"Is Tucker Carlson lying or just completely ignorant of the subject matter on which he's opining?"
October 23, 2009 2:37 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
So asks Salon's Glenn Greenwald. (I'm going with the former.)
Not only does he effectively eviscerate Carlon's Daily Beast column, but Greenwald also speaks the necessary truth regarding the WH/Fox News dispute and the nearly uniform response from The Village:
There has been a horde of media figures rushing to condemn the Obama administration merely for criticizing Fox's "reporting." Many of these same media figures -- probably most -- were silent in the face not only of identical Bush White House attacks on reporters they disliked, but far more serious and actual threats to press freedom over the last eight years.
The number one rule of American politics: the greatest, most insatiable need of the standard conservative is to turn themselves into oppressed little victims. In The Daily Beast today, Tucker Carlson devotes his entire column to complaining that Obama is "bullying" Fox News, absurdly claiming that the White House and liberals are trying "to use government power to muzzle opinions they don't agree with."
When I say that there are vacuous arguments, those arguments come from the posters here who say that.
And a lot of the problematic things that the right says are comments where they are pretending to be victims, but they are simply being held to account for what they say. A criminal is not a 'victim' of the legal system when he's found guilty and punished. Beck is not a victim of MMFA's refutations, just like Rep Joe Wilson isn't a victim of Congress' sanctions.
Is is simply the fact that due to media consolidation that the corporate owners make it difficult for democratic administrations to get a fair shake ?
The amount of daily misinformation is staggering and is hurting us at a time when we need striaght, truthful news to help make critical decisions.
Look what Obama is doing to Creigh Deeds just today.
Look how many people the guy's thrown under the bus so far int the last year.
Who's going to be next?
And why can't you see that?
Deeds isn't a journalist or media figure.
Also how would you define "coming after"? Stating that Fox News isn't a news organization is simply the truth. It's not really a vicious attack.
piece. Some guy criticized the President for adopting a sort-of, kind-of legal way to not enforce laws on pot. That's all very fine and well, but where was this guy three years ago when Bush's signing statements came to light!?!!?