‘THIS CAN’T BE HAPPENING HERE’
Yeah, I know. Riehl and I are usually at each other’s throats but in this case, his thinking mirrors my own thoughts when I first read about this story:
This is the stuff of apparatchiks and Politburos, not a healthy, ethical free press. ABC will become the Obama network to sell his health care plan for an entire day.
I was going to start by saying, unbelievable. But given the media’s coverage of Obama from the primary to November, it may not be as unbelievable as it should. This is the single most dangerous thing for this Republic I’ve seen from their dysfunctional relationship since Obama announced and they fell in love. Health care reform is a major issue that will ultimately impact every American living and to be born. If anything, we need a balanced debate by a media that hasn’t picked a side.
I’m not even sure it’ll help Obama as much as he may think, but the principle here is even more important. I don’t know if ABC will cave, but if they offer Republicans a half hour at the end, or an hour some other night, it is not the same thing. This can’t be happening here.
What Mr. Riehl is rightly incensed about is the news that broke this morning that ABC will, in effect, join the executive branch of government and act as an appendage to the Obama PR machine to sell his - and his alone - health insurance plan.
From Drudge:
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.
The RNC sent a letter to ABC News President David Westin that sounds almost plaintive in its complaints:
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.
Not even granting the GOP the courtesy of giving them a half hour to respond? What’s with that?
Obviously, ABC saw the reasonably good ratings for NBC’s genuflecting coverage of the show featuring Obama in the White House, hosted by the obsequious Brian Williams and wanted a piece of that action. But at what price to their integrity? Williams may have bowed and scraped like a serf from the Middle Ages acknowledging his lord but that was just silly press worship of Obama.
If this story is true (and Drudge has been known to exaggerate things in the past), it’s a game changer. This isn’t anything like the networks offering time to the party holding the White House. It’s different than presenting biased coverage in favor of the president. There is nothing stealthy about it at all. This is putting a huge media conglomerate at the disposal of the executive branch in order to achieve the president’s policy goals.
A one trillion dollar program that will fundamentally alter not only our health care system but re-order American society itself and we are only to be presented with one side of the debate? Riehl has it right; why not just rename ABC, OBC and get on with it.
It’s not like the Republicans don’t have a viable alternative. About a month ago, they released “The Patient’s Choice Act” that totally eschews the so-called “public option” in favor of a federalized, tax friendly approach that even Democratic critics called “comprehensive.”
Now, I have serious problems with the GOP plan. It is hardly perfect. And I suspect ABC will, at some point, offer the GOP some kind of rebuttal, although as the RNC letter points out, fat lot of good it will do when ABC will be promoting the hell out of this program and the details of the Democratic plan.
But health care is really not the issue here. The issue is the crass, obvious, dangerous, and radical manipulation of the media to serve the ends of government and not serve the people. ABC News should immediately alter the program to include opposition voices to what the Democrats are proposing or cancel it altogether.
And if they don’t, I wonder if any journalists at ABC will take the honorable route and resign?
UPDATE: ABC NEWS RESPONDS
No, the Dems are not paying for the airtime. And ABC assures us that they will pick the audience members and that they will give a fair hearing of all sides of the debate.
Fine. One question: WHY DO IT FROM THE FRICKING WHITE HOUSE?
To that end, ABC News announced plans to broadcast a primetime hour from the White House devoted to exploring and probing the President’s position and giving voice to questions and criticisms of that position. We hope that any American concerned about health care will find our efforts to be informative, fair and civil.
Second, 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 is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue. ABC News alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience.
Third, there already has been extensive coverage of the upcoming health care debates, on ABC and elsewhere, and there will be much, much more. Indeed, we’ve already had many critics of the President’s health care proposals on the air – and that’s before a real plan has even been put before the country.
In the end, no one watching, listening to, or reading ABC News will lack for an understanding of all sides of these important questions.
No mention of the fact that they will get all day access to the White House with GMA and WNT getting to host from there.
And a program devoted “to exploring and probing the President’s position and giving voice to questions and criticisms of that position” starts from the premise that the Democrat’s program will be discussed, not alternatives - just “questions and criticisms.”
No doubt there will be some pointed questions about the cost of the program. But my question above remains; why put this on at the White House? Why not someplace like Constitution Hall or some other place that would have real meaning.
It still smacks of partisan shilling in my book. And as my friend Lionheart points out in the comments, if Bush had tried this, many on the left would have hit the roof.
I’m with Riehl. There is nothing unbelievable at all here. If this story is true, the United States media will be unmasked as little more than a totalitarian propaganda outlet. My only hope is that the public will see, probably for the first time, that nothing they read or hear from the traditional media can be trusted any longer.
Even the Europeans, who have no First Amendment protections at all, would have a problem with this one. As we look around our own hemisphere, we see outlets in Latin America that bravely battle their governments to provide objective information. Brave souls in Iran use the new media to inform the rest of us about what has happened there. There are too many such circumstances to list.
The United States is headed to a very dark place. As bad as I hate to admit it, the so-called crazies were right about Obama and the Left, and I will never have anything but praise for the right-wing radio bloviators whom the government probably will unplug unless the GOP has great success in the next congressional elections.
Ultimately I’m saddened to read this one because a free press was such a vital part of American democracy. Someone once said we have a free press for anyone who owns one. Even they never thought “someone” would be an increasingly lawless White House.
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/16/2009 @ 9:23 am
But no one dare call the media left wing.
Comment by Bald Ninja — 6/16/2009 @ 9:35 am
The only thing that can be done is to continue to beat the drum about the leftist media propaganda machine. Maybe call it a “vast left-wing media conspiracy.” There’s no stopping such propaganda except by revealing it for what it is — and convincing enough people to understand that when they turn on network “news” they are tuning into the Obama White House and the reporter on the screen is lying to them. Can that be done? I don’t know.
Comment by Anon — 6/16/2009 @ 9:57 am
You’re implying that ABC is giving up the network for free. It’s not. The air time is being paid for. Smells like good old fashioned capitalism to me. Money is being exchanged for goods and services.
Too bad that fairness doctrine isn’t in place.
So it’s a completely overt and obvious infomercial. What exactly is the problem? It seems a little more straightforward than the covertly paid experts that showed up on all the networks when they sold us the war.
Again, sorry to hear about that fairness doctrine, oh, and that whole capitalism thing.
I don’t know. Maybe you should have read the damn thing before commenting.
ABC is presenting this program as news. No one is paying for it (if you have a link that says someone is, I will alter the text in the post). There is also no indication that any opposing views, i.e. the GOP plan, will be allowed on.
And if you can’t see “the problem” with a news network overtly shilling for one party or the other, there is no hope for you and I wish you well in our brave new world.
ed.
Comment by Chuck Tucson — 6/16/2009 @ 9:59 am
Bring back the Fairness Doctrine!
Comment by Richard Bruce Cheney — 6/16/2009 @ 10:01 am
This seems to be an over-reaction. ABC News is a private entity. At worst, we have a private entity exercising its right to free speech. So what?
Furthermore, ABC News is claiming that it will pick questions that represent a diversity of views. Now, you can claim that they are biased. Fine. So what do you propose? Should we have a government body to oversee the fairness of the news? Now that would truly be scary.
Note that I’m making no claim that ABC News is unbiased, fair, or whatever. You can attack them for that all you want, just as the left attacks Fox News.
Comment by Anon — 6/16/2009 @ 10:16 am
so Rick Moran (and apparently the GOP)are now officially in favor of the return of the fairness doctrine. May wonders never cease.
While you are at it , Rick, I’m sure you will call for the Fox News Network to allow for a Democratic response to its commentary on the debate. I’m sure that you will want fair and balanced treatment from Rush Limbaugh on this issue as well
Comment by stonetools — 6/16/2009 @ 10:38 am
Chuck,
Try to imagine Fox News broadcasting from the White House “Blue Room” during the Bush presidency, where he is making the case for war- prime time, hosted by Brit Hume, presented as news, no opposite viewpoints presented, and free air time. You would be outraged, and rightfully so.
The fact that you attempt to defend the Obama/ABC News marriage is nothing less than astounding, and much more than hypocritical.
Comment by lionheart — 6/16/2009 @ 10:41 am
So, the Dems spewing garbage on ABC is somehow different than your guys spewing garbage on FOX? Got it, thanks.
Comment by Chuck Tucson — 6/16/2009 @ 10:43 am
Lionheart, Presidents always have a bigger soapbox than anyone else. That’s always been the case.
But the real question is: okay, let’s say that you all are right. So the solution is more regulation? What new laws would you suggest?
Comment by Anon — 6/16/2009 @ 10:53 am
Re: The return of the Fairness Doctrine.
If the major nets hired a few people from the right of center…it wouldn’t be necessary.
Problem is…Groupthink. Nothin’ but liberals agreeing with other liberals about how great liberalism is.
Comment by Increase Mather — 6/16/2009 @ 10:58 am
It’s apparent that yet another industry has been taken over by the Obama Federal Government. Banks, automotive, health care, media and entertainment… and we forget the education industry has been owned for quite some time. Telecommunications nationalization is underway. $250/bbl oil will allow for the transportation industry to be taken in. FedEx will be in the unenviable position of being the Ford to the UPS “GM”.
Really, there’s not a lot that’s significant in our economy, other than the information industry and it’s leaving town. Microsoft’s made that clear and much of the Vectoral class will follow as the Great Leader can’t stop those information flows from racing outside our borders.
Other than the service economy (which will be unionized, which is the only effective way of controlling every lawn service, bar, restaurant, etc.), the statist power grab will be complete.
Comment by HatlessHessian — 6/16/2009 @ 11:03 am
What’s all this snark about “so you want the fairness doctrine then?” No one here has said that. People are expressing their outrage at this media corruption and the ensuing hypocrisy from the left. If a Republican did this with Fox News, the left would be having an apoplectic fit. This ABC programming will be left-wing, pro-Obama propaganda masquerading as news. That just needs to be said. That’s all. No calls for regulation, just what I hope will be a thunderous, far-reaching acknowledgement that the ABC news network is in the employ of the Obama administration and therefore should be ignored or ridiculed when reporting on any aspects of said administration. For the record, under the Obama administration I imagine that a “fairness doctrine” would bring us more of this type of corrupt left-wing propaganda, not less.
Comment by Anon — 6/16/2009 @ 11:45 am
Yay, fresh manufactured outrage! Mmmm, smells lemony.
The Bush White House had its own full-time network: Fox News. Still does.
Protests from the Right? Gosh, I don’t recall any. As with so many things conservatives only discover principle when it’s convenient to their politics.
As for why they’re broadcasting from the White House? I believe that would be: ratings. In other words, business. Profit. Money. The profit motive which, as we know, is the only sacred motive.
So we have here a business chasing profit while following in the footsteps of Fox News. So, refresh me: what’s the conservative objection?
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 12:13 pm
Anon:
“People are expressing their outrage at this media corruption and the ensuing hypocrisy from the left. If a Republican did this with Fox News, the left would be having an apoplectic fit. This ABC programming will be left-wing, pro-Obama propaganda masquerading as news. That just needs to be said. That’s all.”
Precisely. This isn’t about regulation, and no one, on the Right, at least, disputes ABC has the legal right to put a camera in the White House and broadcast the most unctuous propaganda 24/7. Rick’s point, my point, and your point is larger. This isn’t about the law but about the propriety and the extreme danger of state-controlled media (even under the aegis of private ownership). I would hope the Left would have become upset had FOX done an hour-long propaganda broadcast from the White House directed by the Bush Administration. I would have. Hell, the Left got upset because FOX didn’t trash Bush enough.
Conservatives aren’t the ones who stay awake at night to plan how to shut down opposition voices. I remember once upon a time when the majority of liberals didn’t, either. Those liberal now are the minority.
This is very dangerous. Period. Those who don’t see it seriously need to think it through.
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/16/2009 @ 12:20 pm
Are “message force multipliers” and “surrogates” being used for Obama’s healthcare as were used for Bush’s Iraq war?
Comment by Jeremy — 6/16/2009 @ 12:20 pm
Back when I worked for 20/20, I met with Av Westin, the father of the current nepotistic nerd-in-charge. Like all nerds, the Westins are socialists who hate individual excellence since the family possesses none of it themselves. Ditto for the other networks, all holding tanks for third-rate “journalists” with little or no clue as to how a business works.
Sadly, I doubt John Stoessel will be in the Blue Room. Probably Diane Sawyer, who worked in the Nixon WH before she defected and other refugees from excellence who infest the ABC newsroom will be on hand as a cheering section.
Wanna bet BHO will stop by to give an “exclusive” interview to Gibson and the other Nibelungs slaving after a Statist regime in the MSM?
Comment by daveinboca — 6/16/2009 @ 12:23 pm
Michale:
“So we have here a business chasing profit while following in the footsteps of Fox News. So, refresh me: what’s the conservative objection?”
Can you show me anything comparable FOX did along this lines, i.e., go into the White House for a straight “news” broadcast to advance legislation?
I know you can’t. The Democrats’ congressional hearings still would be underway. You are usually more intellectually honest.
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/16/2009 @ 12:24 pm
They have always been “in the tank” for Obama and now they are at least being honest about it. How to react? I think an excellent plan would be to absolutely ignore the broadcasts and ABC altogether (that includes
SoapNet too).
Comment by Gayle Miller — 6/16/2009 @ 12:30 pm
Was ABC in the tank for Obama when they featured the pentagon’s military analysts to drum up support for Bush’s war? I think they’re for those in power.
Comment by Jeremy — 6/16/2009 @ 12:33 pm
Let’s just dip the entire population in the Kool Aid of leftwing insanity. We should be grateful that the Obama White House is being so completely open about its nonsense. And to those who bring up Fox News - that’s just so nonsensical! It’s the automatic response to any commentary about the alphabets and CNN being heavily in the tank for Obama. It’s almost a kneejerk reaction to say “What about Fox News” - what kills liberals about Fox News is that they cannot duplicate its success with their own message! Air America is a dismal failure.
Comment by Gayle Miller — 6/16/2009 @ 12:34 pm
me thinks mr. reynolds will be happy with the soon to come obamathons on sundays much to the chagrin of mr. chavez (only in that it will crowd in on his playtime, mind u).
the cat is out of the hat, and guess what, he is the cat we all thought he would be, except his teeth are a bit sharper, his claws a bit longer, and his meow is a roar. but much like the scorpion, obama’s true nature cannot be hidden, he will fall along the road with ozymandias, any monster who uses force when their nation is down (there was a certain German that did that) will eventually meet their end, hopefully sooner than later.
thank you rick, keep up the good bloviations
hoorah!
Comment by jambrowski — 6/16/2009 @ 12:50 pm
Michael is right, more faux ourage from the conservative echo chamber.Out here in middle america this fake issue doesn,t even show up on the radar screen,only mindless rightwingers with too much time on their hands and their minions are fired up. The rest of us have heard them cry wolf so much it only falls on deaf ears.Limbaugh preaches his fearmongering endlessly, I hear no calls of outrage from the peanut gallery on that.ABC broadcasts from the whitehouse, and its the Third Reich all over again,get real conservatives, and then Americans might try listening to you again. Otherwise we will continue to whip you in elections until you get the message.
Comment by Joe — 6/16/2009 @ 1:10 pm
Nothing new here other than it is out of the closet now. The MSM has been an arm of the DNC since at least 1960.
Comment by obamathered — 6/16/2009 @ 1:12 pm
Jackson:
So let’s get straight on this: your only objection is the venue? If so then Fox has done hundreds of fawning interviews from the White House.
Or is it that there’s something magically evil about holding a town hall sort of event at the WH, as opposed to the aforementioned fawning interviews. If so, explain why the first is okay and the second is armageddon.
Setting aside the inevitable hysteria, ABC wants to talk about health care, and it wants a ratings boost by being able to say, “from the White House.”
Explain to me why that’s a change from Fox which has operated openly as an arm of the GOP, up to and including direct quoting of WH-issued talking points.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 1:27 pm
Fine. One question: WHY DO IT FROM THE FRICKING WHITE HOUSE?
One word: Ratings.
The President is popular. ABC would broadcast from Oprah’s house if they thought it would attract viewers.
I think what we’re going to see here is the “Cry Wolf” syndrome coming back to haunt conservatives. For the past five months not a day has gone by without bloggers, talk show hosts and cable news jocks decrying Obama’s Socialist/Communist/Marxist thugocracy. He is depicted as a Nazi and his supporters are frequently compared to Hitler Youth. This has had the result of having all of this over-the-top criticism dismissed as partisan nonsense and it is ignored - nothing more than white noise in an already noisy media landscape.
So what happens now that we have a legitimate concern? The same partisans who have made absurd claims for months on end are now asking to be taken seriously now that they have a real story. They will likely be ignored by most Americans who just don’t trust them anymore.
“Obama is a Commie!” If we’ve heard it once, we’ve heard it a thousand times.
Comment by Never Cry Wolf — 6/16/2009 @ 1:37 pm
@Lionheart:
“Try to imagine Fox News broadcasting from the White House “Blue Room” during the Bush presidency, where he is making the case for war- prime time, hosted by Brit Hume, presented as news, no opposite viewpoints presented, and free air time. You would be outraged, and rightfully so.”
. . .yes, I guess that’s a silly scenario. Who could imagine Fox shilling for the Bush/Neocon Admin? Madness.
@Gayle Miller:
Make up your mind. Fox is fair and balanced, but they have a “message”. If they have a message, then they aren’t fair and balanced . . . they’re pushing a message. That ain’t rocket science.
The fact that you like the message doesn’t make it fair and balanced . . . it makes it your preferred flavor of kool-aid. Enjoy it, but do kindly blow the “everybody is so bamboozled by the propaganda except me” line out your kiester.
Comment by busboy33 — 6/16/2009 @ 1:47 pm
So they are staying true to form since the campaign started. At least they’re consistent.
Consistently and transparently BIASED, that is. And they wonder why their evening news ratings have been going through the floor, oh, since Reynolds, Huntley/Brinkley, and Chronkite. Just when you can’t believe that they’ve hit a new low, they hit another one.
Comment by David R. Block — 6/16/2009 @ 1:47 pm
I don’t have to “explain” anything, Michael, since you couldn’t provide that example. Just change where I wrote “usually” intellectually honest to “infrequently.”
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/16/2009 @ 1:47 pm
“ABC News is a private entity”
Yes, and as a private entity it can broadcast anything it wants throughtout any building it owns. It is nothing without a license to use the very “public” airways to come into your home. Or is this a cable only deal? Oops, no.
Comment by Dan Riehl — 6/16/2009 @ 1:52 pm
Michael,
Every network has aired interviews from the White House in the Bush years. What rock did you crawl out from under? Please.
Find a full length Townhall during the Bush years from the White House and then one will have apples and apples instead of apples and cranberries. Yeah, they’re both red fruit, so what?
Comment by David R. Block — 6/16/2009 @ 1:53 pm
I don’t have to “explain” anything, Michael, since you couldn’t provide that example. Just change where I wrote “usually” intellectually honest to “infrequently.”
In other words, no: you can’t explain why this is fundamentally different.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 1:56 pm
. . .and then one will have apples and apples instead of apples and cranberries.
I see. So you don’t draw the line at pimping for a given White House. Nor do you draw the line at the location for the pimping. You draw the line at townhalls.
Yes, I can see where that’s a core conservative principle.
Save us the ineffectual insults and explain exactly why it’s all right for a network to air an unedited Bush townhall filled with Bush-vetted participants chosen solely for their placidity and GOP credentials from some other location, but it’s an outrage to air a townhall with a more broad-based, less partisan audience from the White House.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 2:01 pm
If you had provided something that somewhat approximated even a strained analogy I would have, Michael. As it is, you just reverted to defensive partisan hackery because you know there isn’t an example of something presented as a straight news broadcast from FOX along these lines during the Bush years. I’m disappointed in you, actually.
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/16/2009 @ 2:03 pm
Time to stop buying Disney products.
Comment by ravs12 — 6/16/2009 @ 3:05 pm
Busboy 33 - I never mentioned “fair and balanced” I simply remarked that Fox News is everyone’s favorite straw man when the subject of the wholly biased alphabets is discussed. And you leave my kiester out of this bucko! That’s offensive as all hell! My comments come from my brain; if your comments come from elsewhere, that’s not my problem!
Comment by Gayle Miller — 6/16/2009 @ 3:17 pm
Jackson:
You don’t have an answer because you can’t think of one. I mean, it’s a simple question, right? Why is this categorically different?
You can’t come up with anything because you bought the outrage without thinking it through. Outrage first, thought process later. So when challenged you double down on bluster and outrage and you still have no answer.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 3:30 pm
So Tony Snow never worked for FOX News? Jeff Gannnon wasn’t a right-wing dupe to toss Bush softball questions? That wasn’t the Bush administration that invited top radio hatemongers and assorted blog loonies to the White House lawn ahead of the 2006 midterms so they could broadcast and write from the White House?
There is nothing sillier than feigned outrage from people who believe Sarah Palin is fit to serve as anything other than butt of joke.
The Republicans lost, they are in the minority and to be honest, if you don’t like that, leave the country. Sound familiar patriots?
Comment by HumboldtBlue — 6/16/2009 @ 3:57 pm
And that’s exactly the problem. Good grief, it’s like they think we’ve forgotten the YouTube debate where all the questions CNN selected for Republicans came from Democratic plants. Who will ABC’s audience be? How will they be selected? And after the show is over, what will we find when we Google those people?
ABC will stack the deck. They always stack the deck. And they’re offering the fact that they’ll be the ones stacking the deck up as if it should make us happy.
Comment by David H. — 6/16/2009 @ 4:24 pm
ABC will stack the deck. They always stack the deck. And they’re offering the fact that they’ll be the ones stacking the deck up as if it should make us happy.
Yeah, I miss the good old days when Karl Rove would handpick all of Mr. Bush’s questioners. That was much more fair.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 4:26 pm
You still haven’t provided an example, Michael. That’s the only problem here. And what’s worse, you know you can’t.
Comment by obamathered — 6/16/2009 @ 4:37 pm
And while you are providing dude an example, when did Fox and Friends do a full broadcast from Bush’s WH? I missed that one.
Comment by obamathered — 6/16/2009 @ 4:48 pm
I understand why NBC/MSNBC/CNBC has whored itself out regarding anything having to do with ‘Climate Change’. After all, their parent company (GE) is surgically attached at the hip to the Obama administration and stands to make billions if not trillions on anything and everything ‘green’ … cap and tax, smart (we’ll tell how much energy you are allowed to use) grid, solar and tilting at windwills. Just not sure what the connection between ABC and health care is. Maybe, the plan is to nominate Goofy as the new Surgeon General and turn our entire health care system into the usual Mickey Mouse operation that is so prevalent in our government.
Comment by Michael S. — 6/16/2009 @ 5:29 pm
Now what do you boys have? Nothing?
NEENER, NEENER, NEENER…LALALALALALALALA
Some pissant reporter from a pissant station gets an interview with Rumsfeld and you’re comparing that to an ALL DAY ABC FULL ACCESS to the White House with GMA, WNT, 20-20, and Nightline all getting access to admin officials to talk about THEIR health care plan not to mention interviews with BOTH Obama and Michelle?
Grow up, Michael.
ed.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 7:05 pm
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 7:53 pm
One more, Rick, since you accuse me of talking about pissant nobodies:
I was not able to locate any principled conservative denunciations of this event.
Comment by michael reynolds — 6/16/2009 @ 8:24 pm
I’m going to have to go with the ‘no big deal’ crowd. After the MSM’s whoring of themselves in the election run up everything else seems pretty marginal.
However, I’ve got to say that 42 and 44 read like modified press conferences and 43 seems to be a defense of Bush - he could have asked for Fox or others to help with Amnesty in the same fashion as Obama did with ABC but declined to do so. Maybe one more MR reference pushes me to the ‘it’s a big and highly unusual deal’ side.
Comment by EBJ — 6/16/2009 @ 9:12 pm
@ Michael R.
How bout you post the rest of the article from USA Today there or at least give it as your source? Notice you convienently left out the part where they mention that THIRTY-EIGHT talk shows were invited to include moderate and liberal hosts. The event was not limited to just one outlet with any opposing views being specifically and intentionally forbidden. Yeah that’s some real transparency and bi-partisanship in action there. More imporantly, check out the leftie blogs about the event and they were all screaming bloody murder. But of course that was the evil Boooosh, so of course it was wrong and bad for him to do this type of thing. Now of course, the all-knowing and benevolent Doh’bambi is in charge so it’s all good and ok. I would suggest you pull your head out and replace it with your usual hypocrisy, but I know that will never happen.
Comment by Michael S. — 6/16/2009 @ 10:04 pm
The best part of all of this is that, even with ObamaCare, there will be 36 million Americans without health insurance.
This is failure with a big price tag.
Comment by Neo — 6/17/2009 @ 9:32 am
So you dug and dug and dug, Michael, and the closest analogy you could draw between an ostensibly objective network broadcasting its signature news programs from the White House to push an Administration’s pet issue was with…right-wing talk radio entertainers who admit they have a POV broadcasting from the White House. If Obama had invited left-wing newspaper columnists (but I repeat myself)rather than ABC your example would be valid. As it is, your analogy is beyond pathetic. You are in full and ineffectual spin mode now and not even worth the waste of my time.
And to answer a question you originally posed, Rick: I’m afraid the only way ABC “reporters” will leave is if, like Linda Douglass, they have an undisguised job waiting for them with this Administration.
Comment by jackson1234 — 6/17/2009 @ 9:35 am
Hey Michael S,I,ve tried discussing things with conservatives, they never give an inch,their ideology won,t let them.Michael R tries and then you people get all huffy and personal. My instincts tell me conservatives can,t accept that Obama won. As long as that persists conservatives will continue to make up fake controverseys,it must make being in the political wilderness a little easier. Obama is stomping his opposition, he’s way smarter than his foes and will probably stomp his opponent in 2012. So my advice is, you better get used to him as president,your yelling at clouds will only sink the gop further than it already is. We own you, get over it.
Comment by Joe — 6/17/2009 @ 9:40 am
“We own you, get over it.”
LMFAOROFL … What a typical Leftist’s idea of an ‘open-minded discussion’. From Obama all the way down to lick-spittle little Joe … ‘We won, now STFU’. Not even worth my time to explain the complete and utter hypocrisy of that mentality. Have a nice day
Comment by Michael S. — 6/17/2009 @ 11:24 am
Maybe this is part of the plot to overexpose the “WON”. I am not the only one lately to mention that I am sick and tired of seeing him EVERY FRICKIN’ DAY bloviating on every subject under the sun.
Just like Kenya in the old (1987) days:” His Excellency Daniel Arap Moi today…” the entire front page. The news (if they dared to print any) was on the back pages.
Comment by fiona — 6/17/2009 @ 12:09 pm
Jesus Christ… Cry about it why don’t ya.
Comment by Levi — 6/17/2009 @ 3:26 pm
I’ve come to believe that the media have squarely taken on the role of Blanche Maxwell
Comment by Neo — 6/18/2009 @ 3:45 pm
The republican position is clear: they like things the way they are. And any idea of introducing a public option will by met by an army of republican talking heads telling the lie that this is a government takeover rather then the competition with the private market that it is.
Comment by Aaron — 6/18/2009 @ 6:01 pm
I cannot believe all of these arguments being posted. Our media, which is supposedly biased and to get at the root of these issues, is being taken over to serve a governmental agenda. This is not really shocking, since it has been going on for such a long time. The media is set-up to report the facts, on both sides. The fact that ABC is not allowing opposing views is an outrage. End of story.
Comment by Brent — 6/18/2009 @ 8:22 pm