Spring Break
Obama's anger with Fox News stems from immaturity
Josh Phillips
Issue date: 10/27/09 Section: Opinion
When Obama was elected president, he suggested that he was going to usher in a new era of transparency and non-partisan politics in America. His proponents claimed that he was the smartest, most educated and most tolerant name on the election ballot in perhaps decades.
But his recent attacks on the Fox News network has been anything but tolerant or non-partisan. Obama's tantrum seems to have begun with his dismissal of Fox News in mid-September, when he opted to meet with every major media news outlet except the one that has the most viewers overall.
Now his temper-tantrum has extended to engaging in what his administration has called a war on Fox News. In an Oct. 21 interview with NBC's Savannah Guthrie, Obama was asked if he felt it was appropriate for the White House to determine what a news organization is. As any typical politician would do, Obama conveniently sidestepped the question, saying that the people were more interested in the health care issue and the situation in Afghanistan.
It seems that maybe the people are the only ones concerned with these issues, considering Obama's first few months were spent on visiting as many late night talk shows as possible and even nationally announcing his fantasy football picks.
Or maybe the media just made a big deal out of his fantasy football picks, just like they tend to glamorize Michelle Obama's underarms. Regardless, Obama doesn't seem to mind if the media portrays him as the national savior or if they portray his wife as a stylish, sexy supermodel. Anything less, and he gets huffy.
For all of Obama's supposed intelligence, he seems to have trouble understanding the "loyal opposition" and its value. It has existed since Ancient Rome and keeps the governing party in check, but Obama tends to believe that he is immune to criticism. As such, he dances with the great "liberal no-nos" - intolerance and the undermining of free speech.
I'm no stranger to Fox's constant attacks on liberal ideology or their hypocrisy. When George W. Bush was in office, they typically took a stand against protests; but now that citizens all over the country have begun to protest Obama's social health care plan, Fox News has become a staunch supporter of the First Amendment.
But his recent attacks on the Fox News network has been anything but tolerant or non-partisan. Obama's tantrum seems to have begun with his dismissal of Fox News in mid-September, when he opted to meet with every major media news outlet except the one that has the most viewers overall.
Now his temper-tantrum has extended to engaging in what his administration has called a war on Fox News. In an Oct. 21 interview with NBC's Savannah Guthrie, Obama was asked if he felt it was appropriate for the White House to determine what a news organization is. As any typical politician would do, Obama conveniently sidestepped the question, saying that the people were more interested in the health care issue and the situation in Afghanistan.
It seems that maybe the people are the only ones concerned with these issues, considering Obama's first few months were spent on visiting as many late night talk shows as possible and even nationally announcing his fantasy football picks.
Or maybe the media just made a big deal out of his fantasy football picks, just like they tend to glamorize Michelle Obama's underarms. Regardless, Obama doesn't seem to mind if the media portrays him as the national savior or if they portray his wife as a stylish, sexy supermodel. Anything less, and he gets huffy.
For all of Obama's supposed intelligence, he seems to have trouble understanding the "loyal opposition" and its value. It has existed since Ancient Rome and keeps the governing party in check, but Obama tends to believe that he is immune to criticism. As such, he dances with the great "liberal no-nos" - intolerance and the undermining of free speech.
I'm no stranger to Fox's constant attacks on liberal ideology or their hypocrisy. When George W. Bush was in office, they typically took a stand against protests; but now that citizens all over the country have begun to protest Obama's social health care plan, Fox News has become a staunch supporter of the First Amendment.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 36
jimmy
posted 10/27/09 @ 8:16 AM MST
Nice column, but your accusations against FOX for not being "fair and balanced" and your assertion that O'Reilly is somehow less polite and taking the cliche conservative viewpoints is unwarranted. (Continued…)
Josh Phillips
posted 10/27/09 @ 8:31 AM MST
Correction: I mistakenly wrote "fantasy football" picks when the actual issue I intended to refer to was Obama's "March Madness" picks. The editors were notified of this mistake before print, but somehow it still managed to sneak onto the page. (Continued…)
James
posted 10/27/09 @ 8:53 AM MST
Your most glaring mistake in your attack piece is to equate Fox News to the "loyal opposition." If Fox were only a conservative news organization and acted as such; if it truly were a loyal opposition I would wholeheartedly agree with your remarks. (Continued…)
Sandra
posted 10/27/09 @ 12:10 PM MST
"A true news organization only reports the news; it doesn't and shouldn't *create* the news."
If this is true, then we have no true news organizations and haven't for . (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 10/27/09 @ 12:14 PM MST
Response to this article:
The very next day after the Obama white house declared war on Fox News, Sally Quinn of Washington Post fame made a point of appearing on Fox News. (Continued…)
Zach
posted 10/27/09 @ 8:01 PM MST
Obama vs. Fox News=What you get when you vote in a fraud of a president with no experience whatsoever.
Huh?
posted 10/27/09 @ 11:39 PM MST
"Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he never acted like a spoiled child when he came under fire."
GW stopped giving press time to MSNBC because they were critical of his policies (http://thinkprogress. (Continued…)
James
posted 10/28/09 @ 11:37 AM MST
First off, I never said that Fox has not been doing needful investigation. It has, and I think it should continue to do so. In that Fox does do what is needed to fill the "loyal opposition" that was originally mentioned. (Continued…)
Registered Independent
posted 10/29/09 @ 12:30 PM MST
Response to James:
Ummmm . . . no, as a matter of fact.
I watch Fox and CNN pretty equally, and only turn on MSNBC occasionally, for humorous contrast. (Continued…)
James
posted 10/30/09 @ 9:48 AM MST
So, "Registered Independant," who is it exactly that you are arguing with here? It obviously isn't me because I've already stated at least twice that I agree that Fox News is a needed presence in our society. (Continued…)
Post a Comment