Fox News' Jarrett to Obama adviser: "I'll shut down the microphone if you continue" to use "talking points"
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
During the September 5 edition of Fox News' Studio B, after Obama campaign senior adviser Anita Dunn stated that "[Sen.] Barack Obama believes strongly that health care has to be accessible and affordable, that you should be able to get health care without having to shop all over the country," guest host Gregg Jarrett interrupted Dunn, and said: "All right, now you're getting into your talking points. ... Now you're getting into your talking points." Dunn responded, "No, no, Nancy gave us the talking points here," referring to McCain campaign senior adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer, who also was on the program and had brought up Sen. John McCain's position on "health care" earlier in the conversation. Dunn added: "Come on, guys. Come on." Jarrett replied, "I'll shut down the microphone if you continue doing that," and then asked Pfotenhauer about Gov. Sarah Palin: "Nancy, the personal narrative -- hockey mom, special needs child, is that especially appealing to undecided female voters who are trying to figure out what to do?" At no point during the interview did Jarrett interrupt Pfotenhauer because she was using "talking points" or threaten to cut off her microphone.
From the September 5 edition of Fox News' Studio B:
JARRETT: Joining us now from Washington, Anita Dunn, a senior adviser for the Obama campaign, and from Arlington, Virginia, Nancy Pfotenhauer, senior policy adviser for the McCain campaign. Good to see you both. Nancy, that's a pretty shrewd, pretty smart strategy, right? Get the women out there to criticize the woman on the ticket.
PFOTENHAUER: Yeah, well, and it's entirely anticipated. We are prepared for this and we're gonna go out and make the case for why Senator McCain and the McCain-Palin ticket have the policies that will bring about the things that women care the most about. And those are jobs, making sure they keep their jobs, that their, their families stay safe economically, that health care is available and that the costs come down, that we've got an energy plan that will keep us from ever being in this situation again, and that we certainly don't raise taxes in an economic downturn --
JARRETT: Yeah.
PFOTENHAUER: Which has never helped any country, anywhere, any time.
JARRETT: Anita, women rallied around Hillary Clinton when they perceived -- right or wrong -- that she was the victim of sexism during the primary campaign at the hands of Barack Obama. That was the perception. So, by using women here, as surrogates, to attack Sarah Palin, does Barack Obama therefore avoid being accused of sexism?
DUNN: Well, Gregg, I think if you talk to most supporters of Hillary Clinton, they will tell you that the sexism that they saw during the primary was, by and large, on the part of the media and we've seen a little of that towards Governor Palin --
JARRETT: Now --
DUNN: -- as well, and it's totally inappropriate. But let me address your real question here, which is what is the Obama campaign going to do to appeal to women, and the answer is, we're going to do what we have always done. We've always had high-profile women out there campaigning for Senator Obama, people like [Sen.] Claire McCaskill [D-MO], [Gov.] Janet Napolitano [D-AZ]. Obviously Hillary Clinton is a great surrogate for us because she's an eloquent voice for the working men and women of this country. And on the issues, which Nancy brought up, there is a real difference. For instance, Barack Obama believes that women should have the right to sue for equal pay if they are being discriminated against.
JARRETT: Yeah.
DUNN: John McCain doesn't think they should be able to sue under those circumstances.
PFOTENHAUER: That's not true.
JARRETT: Nancy --
DUNN: Oh, yes, it is. Oh, yes, it is.
PFOTENHAUER: No, it's not.
DUNN: And Barack Obama --
PFOTENHAUER: I'd be happy to have that conversation.
DUNN: Well, maybe we should have it, but Barack Obama believes strongly that health care has to be accessible and affordable, that you should be able to get health care without having to shop all over the country, that you should be able to get health care --
JARRETT: All right, now you're getting into your talking points.
DUNN: -- without having to worry about pre-existing conditions.
JARRETT: Now you're getting into your talking points.
DUNN: No, no, Nancy gave us the talking points here.
JARRETT: You are.
DUNN: Come on, guys. Come on.
JARRETT: I'll shut down the microphone if you continue doing that. Nancy, the personal narrative -- hockey mom, special needs child, is that especially appealing to undecided female voters who are trying to figure out what to do?
PFOTENHAUER: Well, I think what it does is it shows -- you know, it's a real life. It's a look into real life, if you will, on who Sarah Palin is. And it helps them -- folks understand how she knows what they're going through and she knows the things that they're balancing, the struggles that they have to make it through the day, the hopes they have, but the fears they have. You know, one thing that women tend to believe --
JARRETT: All right --
PFOTENHAUER: -- if you look at polls and focus groups, is that they'll be kind of the last hired and the first fired and so any time you've got economic downturn, their focus is very clearly on that topic.
JARRETT: All right, I got to go. I'm getting the hard break here. Anita Dunn, Nancy Pfotenhauer, thank you both.
Getting helath care without having to shop all over the country is a "talking point?"
Jarrett has proven that even outright stupidity is no disqualification for working at Fox "news."
That's what I was thinking too. I can imagine his boss screaming in his ear "we'll shut down her mike if she doesn't stop!"
This is shameful.
So this is the future of our media.......
I weep for this country!
My heart breaks at the very thought!
Which is worse? That FoxNoise is as popular as it is or that Grampy and his little rightwing sidekick actually have a shot at winning in Nov?
A shining example of whats wrong with cable news today.
A junior wannabe husbanding two bimbos through an utterly stupid waste of air time...none of the three had anything worthwhile to say and could have gotten there points across by just standing silently on-screen and holding up their respective campaign placards.
sexist!!!
Two Bimbos?
I guess we know what side of the street you hang your balls on.
Right on. Journalists are supposed to be as objective as possible, not toss softballs to your "side", then imply that the other person is your enemy which you must cast in a negative light.
Faux Gnus is the dark side of television; the antichrist of journalism; the three stooges of reporting; the bane of Philo Farnsworth.
Yeah, there it is. Censor censor censor. Shut off the mikes when the discussion gets too hot. Straight outta the Bob Grant Handbook on Hate Broadcasting.
You assholes on the Right... I swear to god... such absolute trash. Jarrett and Fox can go Cheney themselves. And I'm still pissed that Obama caved in and went on Billo's joint. Dumb move, IMO.
Fox does not deserve any shred of respect and validation from our side. That crew is the enemy.
Crimminy, the Dems need to get a CLUE....
Background on repub....MCCAIN everywhere
Background on dem......could you even tell it was for Obama?
Even I know this much from local campaign activism, put you name everywhere! Let people know this person represents you.
ok, done...it just ticks me off when i see glaring crap like that.
This is even more insane when you remember that the Bush Administration and righties around the nation recently admitted that they used rightwing talking points sent out by the Bush Administration!
And it's liberals who are illegitimately using talking points? Just a bunch of crapola.
As always with Fox (and most other outlets, too) only one side gets abused.
How are those "fair and balanced" and "we report, you decide" slogans looking now?
That was awful... that was as awful as it gets. And the guy, he not once but twice introduces the Obama campaign spokesperson by saying that the Obama campaign is getting "women out there to criticize the woman on the ticket", and "using women here, as surrogates, to attack Sarah Palin"
I'd say this stuff was unbelievable, except that I believe it, I know it, of Fox News Channel.
And another thing, this Fox hack and his "I'll shut down the microphone" threat.
Who does he think he is? Does he and News Corp. think they own the Public Airwaves?
Now more than ever, the American People need to reclaim their Public Property, the Public Resource that is the Public Airwaves, from the private corporate television broadcasters (News Corp., Time-Warner, Disney, General Electric, and CBS... that's it, that's all of them!) that have taken the Public Airwaves as their own property, to use for their own private purposes, which in these matters are to influence and manipulate the political opinions of the American People...
It's a privileged use of a precious Public Resource, and these few companies are abusing that privilege to their own political ends, and we need to reclaim the Public Airwaves for ourselves, as our own Public Property, and we need to do it by way of the FCC under the next administration of our Federal Government.
"I'll shut down the microphone"
Who the freak do these hacks think they are anyway?
In theory, anyway.
If people on Fox were cut off for using talking points, they would be running infomercials in prime time.
Alan Colmes is a liberal who gets approximately 4 minutes to cross-examine whichever rightwing sycophant happens to be sitting between him and hannity. Given his circumstances, I think he generally does a pretty good job of it, despite the general consensus of the left.
The problem that you may notice is that on NONE of these shows do they bring on non-partisan experts in ANY subject that they're addressing. You get "fair and balanced" punditry - sycophants on the right vs. sycophants on the left. The truth is not halfway between "a bear craps in the woods" and "a bear does NOT crap in the woods". When was the last time you saw a news program bring on an economist to analyze the statement "tax breaks create jobs"? You don't. You get hannity asking Dick Morris if it's true, and Colmes getting 3 sentences in to argue with him, and that's where the conversation ends. And your typical ignorant H & C viewer ends up with absolutely NO substantive information regarding the topic, and actually comes away dumber from having watched it because they THINK they know more about the subject now.
And in case you didn't already infer that I'm a little bothered by this, let me leave no doubt. This kind of infotainment is the REAL reason we've got Iraq, economy in the crapper, and domestic spying right now. It's the reason that Bush won't be impeached. It's the reason that we're no more than a hair's width away from voting as a nation, one more time, to put our futures into the hands of a group of people who will literally kill, maim, ignore suffering, and condemn future generations to make a dollar and retain power. An informed citizenry would not let this happen. With McCain and Obama running neck and neck, it's apparent that we do not have informed citizens. And the guys at the top of the news and broadcasting empire are perfectly happy, because we have endless controversy, and that makes for good ratings and great advertising revenue.
..................
gawd, i detest republicans...
more and more
Sorry, Had a bad lunch today, we discussed politics and the damn waiter informed me that he would never vote for that communist Obama!
I'm saddened to hear that many soldiers don't vote. Especially since the voting age was 21 in the sixties and seventies when tens of thousands gave their lives fighting another war.
Keep in touch if possible.
Excellent point, King.
The bulk of the kids sent to give their lives in Nam didn't even have a say in the workings of the country for which they were dying. Now that they have a say, they're declining to do so?
I'm curious, NG. How easily can one become informed on the issues over there?
It is very easy to get information over here. We have internet access in our hooches (we pay for it of course). The problem is the "news" websites the Soldiers choose to get their info from. Foxnews seems to be prevalent. We also get a version of Stars and Stripes here. Not very balanced on the Op Ed page, though. They seem to like to print Ann Coulter a lot. But i did see an article from Arianna Huffington, so....
Sorry it took so long for the response. I am 10 1/2 hours ahead here
The media has only gotten worse over the years.
No matter how much we complain, nothing changes for the better.
I really think we need to directly boycott the mainstream media. That seems to be the only way they get the message. Call their advertisers and truly do not use their products until they take action. Drive the bad corporate media out of business. We must not condone this.
Our standards have fallen so dramatically. Thank goddess for Media Matters, so that I don't have to watch TV to know what's going on. However, I believe that writing them letters no longer has any impact. It only gives them more hits on their websites that allow them to go out and convince advertisers that they are 'popular' or highly rated.
The joke is, Obama is not even remotely liberal.
And now they are trying to make 'liberal' a 'bad word'. So forget going to a 'liberal arts' college. In addition, with the trailer trash called Palin that they are promoting for VP [and one heartbeat away from President - OMIGOD!! I mean really!!??!!] they have been putting down the fact that Obama went to an ivy league school. Culturally, this country has been moving lower and lower, and now we are promoting that our kids not go to college, and just sit home and be racist, sexist, fundamentalists.
And when exactly did it become acceptable to say the things that are said on national television?
When did it become acceptable to blatantly lie? As a candidate for the office of the President of the US, no less? As a network talking head?
We must shut them down. The only way is to call the people that pay their bills [the advertisers]. And PLEASE don't watch any of their shows or visit any of their websites, or read any of their papers.
And Murdoch owns Myspace. Don't go there anymore.
Allan Colmes is not a liberal by the way. They pay him to play a part and act wimpy so that they can say "See? This is a namby pamby liberal." And then these pigs beat up on him on the air.
This is 'News' or even "Entertainment"?
Don't get mad any more. Get even. Shut them down.
The classic Mean Girl tactics are snark, put-downs and spreading around false rumors about people you don't like. When Palin falsely charged that Obama planned to raise taxes on middle class people, or blamed Senate majority leader Harry Reid for inaction even though it was the Republican plurality in the Senate that rejected most of his initiatives, she is playing classic Regina, declaring who is in the Plastic clique and who is outside. Even the boasting about being a soccer mom is a claim on status (poor women are not soccer moms, and how many minority women are?)
Palin's put-down of Obama that he lacks executive experience (unlike her own superior Mean Girl self) makes it sound as though she had run something bigger than he had. But Obama has been head of a political campaign with hundreds of thousands of workers and volunteers. Doesn't a campaign head organize people and give orders and plan strategy and tactics, i.e., act in an executive capacity? Isn't that what Barack Obama has been doing for two years and hasn't he proven that he is an excellent executive in this endeavor? Only 114,000 or so people voted to make Palin governor in 2006. In contrast, Obama's executive performance as head of his presidential campaign garnered him 18 million votes.
Rambo and the Mean Girl are narratives intended as what magicians call misdirection.
The Republican Party has given us a failed war in Iraq. None of the stated Bush administration goals in invading Iraq were ever actually accomplished. No threat from Iraq existed, it was completely unrelated to 9/11,had no serious weaponry or military capability, and is not 'liberated' but rather occupied. The government installed under US auspices is best friends with the ayatollahs in Iran and may actually be taking orders from them on some issues.
McCain wholeheartedly supported that war from before it was launched. Yet McRambo is posing as a challenger of the war, and is rebranding this burned-out hulk of a country that he helped to destroy as a "victory."
The Republican Party gave us a long list of massive scandals, in which the American public was actively stolen from and defrauded, not to mention disenfranchised. That was the point of Jack Abramoff and his pyramid scheme intended to create a permanent Republican majority, so that the hogs at the trough could be propped up there and remain indefinitely a drain on your pocketbook. That was the point of Tom Delay's scam, and the many cases of embezzlement and sheer criminality by Republican lawmakers.
Rambo and the Mean Girl will tell you that they are the squeaky clean Republicans, not like all those other Republicans, and we should focus on them, not on all the crooks.
The Republican Party has massively grown the size of the federal government, including especially of the Pentagon, but Rambo and the Mean Girl are all of a sudden promising to fire every other government employee.
The Republican Party oversaw the mortgage crisis. But won't admit it, and neither will these two.
You want a narrative, about a war hero tortured by the confession he signed, or about a feisty soccer mom who cleaned out the Augean stables of Seward's Ice Box, then you have got it.
You want real policy positions and a rationale for them that goes beyond "I will make my friends rich," then you won't find that in the convention in Minnesota. © 2008 Juan Cole
Thanks Conger. That's a pretty good summary of what half of America is buying right now, complete BS.
And if Fox is planning to make a habit of cutting off mics anytime talking points are offered, they should get an old-timey organ player on the payroll.
So it's okay when the Republicans distort reality with their talking points. When Democrats talk truthfully with their talking points, it's time to shut off the microphone.
So, what happened to freedom of speech? Not to mention being "fair and balanced?"