President Obama: Media Critic

You can run for 100 days.. but you can’t hide..

“Well, you can’t have it both ways,” the president said.
No, you cannot. And it is beginning to catch up with you already…

BO is an idiot to no end!!!!

I think he has painted himself into a corner

This guy (BO) has some very thin skin… The Main Stream Media has been EXTREMELY positive in their coverage of The One….
4/27/09
“THE MEDIA HAVE GIVEN PRESIDENT OBAMA MORE COVERAGE THAN GEORGE W. BUSH AND BILL CLINTON COMBINED AND MORE POSITIVE COVERAGE THAN EITHER RECEIVED AT THIS POINT IN THEIR PRESIDENCIES, according to a new study by researchers at George Mason and Chapman Universities.
DURING HIS FIRST 50 DAYS IN OFFICE, the three broadcast network evening news shows devoted 1021 stories lasting 27 hours 44 minutes to Barack Obama’s presidency. THE DAILY AVERAGE OF SEVEN STORIES AND OVER 11 MINUTES OF AIRTIME REPRESENTS ABOUT HALF OF THE ENTIRE NEWSCASTS. By contrast, at this point in their presidencies George W. Bush had received 7 hours 42 minutes and Bill Clinton garnered 15 hours 2 minutes of coverage, for a combined total airtime five hours less than Mr. Obama’s.
Mr. Obama has received not only MORE PRESS but also BETTER PRESS than his immediate predecessors. On the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news, FIFTY-EIGHT PERCENT OF ALL EVALUATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS POLICIES HAVE BEEN FAVORABLE, and 42 percent were unfavorable. CMPA’s previous studies of network news found that George W. Bush received only 33 percent positive evaluations by sources and reporters during the first 50 days of his administration in 2001, and Bill Clinton received only 44 percent positive evaluations during his first ten weeks (70 days) in office in 1993. (As noted above, these figures are based on judgments by reporters and sources not affiliated with either political party.)
The three networks have evaluated Mr. Obama very similarly – 57% POSITIVE COMMENTS on ABC, 58% POSITIVE on CBS, and 61% POSITIVE on NBC. But he fared far better in New York Times stories, where nearly THREE OUT OF FOUR evaluative comments (73%) by sources and reporters were FAVORABLE. And he fared far worse on Fox News, where only one out of eight such comments (13%) were favorable.”
================
Wait until the MSM wakes up and begins to dig a little deeper into Obama’s policies, spending priorities, and circle of thugs (unions, insiders, etc.)… Then we’ll see The One bare his fascist fangs…

Any fair look at Obama’s history will show that he has never been subjected to much criticism by people around him in his life endeavors. He has been a popular person and accustomed to praise at all turns. This, imo, is why he is so thin skinned about any criticism he receives. He has never had to deal with it. Now he does.

Jake
Is it odd to be about the only reporter who doesn’t tingle at these pressers?

“That is the classic narcissist.”
He has a need to prove his purity.

tjp612:”Mr. Obama has received not only MORE PRESS but also BETTER PRESS than his immediate predecessors.”
Cute how you conveniently omit Reagan, who the cameras loved and who also had a penchant for prime time press conferences.

As he has been doing with distressing frequency, the president is talling only part of the story concerning his deficits.
Regardless of whether one approves or disapproves of the deficits incurred during Mr. Bush’s tenure (the final two of which were engineered by a Democratic congress that included Mr. Obama, who voted for them), the fact is that no deficit during the Bush years exceeded 4% of GDP. The FY 2010 deficit will be an astonishing 12.9%, and the CBO projects deficits exceeding 5% of GDP indefinitely.
I have seen not a single member of congress offer one word as to how the accumulating debt will be paid, nor to the best of my knowledge has the president ever addressed the subject.
It the total national debt was X upon Bush’s arrival and 2X upon his departure, I consider that bad (so did the Democrats while it was occurring). How, then, to consider making it 4X in a mere five years? He will add twice as much to the national debt in five years as Bush did in eight.
The entire world is fast becoming very leery about the financial management of the United States Treasury, and the consequences of their unease will not be pretty at all.

Great Scott! Can you believe this? The man actually got up today and said this with a straight face:
“(Reuters) – President Barack Obama raised the prospect on Thursday that China and other nations could stop buying U.S. debt and said the United States needed to tackle its deficit to avoid long-term economic damage.
“‘The long-term deficit and debt that we have accumulated is unsustainable. We can’t keep on just borrowing from China or borrowing from other countries,’ Obama told a town hall meeting event in New Mexico.
“‘We have to pay interest on that debt and that means that we’re mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt,’ he said.”
Well, well, well…Just who is it who’s doing all this irresponsible borrowing that must be stopped? He didn’t say…
He certainly got the part about “we can’t just keep on borrowing from China” right–the Chinese are fast becoming reluctant to lend to us, and are pushing for abandoning the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
Clearly this man figures his Democratic supporters are uncomprehending morons, and who can question his conclusion in that regard?

My my, we do have a lot of jealous jills on this board. Obama an idiot? you wouldn’t last 2 minutes in a debate with him.
Let me run this by you. Are the questions the press asks soft? or is Obama just that good at actually answering questions unlike the former bumbling Prez?

Most news reporters don’t know how to report the news without being confrontational. All we ask is the truth and the facts.

“”President Obama: Media Critic”"
Especially so soon after President Obama told attendees of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner that they all voted for him.
–
That’s Funny:
It’s the Media that got him elected.
He “IS” our First ‘Media Induced President’.
Media Induced President
Media Induced President
Media Induced Prez.

Da Truth:”Sore Losers –
You mean like when the “Demi-Dems” Trashed the White House after Bush was elected !!!”
Seriously? You’re still flogging that urban legend? A formal review by the General Accounting Office “found no damage to the offices of the White House’s East or West Wings or EOB.” Bush’s own representatives reported “there is no record of damage that may have been deliberately caused by the employees of the Clinton administration.”
That whole ‘scandal’ was the result of a slow news week and a joke about Bush’s ‘W’ nickname.

It’s not the comparative dollar amounts that’s the issue here. The real problem with earmarks is not the money spent (money that is already allocated in the budget anyway), but the corruption engendered by the earmarking process. Too many discussions of earmarks in the press focus on the money spent, and not on showing how earmarks are used as paybacks for political contributions. Murtha anyone?

It is so funny how people remember things. Truth: He did come into office with a huge plate of non tasty food on it waiting for him, you know like brussel sprouts. But your mom says you can’t leave the table until you eat them so what do you do, you find a way to make them taste better so in the future when they are on your plate, you know what to do to them to make them taste well enough so you can eat them and not be fussed at by your parents or whomever.
He has taken this bad tasting economy, health care, education, and energy that was put on his plate and he is trying to make them taste well enough so you can stomach it and get through the meal. He is not trying to jip anyone or cause harm to this country. He is doing his best to handle this large plate of food that doesn’t taste good. He is trying to fix it so it taste good enough for consumption by the american people.
He has always been open to ideas and logical debate. This is not the time to fight and argue and jocky for political position, it’s time to HELP the american people who have been given bad food to eat for 8yrs. WE didn’t like it but we had to eat it for so many years. Now we have a cook that is trying to spice it up so it doesn’t taste so bad meaning, get the economy up and going, get the health care system on better ground, get better schools and teachers for our kids and their kids and so on, better engery in this country, fuel saving energy. He hasn’t gotten the mixture just right but you best believe he is doing his best.
Most of all he wants ALL of americans to be able to digest this food we have been left but to a point where it doesn’t leave a nasty taste in your mouth when you swallow.
Give the man a break.

the biggest news for a week was the earmark issue. it was the basis of all the punditry shows, including numerous strategists, politicians, and bloggers offering words on the issue. yet, this was 0.02% of the country’s determined medicine to fix the worst recession since the Great Depression. sorry Jake, but the equivalent is not Obama’s dismissal of you pointing out the mole on a supermodel. the equivalent was when McCain made cutting those earmarks the backbone of his prescription to fix the US economy. i still like you, but the slipperly slope to false equivalents is turning fans into critics. presently, you still come off as sincere even to those of us ardent Obama fans. don’t jeopardize that to stand up for your brethren after Obama’s swipe.

david:” a Government that can’t seem to syncronize traffic lights, even in the smallest of cities, has no business becoming our Doctors.”
City governments would not be involved, it would be the federal governement – which is the envy of the free world for producing the most prosperous and productive free country mankind has ever known. Most Americans think this country is great because of the work of our Founding Fathers, the Constitutional government, not in spite of it.

He’s right about one thing…the part about ‘can’t have it both ways’.
Fascist Hyena explains it perfectly…NO ONE is talking about how to pay the enormous debt off.
Some nobel prize winners, like Krugman, think this is fine. He’s wrong, and we’re all going to pay for it with worthless dollars.

“But there is no evidence of that having ever happened – not in the GAO investigation nor from the incoming Bush Administration.”
No one requested an investigation and the Bushes didn’t make an issue of it to anyone.

J House—”Some nobel prize winners, like Krugman, think this is fine. He’s wrong”…looks like you’ll get the Nobel Prize this year. congratulations. (i’m assuming in literature and not economics).

Foghorn Leghorn:”I don’t think I have ever heard someone argue that our freedom comes from the federal government.”
‘Where our freedom comes from’? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize this was a religious discussion. I was commenting that our governmental system is the best in the world, has resulted in the most prosperous free nation in the world, and the most productive nation in the world. Ever.
I’m not sure how you can twist that to say our freedom “comes from” our government. I’m not even sure what that means.

“I’m not sure how you can twist that…”
Don’t sell yourself short.

Sigmonde:” BTW, who requested the investigation? or is that normal procedure, like an audit?”
It is not at all a normal procedure, with over 100 people interviewed. The GAO investigation was requested (demanded more like it) by Representative Bob Barr, Republican from Georgia. Note that the damage found was on the order of $20k. I wonder how much that 200+ page witch hunt cost?

“By more than 3-to-1 Americans think it is time for the Obama administration to start taking responsibility (64 percent) instead of continuing to blame the Bush administration for mistakes (21 percent).”
Will Pelosi go to jail?

“Note that the damage found was on the order of $20k. I wonder how much that 200+ page witch hunt cost? ”
20k worth of damage sounds like a lot of damage in professional offices such as the White House and vacated by a group of educated professionals. Usually, the White House offices are maintained well a maintenance staff. No doubt they interviewed the 100 people who were there to determine who caused the damage, as should be reasonably expected when 20k of vandalism was done to government property.

I’ve supposed that the reason national healthcare didn’t come with the New Deal was because there was so much public anger by the time the half of the deal started to become apparent. I’ve believed that with today’s internet and media speed of communications, the New Deal would never have even gone as far as it did. Lately, I’m not so sure about that.

The concern over earmarks has little to do with their actual dollar amounts–that’s always been a red herring. The problem with earmarks is that they represent a Washington culture that avoids transparency, that is not accountable to the citizens, and which it is perfectly acceptable to pencil in a million here and ten million there for political allies, or self-serving projects like the airport named after John Murtha.
It’s troubling that the President doesn’t understand why earmarks are troubling.

Obama sure is being ungrateful considering the slobbering mainstream media worked overtime to help him get elected. Unbelievable!

“Obama sure is being ungrateful considering the slobbering mainstream media worked overtime to help him get elected. Unbelievable!”
Not at all. Sycophants are almost never respected or liked by the targets of their affection. They are treated with the contempt that they have earned.

The democrats are so used to having it both ways complaining about the deficits which they helped push through. Whenever Obama talks about Bush’s spending why doesn’t ONE so called journalist ask him about his votes on those budgets? Doesn’t ANYONE remember the complaints from democrats about the “cuts” in Bush’s budgets that were actually increases but not as much as the democrats wanted?

what THE ONE really means when he calls out the media is that he’s upset that someone or not everyone understands that they are not to question or criticize his logic & leadership skills.

I know this will sound like paranoia to many libs on this board. But, it is my belief that the Socialists around the world planned this whole economy crash just to take over without firing a shot. I am still wondering how so many around the world knew about little Barrack Obama when we didn’t know much about him here in this country. I smell a plot financed by wealthy Socialist/One World Government freaks.
like George Soros. Those who want to duplicate the French or the U.K. government are free to leave.

Alan, thanks so much for a brilliant analysis of why earmarks are important– not so much for their size but for the abuse of power they represent. Obama does not understand, or at least pretends not to understand, that he was talking apples and kumquats when he compared the earmarks and the budget cuts. What nerve he has to complain about the press coverage of such matters as he did, considering the overall free ride he has gotten generally from the media since early in the campaign and throughout his brief time in office.

What have they given us in return? Well, let’s see, since WWII almost every ‘innovation’ in education and finance has come from the British.

Today I heard that the administration was proposing giving help to people with incomes up to $88,000 to purchase health insurance premiums.
I am in this income bracket and don’t want or need this a hand out. The cost of this largess is putting our country further into the red, and further weakening us as a nation. Consider this to be a bribe paid for middle class votes.
STOP THE MADNESS.

Jake-
You are picking up where the late great Tim Russert left off. Critical, honest, unbiased reporting, so rare these days. Thank you!

A household uses debt to leverage income. We used the shadow banking system to leverage debt and income. With the limits of that shadow system now very close to defined, filled in, and contained, it is no surprise that every major industry has been hit. The healthcare problem is not permanant, and neither is social security. Both will adjust to our new financial institutional changes, given a little time for the adjustments and corrections. The pain will be no worse than that felt by WallStreet, which, in hindsight, is really not much if you consider the magnitude of the changes. The difference with WallStreet is that Europe was not trying to sell us an alternative. We are making it through just fine, or at least we will survive with our values intact. The same can not be said if we cave into the belief that unpaid healthcare expenses should be taxed to the public income indefinitely. A healthcare bailout would be a far easier sell, and far better government.

What nerve he has to complain…considering the overall free ride he has gotten generally from the media since early in the campaign…
Moderate, if you’re interested in the facts read 71 DAYS: THE MEDIA ASSAULT ON OBAMA by Michael Jason Overstreet. Just because the propagandists you favor say the media was/is all in for Obama doesn’t make it so. The voters are onto where the propaganda is coming from, and–so far at least–it’s not from the Dems and Obama; it’s from those who learned their tactics from reading “How to Move the Masses”. They would be better server by reading David Brock’s BLINDED BY THE RIGHT.

I thought everyone was familiar with the term ‘don’t bite the hand that feeds you.’ Apparently not…

Jake. I agree with Steve above. Style is like Russett was. The only journalist that seems aware of what reporting really means. Calls it like he hears it without dishonest hate spin. Good job Jake.

So the Press is now above board? They can’t be criticized? Get over it People! I prefer a President that comes out and says it as it is and not one that needs to hide under politics to say what he feels the People want to hear.

Disagreements mean ratings.
This President is going to treat the mainstream Press a whole lot better then Bush/Cheney/Rove ever did.
Tapper you and the Press Corp are in that bubble too. Or does the media feel while they fire questions at Gibbs that they are not part of the bubble?
I thinks it changes some Reporters Tapper once they get assigned to be a part of the White House Press Corp.
Tapper do you notice the difference between the Bush administration and the Obama administration or is this your WH first assignment?
Never take anything personal Tapper if its your first assignment ok. Also remember history doesn’t start with you once you are a part of the WH Press corp. You can learn from Helen Thomas Tapper respect your elders of your profession.
Caught my eye from your blog
- At another moment during the town hall meeting, the president was asked by a voter if he could “break those lines of bipartisanship, and get these laws and this help that we need to us, the people?”
When Pelsi makes the front page of Drudge we see a power play watching the Republicans on the hunt is a reminder of how Brutal Politics is in DC. They see her are a 2010 issue. Now bipartisanship works only if Republicans and Democrats work together.
It doe not work if one party is scrambling for a issues to rally around for the next election. We need the House to work together because it effects our lives. A power play to Take Down Pelsi based on the Abuse of Power by Bush/Cheney/Rove is hard to watch.
Glimpses of bipartisanship gives hope especially with the Credit Card issue. Health care and energy have powerful special interests with money for ads and poll driven sound bites. this worries me because main street doesn’t and we need allies.

Wrong, tjp612! President Obama succeeded his first 100 days despite a skeptical press and a kamikaze group of Republicans…and he sure will soar above a disintegrating Republican Party and a shrinking press for two terms!

Posted by: tjp612 | May 14, 2009 3:56:22 PM
IF ELECTED IN 2006, THE DEMS DIDN’T TAKE THEIR SEATS UNTIL JAN 2007, PLS STOP TWISTING THE TRUTH MY GOODNESS U ARE NTO GOOD AT IT,
ADDITIONALLY, THE MAJORITY THE DEMS NOW HAVE IS FORM THE COMBINATION OF 2006 ELECTIONS AND 2008 ELECTIONS GET IS. SO NO THE RNC DID LOOSE ITS OVERPOWERING MAJORITY IN 2006 ELECTIONS, BUT THEY STILL HAVE THE PRESIDENT AND OVERALL POWER IN HOUSE N SENATE.

MARIO,
“Posted by: tjp612 | May 14, 2009 3:56:22 PM
IF ELECTED IN 2006, THE DEMS DIDN’T TAKE THEIR SEATS UNTIL JAN 2007, PLS STOP TWISTING THE TRUTH MY GOODNESS U ARE NTO GOOD AT IT,”
————————
So, you would rather argue about the timing of “when” the Dems actually took over power (when in reality there is no difference between November and January given little/no legislation takes place after the elections and prior to swearing in)?
I could see why you would – After all, you surely cannot defend Obama’s plans to DOUBLE the NATIONAL DEBT of ALL 43 administrations prior to his arrival within 5 years and DOUBLE AGAIN WITHIN 10 YEARS.

Suzie: Daddy, what does “prostrate” mean?
Daddy: It means to be stretched out with face on the ground in adoration or submission.
Suzie: Do you mean like the TV reporters act when president Obama talks?

There are very few reporters who have the command of facts and history to really engage in an in depth conversation on the issues.
Most in the media, nowadays are into the ‘gotcha’ questions, and simplistic ‘OMG, you changed your mind on an issue’, not even going to get into the fringe rants of both ‘left’ and ‘right’.
News today operates in an historical vacuum, no perspective to show how and why things happen in today’s world.

jhw, were you alive and paying attention during the Reagan administration? The press spent most of those years implying Reagan was a crazy cowboy about to start WWIII and treating him like a crazy uncle. THe camera mighthave loved him, and he mayhave loved the camera, but the press were not fans. Trust me– I was an adult back then.