Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about offering round-robin interviews with Feingold to the press corps, and specifically excluding Fox? Snubbing Chris Wallace on "Obama Sunday".
What better way to silence than to minimize access? Didn't work of course, but they tried.
How about offering round-robin interviews with Feingold to the press corps, and specifically excluding Fox? Snubbing Chris Wallace on "Obama Sunday".
What better way to silence than to minimize access? Didn't work of course, but they tried.
Your posts in defense of Fox don't discredit your point of view though, do they?
Why would I defend Fox? Its not like I think they are honest. What I am pointing out is that liberals don't mind liberal slanted media while they simultaneously go nuts because Fox is slanted to the right.
Why would I defend Fox? Its not like I think they are honest. What I am pointing out is that liberals don't mind liberal slanted media while they simultaneously go nuts because Fox is slanted to the right.
You said earlier that Rachel Maddow lies; could you give a link to Rachel Maddow lying about something?
Also, Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow both constantly criticize Obama and the Obama Admin, and Democrats in Congress.
Do you not really see the connection? If you're interested in what Feingold had to say, would you prefer an original interview, or a second-hand recap from a reporter who wasn't even there?
News is all about access. The WH is making a concentrated effort to minimize Fox's access.
Do you not really see the connection? If you're interested in what Feingold had to say, would you prefer an original interview, or a second-hand recap from a reporter who wasn't even there?
News is all about access. The WH is making a concentrated effort to minimize Fox's access.
I agree it's unbecoming for the WH to play games like that, but restricting access to an interview isnt the same as trying to "silence" them.
Im sure Faux is going to be pushing the idea on its fans that the WH is going to try to silence them ("any day now"), if they're not pushing it already.
I agree it's unbecoming for the WH to play games like that, but restricting access to an interview isnt the same as trying to "silence" them.
Im sure Faux is going to be pushing the idea on its fans that the WH is going to try to silence them ("any day now"), if they're not pushing it already.
So you agree that the WH is playing games with Fox..so to what end? What exactly is the purpose? Obviously they have an agenda...restricting access to a press corps member is unheard of.
So, if not to silence them (and yes, repeated lack of access will most definitely hurt a news organization), what is the administration's goal?
I agree it's unbecoming for the WH to play games like that, but restricting access to an interview isnt the same as trying to "silence" them.
Im sure Faux is going to be pushing the idea on its fans that the WH is going to try to silence them ("any day now"), if they're not pushing it already.
Some foriegner comes over here and starts buying up the TV, Radio, print news and organizing demonstrations against the elected government.
What tools
Some foriegner comes over here and starts buying up the TV, Radio, print news and organizing demonstrations against the elected government.
What tools
George Soros is an American citizen
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.