Perino: White House "trying to take the shovel and hitting people across the head...like they want to hurt somebody"
October 26, 2009 8:20 am ET
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
-
O'Reilly claims health bill would "force all Americans... to fund, through their taxpayer dollars, abortions"
November 23, 2009 8:41 pm ET -
O'Reilly cites his colleague Beck as evidence of a possible conservative resurgence
November 23, 2009 8:22 pm ET -
On his Fox show, Beck promotes "live broadcast with me in the movie theatres"
November 23, 2009 6:18 pm ET -
On Beck, Horowitz calls for "die-ins" over mammogram guidelines, because "it's the Democrats killing them"
November 23, 2009 5:59 pm ET -
Beck "Three G's" solution to possible U.S. economic "collapse": "God, Gold, and Guns"
November 23, 2009 5:27 pm ET -
Beck uses his Fox News show to promote his "Plan" to "save our country"
November 23, 2009 5:24 pm ET
-
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
by Eric Boehlert - November 23, 2009 -
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
by Simon Maloy - November 20, 2009 -
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
by Greg Lewis - November 20, 2009
|
|
||
Connect & Share
© 2009 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
  |
||
Now I bet before the week is over someone is going to compare Obama to Wile E. Coyote dropping anvils and pianos on top of the American people.
When MMFA made that same point last week, we had all kinds of trolls here denying that anything that had been said was violent rhetoric. MMFA posted "Beck, conservative media use violent rhetoric suggesting White House will retaliate against Fox News and opponents." And here it is 5 days later, and an example of that.
Friedbergboy asked one of them, "Do cornered animals react violent or peacefully? What happened when they came for the Jews? Why would Beck want prayers for his safety?" All are violent images, yet the poster being questioned couldnt' force themselves to admit that violent rhetoric was being used!
And it's not like their viewers will EVER ask for any actual EVIDENCE. To these morons, the likes of [a professional liar like] Perrino merely SAYING it constitutes EVIDENCE!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus no lie is too absurd for them. Hearing it said MAKES it the truth.
Yeah, that's what I thought.
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino admitted on NPR’s Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me that she didn’t know what the Cuban Missile Crisis was, when asked about it in a recent press conference:
“I was panicked a bit because I really don’t know about . . . the Cuban Missile Crisis,” said Perino, who at 35 was born about a decade after the 1962 U.S.-Soviet nuclear showdown. “It had to do with Cuba and missiles, I’m pretty sure.” and admitted that she RECENTLY had to ask her (British, and much older) husband if the "Cuban Missile Crisis" and the "Bay of Pigs" were the same thing.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
More GOP projection from Dana (Know-Nothing) Perino.
Yo' Perino...this White House didn't lie our kids into a war.
~
Also, I wish Fox would stop with the clips from "The Untouchables" when there are perfectly good clips of Martin Sheen from the "Dead Zone" they can use.
Kinda like a mack truck ?
But, he shouldn't be criticized for that -- for some, unknown, reason . . .
Show me the proof that they're threatening to harm people ...
It's true, mag.
All he did was serve on a community board with some guy named William Ayres -- and seemingly, that was enough to throw the rightwingnuts into a tizzy . . .
.
"If we're gonna do 'let's kill people with a shovel', let's do it the right way! (And now, people we'd like to beat to death with a shovel.) Charlie Rangel! *Clang!*" Glenn Beck, 2001
So, Ms. Perino appears on FOX Propaganda, and accuses the White House of wanting to hit people in the head with a shovel. Oddly, she ignores Glenn Beck, a FOX talking head, who advocated that very thing, for at least one elected official.
"I understand what it's like to be on the receiving end of what you think is tough coverage. And if they think that they've had tough coverage, you know, walk a mile in my size six shoes. It's extremely difficult, over the years, when we were in the White House, and that was coming from all sides."
Ah, time for false equivalencies. Ms. Perino, you do know that you served an administration that failed to protect us from the single largest terror attack in the history of our country? An administration that cut taxes on the wealthy to pay for a war of opportunity? An administration that tortured people?! Bush/Cheney deserved far more criticism and scrutiny than they received. Show one act by the Obama administration that compares even to the disastrous mishandling of Katrina, please, or quit making this false comparison.
"And I think that, if they truly believe that their arguments can win on the merits, they should be willing at least to come on FOX. Or, at least, put the shovel down, stop making attacks, and if they don't want to work with FOX, fine. Don't. But don't say so publicly, because it makes them look very petty, and they should be above that."
Their arguments are winning on the merits. President Obama continues to poll well, both for popularity and job performance. There is a majority of Americans behind health coverage reform and a greener economy. We are still waiting to see what will become of American policy in Afghanistan, but we still solidly support closing Gitmo and getting out of Iraq. Working with FOX? The self-styled opposition channel? Who's only response to anything is 'No!' regardless of what it is? The channel that still demands to see President Obama's birth certificate? The channel that helped organize, promote, and then televised the Tea Party protests? That spawned things like death panels, death to granny, and rationed care? That has been lying about the President since he took office? That decided, as a network, to stop carrying Presidential addresses, even though they hung on every lie spewed forth by the previous administration? Well, out of curiosity, what do you think FOX Propaganda could legitimately bring to the table, Ms. Perino?
"And, there is this little thing called the First Amendment, that we should all aspire to."
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Yup, there it is. The founding fathers clearly forbade the government to criticize any aspect of press coverage. See? Between the lines? Written real real tiny? No? Funny. I don't see it either. If you think the press is free to print whatever it wants and not get called out on lies and distortions, then you live in fantasy land, Ms. Perino.
As for a 'war', the White House let 10 months of attacks from FOX Propaganda go unanswered. They let things get ridiculous, really, and the moment they point out that FOX has ceased to do news, and has basically chosen up sides, it's abruptly all the White House's fault. This reminds me of Mr. Limbaugh, because he didn't lose the NFL bid due to his long history of racism. It's because his critics kept bringing up his long history of racism that cost him, right? Do the words 'personal responsibility' ring any bells, Ms. Perino?
And, it hadn't honestly occurred to you that showing up on FOX to bash the White House for criticizing FOX, and not finding any contrary opinions only confirms the administration's estimation of this network?
Isn't your day job over at Burson-Marsteller, a public relations firm that does things like clean up Union Carbide's reputation after all the deaths they caused in Bhopal? And Blackwater's reputation? And Exxon after the Exxon-Valdez? So, basically, you're a professional liar? Well, that makes you a good fit at FOX, but very unreliable from the standpoint of veracity. Because, you'll say anything if the price is right.
Nice post. Thank you.
I think Fox is using some old Bush administration tactics. If you repeat something enough times everybody will think it is true. I can't help but notice how Fox has discussed the WH "Full-scale attack" (their definition of full-scale must be different than mine) repeated times on all their talk shows with the same talking points and guests.
go back and watch "Fahrenheit 9/11". If memory serves me correctly Michael Moore brings up how Bush and his administration repeated over and over again that Iraq had WMD. I feel that Fox has the same strategy. Hell, even the Fox supporters that post here and that show up on TV repeat the exact same talking points.
And the funny thing is, the "full-scale attack" on the Fox Comedy Channel consists of ONE COMMENT made by President Obama in JUNE . . .
What is with this shovel garbage? Gosh, they really can't take any criticism can they? And they are so arrogant that instead of trying to prove the White House wrong by actually sticking to the facts and reporting actual news, they continue hammering at the White House with lies and misinformation.
To top this off, they ask Parino, "when do you think they will end this war with Fox?" well, when Fox shuts up about it! They are the ones perpetuating this issue. There is no war, the White House declared them irrelevant as an actual news source and that was that. There is no war, there is no need for Fox to spend the rest of their days whining and crying victims, nobody but their little 1% market share is even listening.
Don't they get tired of themselves?
Who does Dana think she is giving advice to Obama on how to win friends and persuade people? She worked for the least popular president ever. But really, these guys sound like a gaggle of concern trolls telling us about what a bad strategy this is to expose Fox. Whatever. This is a long struggle and Fox is the heart of Republicanism. We're actually doing the right a favor by showing what a tremendous farce is Fox News.
A free media is one of the cornerstones of democracy after all. Propagandized media sure isn't.
And you're right about doing the Repubs a favor. They'd look a lot less silly and stupid and fringey, if they didn't have these dopes on the TV and radio acting as their point men.
I am a total news junkie and enjoy watching MSNBC, CNN, and Fox. I enjoy all 3. All 3 have a "point of view."
To assert otherwise demonstrates your own bias. I just watched the top 5 videos on msnbc.com:
10 minutes of Harry Reid singing the praises of the public option
3 minutes about climate change and how we need to do more
another 3 minutes about the public option with clips of Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer
8 minutes on Afghanistan War strategy, leading with comments from John Kerry, with Andrea Mitchell asking a gentlemen from The New York Times how can our leaders make a decision that is "comfortable" for the president without upsetting the military?
4 more minutes of the public option is not dead yet
Over 30 minutes of coverage, 8 minutes were fairly balanced. Based on my experience, this is a typical mix for them.
I don't feel outrage at all. I simply expect it and that's why I watch all 3 networks.
Now I know that when she was Bushie's rooster, she was pedaling the prosecution of the New York Times and calling NBC names.
Her opinion about this White House Administration is not worth listening too. Plus Bush never had a liberal or progressive reporter interview him his whole term in office.