
Hear, Hear!

Just this morning on the news the big political spot was some lady Senator, I don't know who she was, and it really doesn't matter, questioning a military officer at some sub-committee. The officer addressed her as "Mam," which is traditional, and she derided him saying he should address her as "Senator," which he did.

Well, the media story and slant was on this exchange rather than on what they were actually addressing! And the reason for the Senate sub-committee is UNDOUBTEDLY more important than some pissing contest. Yet the media covered only this aspect. Why? Because that is what the public wants to see -- or at least what the media THINKS the public wants to see.

We major on minors while the country and the world faces some really serious threats. Leisure is more important than substance. Just the way things are. Why television is more popular than print media. We never get the whole story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top