The war on Fox may be dumb…
…but it’s Obama’s war. He may be Hamlet on Afghanistan, but in the domestic Fox War he’s called up the troops: Dunn, Axelrod, Emanuel.
In the WaPo, Ruth Marcus says the war on Fox is dumb, and she goes on to succinctly list a number of reasons why:
It makes the White House look weak, unable to take Harry Truman’s advice and just deal with the heat. It makes the White House look small, dragged down to the level of Glenn Beck. It makes the White House look childish and petty at best, and it has a distinct Nixonian — Agnewesque? — aroma at worst. It is a self-defeating trifecta: it distracts attention from the Obama administration’s substantive message; it serves to help Fox, not punish it, by driving up ratings; and it deprives the White House, to the extent it refuses to provide administration officials to appear on the cable network, of access to an audience that is, in fact, broader than hard-core Obama haters.
Let’s see: weak, small, childish, self-defeating, distracting, helps Fox, and the White House loses an important audience—that’s seven, by my count. I would add, moreover, that the Fox War doesn’t just make the White House appear to be these things, it reveals the White House to actually be these things.
Marcus goes on to write:
On “Fox News Sunday,” host Chris Wallace replayed a quote from an Obama interview: “I don’t always get my most favorable coverage on Fox, but I think that’s part of how democracy is supposed to work. You know, we’re not supposed to all be in lock step here.”
Maybe he should tell the rest of the team.
Perhaps Marcus is being sarcastic there. Because, although I think her article makes some excellent points, if she actually believes that Dunn and Axelrod and Emanuel and all the rest are going rogue in their attack on Fox, that it is not approved of and probably coordinated by Obama himself, then she is guilty of the “if only Stalin knew” syndrome.
Trust me, Ruth: Obama has told the rest of the team. But he’s told them to attack Fox News.
Oh, and one more thing: yes, the attack on Fox is a distraction from the rest of Obama’s program. But in the eyes of the administration that’s a feature, not a bug.
It is absolutely the weirdest thing I could have imagined a presidential office doing to a new agency … talk about some superhyperdisplacement. Freaking cry baby city!!
Fox has outed so many of Obama’s skeletons that the White House is turning into a haunted house for Mr. President and his ghouls. It is now his priority to silence Fox and their heathen truth mongers 🙂
I can immagine that the Fox-war could has been started by some of his followers on their own to please their idol
in my opinion Obama is more reasonable than his stupid followers
by the way: Fox is regarded as fascist propaganda in the european media
but I guess you hear similar things about Berlusconi
Aron Sperber: Obama was criticizing members of Fox (such as Hannity) even during the campaign. Emanuel and Axelrod are his top advisers. They do not speak for themselves. If they are saying this, I am about 99.99% sure it is because he has approved it and perhaps ordered it.
Obama really is that vain, petty and stupid. Big surprise.
by the way: who really cares what the european media thinks of Fox?
If it walks like a duck
quacks like a duck
mates with ducks
and lays eggs like ducks
its the best immitation of a duck i have every seen!
The solution to this is clear: give Iran, the Taliban, and North Korea their own Fox News programs. Either President Obama will go to war with these regimes, or he’ll call off the dogs from Fox News. It’s a win either way.
Do liberals even notice how anti freedom of speech they’ve become?
The new lib mantra must be…”I may disagree with what you say, but i’ll defend to the death my right to simply call you a hater for disagreeing”.
How soon we forget. Obama has been seriously looking for scapegoats to blame for the woes of HIS not getting what he wants almost from the time he won the candidacy of his party. You know, whoever he perceives has been standing between him and his current “plan”, whatever it is at the moment (the Stimulus, Health Care, Cap and Tax, etc.). Bush 43 has been taking more than his fair share of licks with true graciousness (making Obama look more the fool each time he blames his current problems on Bush). Limbaugh was out there for a time taking flak (and he is now back for an encore appearance), then the car companies and their investors, of course the banks, then doctors, and now health insurance companies (although the threat to do away with the antitrust exemption for health insurers would hit all of the insurance industry) and now FOX News. If scapegoating is how he thinks he will deflect attention from his spend and spend and tax and tax programs, it is becoming trite. I guess because of Axelrod and Emanuel he hasn’t gotten to the Jews yet, but I have every confidence that he will, as soon as he finds cause to blame them (and Henry Waxman, Chuckie Schumer and Joe Lieberman, et al) for some error. What was it that Obama’s Reverand Wright said about his inability to gain access to the White House, “It’s them Jews!” Although we tend to push those things from our collective memories, Obama has not forgotten.
The lack of subtlety again astounds me. The Obama administration (and Obama himself) have no ability to tread lightly. Surely they could have put Fox into Coventry without the public announcements?
Aron wrote, “by the way: Fox is regarded as fascist propaganda in the european media”
You and european do not understand the word fascism. 🙂 Have it bass ackwards….
If ∅bama succeeds in silencing the free press – then that would be fascism.
Knowledge is power.
nixon was not a populous leader, FDR was..
nixon made FDR look like a piker when it came to attacking inconvenient things.
its easy not to remember history you never learned
its funny, but i was able to get the information from the daily kos… who is using it to draw the line and similarity to FDR.
Campaign Dinner Address of Franklin Delano Roosevelt,
September 23, 1944. Washington, DC
International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America.
http://www.hpol.org/fdr/fala/
[i will highlight the joke in it or irony]
These Republican leaders have not been content with attacks on me, or my wife, or on my sons. No, not content with that, they now include my little dog, Fala. Well, of course, I don’t resent attacks, and my family doesn’t resent attacks, but Fala does resent them.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Well, I think we all recognize the old technique. The people of this country know the past too well to be deceived into forgetting. Too much is at stake to forget.
so there IS a prior president who went after every silly thing thrown at him. it wasnt nixon, it was FDR, another populist, like Sascha Pushkin, hitler, stalin, mao, obama, all cults of personality…
does anyone remember the attacks on people like father coughlin? or a few others?
Carter, evoking FDR, attacks Ford on jobless
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=888&dat=19760907&id=VxoMAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fV0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4543,4960407
read the first paragraph… a pip.
[we also forget all the work FDR did to create communist china!! poor old Chiang]
Graham J. White / F. D. R. and the Press
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s tempestuous, adversary relationship with the American press is celebrated in the literature of his administrations. Historians have documented the skill and virtuosity that he displayed in his handling and exploitation of the press. Graham J. White discovers the well of Roosevelt’s excessive ardor: an intractable political philosophy that pitted him against a fierce (though imaginary) enemy, the written press.
its not that he is like FDR, its that FDR is like other populists… and so all the populists appear similar, and so we make the fatal conceptual to compare them to declare that theya re not the same. but all are just variations on a theme we grok, and we do not want to know the essence of populist despotism, so we do not look with clear eyes.
White challenges and disproves Roosevelt’s contention that the press was unusually severe and slanted in its treatment of the Roosevelt years. His original work traces FDR’s hostile assessment of the press to his own political philosophy: an ideology that ordained him a champion of the people, whose task it was to preserve American democracy against the recurring attempt by Hamiltonian minorities (newspaper publishers and captive reporters) to wrest control of their destiny from the masses.
anyone really taking the time to listen to who he admires?
Expert Sees Hints Of FDR In Obama Speech
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99618417
Historian William E. Leuchtenburg, author of Franklin D. Roosevelt And The New Deal, talks about the echoes of FDR in President Barack Obama’s inaugural speech. Leuchtenburg says even though Obama did not mention FDR by name, or quote him directly, he was struck by how he evoked the crisis of 1933
remember that inagural address by FDR included several goals that were planks of the communists.
he used fdr in tons of quotes and things (i put a lot of stuff up on the fdr post, though some cut down by neo)
looking to a presidents 100 days, was started with FDR
FDR was a populist and the most left communist president until obama.
Obama loves populism and has quoted FDR and like the past, the way left is blindly supporting this FDR rerun
FDR had serious problems wiht the press, even worse than obama, as he was trying to sell us on communist totalitarianism. and kept trying to keep the press from reporting tons of inconvenient alliances, like with the mob.
Roosevelt got 15 major bills through Congress in his first 100 days. “Congress doesn’t pass legislation anymore–they just wave at the bills as they go by,” said humorist Will Rogers.
sounds familiar?
“Never before had a president converted so many promises into so much legislation so quickly,” wrote historian James McGregor Burns in The Lion and the Fox
sound familar?
This was only part of a vast array of government programs that Roosevelt called the New Deal, and collectively they represented a revolution as the nation shifted from a limited central government to an extremely powerful one. Through it all, FDR bonded with everyday Americans by means of his speeches and “fireside chats”–homespun radio talks that reached millions of listeners as the president explained his objectives and convinced his fellow citizens that he was their champion.
and obama doesnt like media for the same reason FDR didnt. they were a force to rekon with and they prevented him from commnuizing the whole state apparatus
“He has very pronounced ideas on the functions of the Presidency. He believes that the President is literally the leader of the people, particularly in the development of ideas. He believes that at every turning point of history some one rises up who can enunciate and in a sense personify the new direction of the public mind and will. In his view America has reached such a crossroads. He does not go so far as to speak of himself as the leader of the economic revolution now in progress, but there is no doubt that he considers the President of the United States at this juncture the instrument by which profound and necessary changes in the American system are to be effected.”
was that said about obama, or was that said about FDR?
it was Anne O’Hare McCormick in the New York Times March 26, 1933
read Progressive Obama Critics Should Study FDR
by Randy Shaw
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/30/9993
Roosevelt is an icon on the U.S. left, as again became clear as the 75th anniversary of the New Deal was celebrated this year. And while Republicans have successfully rolled back many of the gains of the 1960’s and 1970’s, they have consistently failed to reverse the key building blocks of Roosevelt’s New Deal.
and in this game, whoever accomplishes a move forward is a hero… they are not losers, but winners.
and we still ahvent rid ourselves of the CHANGE thelast progressive president made.
the parallels are striking (though not as striking as the parallels to germany).
to see the paralles i would suggest reading
FDR and the press By Graham J. White
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
They are trying to use alinsky rules on the public, rank amateurs in the White House.
What they fail to realize is that there are American people behind each one of these organizations they are trying to demonize. This is way beyond anything Nixon did. Unprecedented, unprofessional and they double down:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/10/todays-qs-for-os-wh-10202009.html
My vertical scroll isn’t fast enough for this blog.
I don’t believe Emanuel have the will to attack FOX at all.
Glenn beck is using Alinsky’s tools to perfection. First he isolates the target, then he dissects the target until the target becomes a laughing stock. look at the way he has done this to ACORN, Van Jones, and Anita Dunn. All the while he is asking, even begging for Obama to show him where he is wrong. (The red telephone.) It is rich to see the community organizer out-Alinskied by that simple kid from Mt. Vernon, WA.
Darrell said, What they fail to realize is that there are American people behind each one of these organizations they are trying to demonize.
I wonder how many people work for health insurance companies and hear themselves attacked every time their employers are criticized for the earnings that pay their salaries? How many work (or worked) on Wall Street? How many work “stupidly” in law enforcement? How many in health care? How many are doctors, or work for doctors, or HAVE doctors, for crissakes, and were offended by Obama’s crass and dishonest efforts to demonize doctors as money hounds who lop off people’s legs and tonsils to fatten their wallets? How many people work for Fox — or just enjoy watching it, and believe themselves to be capable of determining whether or not it’s “legitimate” without the heavy-handed help of the White House?
Sooner or later, Obama will have set himself up as the enemy of nearly every American . . . which may, come to think of it, be exactly how he thinks of himself.
As one of my favorite philosphers, Mao or perhap it was Mother Teresa once said – “you fight your war and I’ll fight mine.” Chaing Kai Shek might have the soldiers and hold the cities, but we’ll still manage to slaughter tens of millions of capitalist pig running dogs, who deserve to die as we spit upon their memory – and seize control anyway, by fighting MY war. Said Mother Teresa. “Go find your own Calcutta,” said Mao. (Or reverse that; I was high that day at Occidental and forget now.)
So you fight your own wars with your teabagger parties and marches which I will ignore and pretend aren’t happening, as will my friends in the LOYAL and patriotic and True American Media shall do. (Or else).
And I’ll fight MY war with Fox News and Rush and Co., and I will demonize them; and eventually they SHALL be silenced. This is for your own good and welfare. Because that is what we care about. CNN ran a piece today showing what a mental disorder it is to listen to Rush and Co. You will get help for this mental disorder. And re-education. Worry not. It will all be covered.
Very Truly Yours,
The White House.
Mrs. Whatsit, thanks, that is exactly what I was implying, as Jimmy j says, the alinsky rules work very well against a person, an opposing candidate or a local bank in the community. When you start trying to use them against large portions of society, I believe they back fire.
With their demonstrated tone deafness, who is next? the military? veterans, stay at home moms?
There are two reasons I never tell Art to shorten, edit, or modify his comments.
1. As an adult, I don’t like being reliant on anybody. If he has to do something to make me feel or live better, I’ve become his partial slave or servant and at least supplicant. That’s a position people want to be in?
2. As someone who has also been accused of the same sorts of things, I know of the experience and I know the various reasons, motivations, and flaws behind the people making such requests. Some are born of pernicious reasons, but most aren’t. That’s not the point. The point is that on the road to improving yourself, you aren’t going to do so by complaining to somebody else that they should do something for you that will benefit them in no way shape or how. You want me to edit or shorten my comments, because you like what I’ve said but don’t like the length? Then Pay me Money per my price, now, or shut up. I’m not in the business of handing out ‘free stuff’ at my expense so others can gain. I’m pretty sure most of us aren’t, unless you’re in DC or Chicago.
So you have a weird trifeca of capitalism, independence, and do it yourself whatevers. Because there’s always going to be the free loaders that want what they like, but don’t want to actually bargain or pay for. And there will always be in the crabs in the bucket seeing you improve your mind, body, spirit, or knowledge, and seek to drag you down to their constrained level.
That’s how the world is. Deal with it. And if you don’t believe me that this is how the world is, you can check this historical analog out.
I came across this book today and excerpted some of it by hand
America has seen FDRs and Obamas come and go. That’s not the important thing. The important thing is how did people back then, in a younger America though still virtuous of character, deal with it? How did they sustain liberty to give it to their descendants, as we hope to do?
This is important for all sides of the anti-Obama coalition to think and learn about. Regardless of whether you think the likeliest scenario is the worst case or the best case scenario for Obama’s plans on America. American men and women have fought the same enemies we fight today on the domestic fronts. The won, or at least kept the enemy off long enough for us to be here. They are to be commended for it. They are to be studied and emulated for it if we hope to do the same.
Ymarsaker: There are two reasons I never tell Art to shorten, edit, or modify his comments.
I cried a little when I read that….
The reason why Flight 93 and Hannah Giles and O’Keefe are inspirational is because they actually did something. They just didn’t sit around, complain, call their lawyers, and threaten to sue. They did something about the injustice they saw. They didn’t like it? Okay, so they invested their own time and lives to changing it. They reached with their own hands for justice. They didn’t sit around, ask ‘pretty please’ of the government for a handout or for justice or for well, anything.
When Neo edits Art’s comments, I found it a little bit weird, but not wrong. Why? Because Neo was doing it herself, by her own hand. She wasn’t complaining about something that she had to power to either change or help change.
Personal character in America has been going down the toilet. If I can’t fix it up, at least I can prevent my own personal decay. That’ll have to be good enough. Hanson said something similar, actually.
Too tough to scroll past is right up there with the tv remote being on the other end of the sofa as an actual life difficulty.
Too tough to scroll past is right up there with the tv remote being on the other end of the sofa as an actual life difficulty.
It would be more anologous here if the sofa were a football field long.
Public education must going down in quality. Last time I checked, you couldn’t fit even half a football field’s broad length on a computer screen. How many screens does it take to cover a football field? Who knows, nobody can do math now a days without a calculator.
Thanks Y, sorry so long past few days…
Gray,
Be easier if the people who all that info is not known would have learned it and we didnt have to pass it on in volumes to make up for the days they spent eating corn dogs at the country fair. 🙂
Or are you telling me you know all that stuff?
In general we are not arguing facts we are arguing two false positions which are various summaries of said event. That is, we as a group tend to take a side with absolutely no in depth knowlege, and we like to pretend that we are actually deciding something.
for some reason, when i see people doing that with the facts they are bantering. i usually see a very gold fish bowl view, and that they are generally bantering back and forth different common knowledges.
want to know what made me write so much?
the whole point was obama was being petty about Fox and the media that doesnt act the way he wants. most treat this as if this is something that never happened. but it DID happen before, it happened with the man that OBAMA said he was copying.
common knowlege is what makes stalin a hero and forgets the other things. like FDR giving a speech to counter the newspapers talking poorly about his dog.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ignorance is kind of like a hole. It’s a negative quantity. The more you have the bigger hole you have. This means that someone has to shovel more to fill it.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Most people who know more dont waste their time sharing it. they look at others who dont know, and they say what a fool, and maybe even become marxists and then decide what you should know.
I say, what a thinker, they would be able to think clearer if they have the information naked in front of them. why shouldnt they know?
funny thing is that the same people who would want a population educated enough to understand whats going on and make a meaningful postitive contribution, are generally also the ones who only want the message to be short, simplefied.
after all, when you boil it down, arent we just buying ideas by how they appeal, like a product or new soap?
i keep coming out with histories, and the consumers are telling me that what they want are two minute sparky soundbites using only the most common information and make it short… like like a jingle, or a motto… maybe this is what happens when you learn history from exised quotes, and grew up on sesame street short time span skits.
on another stack, i get another set of consumer that appreciates what i have to offer. that as annoying as it is to read the length, i generally have a more interesting angle or information that is completely left out of the dialogue.
who do i make happy?
the lazy people who come into another place and think they are so important that they can make demands on strangers so that they can be pleased.
or the more thoughtful people who take time to read, agree, disagree, hate, love… and sometimes take the time to understand…
its a tough one gray…
which would you make happy?
i will tell ya this though. if i tried to make either happy, i wouldnt be expressing myself, but would be expressing some product i would want one or the other to “buy”.
i will let otis redding explain it to you
from sitting on the dock of the bay.
So…Im just gonna sit on a dock of a bay
Watching the tide roll away …ohhh
Im sittin’ on a dock of a bay
Wastin’ time
Look like nothings gonna change
Everything still remains the same
I can’t do what ten people tell me to do
So i guess i’ll remain the same
🙂
Aron Sperber Says:
“but I guess you hear similar things about Berlusconi”
Yeah, from the extreme left wing Euro media!
Steve G Says:
“How soon we forget. Obama has been seriously looking for scapegoats”
For awhile it was guns too. They were pushing the phoney ‘our guns cause the drug war problems in Mexico’ meme.
You get more across to people with less words.
Concise is persuasive because it has a higher chance of being read.
Art wrote, “Be easier if the people who all that info is not known would have learned it and we didnt have to pass it on in volumes to make up for the days they spent eating corn dogs at the country fair.”
Art, start with the premise the reader is smart #1. #2, start with the premise that the reader has a clutter filter.
I do not think Neo should spend anytime editing for shorter length. That takes personal responsibility away from Art.
Art, please take on the responsibility of writing something that smart people like me may actually read and get something out of…
If you dont’ – it’ll just continue as is – with you writing what less people read.
Thanks Y, sorry so long past few days…
No apologies are necessary. I’ve explained, I think, my reasons for that on the previous thread in question.
BTW, I’m not bothered by the scrolling.
I only wish to be helpful to Art because I know he has a good heart.
You get more across to people with less words.
Concise is persuasive because it has a higher chance of being read.
Only true in the abstract. Anybody that wants to help Art out here on this score can lead by example. Go ahead and summarize Art’s views into your own edited format and then say “Kablam” this is how it is done.
People have done so of this kind here before. None of them were those complaining, however. Funny how that works.
I do not think Neo should spend anytime editing for shorter length. That takes personal responsibility away from Art.
Neo can speak for herself, but I question whether she is doing the editing to appease herself (which I don’t see why as she certainly can’t be reading every comment on the list here) or more to address the complaints of her readers. Which means that an improper device has been engaged, if the latter is true. When you can’t play fair in a free market by convincing one party to do things in a mutually acceptable deal, one can complain to a higher power and get them to intercede. That wouldn’t necessarily be Art’s fault for Neo using up her time if she is acceding to the wishes of those lobbying complaints.
Art, please take on the responsibility of writing something that smart people like me may actually read and get something out of…
As people can see, Baklava offers no recompense to Art for the additional time and effort required. Yeah sure, theoretically a more concise format would help Art present his message which benefits Art, but Baklava presents the argument with ‘like me’. Negotiation problem. Conflict of interest one may say.
Who’s out for whose interests here? Smart people can figure out how to do things for themselves. Or they can figure out a way to get people to do it for them. Currently, there’s no reason for either atm.
Personal responsibility is dead for Democrats. And you can see why, right here, right now. And it ain’t just Democrats.
Art has no responsibility to you, Baklava, to provide you anything. You do not own him. You do not pay him for any service. You are not forced to listen or read him, nor are you forced to patronize this blog nor support Neo’s operating costs. If you are making a bid to look out for Neo’s interests, that conflicts with a deal representing Art’s interests, or even your own.
It is certainly correct that you should request something of him as that is right and polite, but to request him to conform to your standards on every one of his posts? You can request clarification on a point, or a link to a specific subject, and Art can say yea or nay, but you have no right to expect that he should modify his standards for your personal benefit at his expense.
Anymore than I have a right to expect you to talk on specific subjects and ignore others, without specifying which subject, only that it needs to fit my requirements. If I was your boss, I may have such expectations, but that’s not the case here, is it.
Yea, and I also have the ‘best intentions’. Of course, TM.
According to Rasmussen, Obama’s strongly favorable support is at 28%. One assumes that 10% of that is among blacks which is not based on performance in many cases. He may be on thin ice with his Chicago style politics.
Obama did something similar to Jack Ryan when he ran for the Senate: His campaign secretly pushed to have the court records of his divorce case unsealed, while publicly pretending to oppose any such action. The record is clear: Obama has always been a duplicitous worm.
I don’t claim Art has responsibility to me Ymar.
I was trying to persuade Art to take responsibility for himself for several reasons.
He’ll be more persuasive because more people will read his comments – that’s a benefit to him. He’ll feel heard and he’ll persuade more people.
If he wants to continue writing things that less people read…. that is up to him…. I’ll continue scrolling… so will many others…
I appealed to him based on the knowledge that he does have a good heart. Please help Ymar. We feel what we feel – you can hear it or choose to ignore it. But I think it would be wise to hear that we scroll..and scroll and you should hear (and Art should hear) that he becomes irrelevant.
I want him to know relevant.
BTW, That was my last comment on the Art subject. I won’t address things that assumed I said things that I didn’t.
I do not know how the leaps were made logically and I know it wouldn’t be fruitful for me to attempt corrections of the record about my thoughts.
He can try or not try to be more relevant by hearing our feedback and adjusting.
Speaking of the war on Media – comments at Oprah’s site pretty funny !!!
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/10/20/sarah-palin-go-oprah-winfreys-fans-arent-pleased
If Obama wants to isolate himself from Fox that furthers removes himself from the squishy ‘independent’ vote that he relied so heavily on to win last time. I’ve noticed something that may or may not be important: During the last three Presidential elections, the candidate that appeared on the O’Reilly factor won their election. Bush in 2000 and 2004, Obama in 2008.
The Mossiah may be rallying his base and serving notice to the lib networks but their influence isn’t nearly enough to win anything. Since he’s already bleeding ‘independents’ this only alienates them further away from his agenda. It seems political suicide to amputate a news arm that helps you connect with the voters you badly need.
My wild guess is that the O is seeking to intimidate ‘moderate’ Democrats to fall in line by herding them away from Fox or any ‘inconvenient’ news outlet. Forcing a boycott of Fox by ALL the Democrats essentially places them on the same idealogical boat tying their fortunes together. He knows that once the mammoth disaster of healthcare is passed, there is no repealing it. He may genuinely not care about the Democrat party after that. Ram the Democrat/Leftist agenda through now and deal with the consequences later. It’s a frightening gamble that may well work.
Obama’s War on Fox News Becomes a Quagmire
thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=4221#
You know I kinda like Glenn Beck but I can’t deal with him rubbing Vicks in his eyes to make himself tear up… Glenn …. Don’t do that. The essential sliver of truth he tells fall to pieces whe the world see that teary eye bullshit.
It REALLY makes Obama look like a big sissy. He’s freakin’ President and he can’t take on a puny news anchor? Or puny talk show host? If he was brilliant and charming, (which many people in this country are) he would have NO problem going on there and cleaning their clocks in a humorous and stylish give and take about the issues of the day. In fact, ANYBODY who really has any executive chops has learned how to deal with adversaries in this manner. It is part of the apprenticeship to climbing a ladder to the top. Anyone who has excelled in ANY field is able to do this! Obama, who has NEVER excelled at anything in his life, except for getting opportunities handed to him based on “potential” does not have this skill set, and once again, it is a very obvious missed opportunity. And makes him look like an amaturish fraud. I feel sorry for him.
He’ll be more persuasive because more people will read his comments – that’s a benefit to him.
I haven’t heard from him on this score. I will believe it is a benefit for him, when he decides to tell me that he judges it a benefit worth of certain actions. Until, those of us saying it is a benefit to him is just speculating.
Unless you want to say that you know best what is good for him. Which sounds not particularly good, if you ask me.
But I think it would be wise to hear that we scroll..and scroll and you should hear (and Art should hear) that he becomes irrelevant.
I’m sure he hears you on this score. As I told him before, I read only the sections that interest me. Sometimes I’m interested. Sometimes I am not. If you are scrolling past every one of his posts, then you are the one losing out. We all have the ability to read a few sentences here and there to decide if things are interesting. If we choose not to do so…. no author can make us do so. Well, sure advertisement sells, but what is Art advertising? Knowledge? Anybody that wants knowledge on the net, can find it. If they don’t want to get it from Art, I’m not sure what Art changing his format will accomplish. If a person is not fired up with the desire and curiosity for knowledge, far be for me or even Art to ram it down their throats.
I can pinpoint specific references and subjects in Art’s posts, because I read those portions. You don’t. Thus you feel you have the right to make a judgment on Art’s format, when you don’t read his format nor have a way to improve it.
I can debate Art’s points, for or against. Because I have read them and considered [some of] them with time I felt they were due. Anyone that hasn’t given the same kind of consideration, has no place to speak.
Oh, they have good intentions to speak, yes, I don’t deny that. Of course, I may have been a little hasty when I made that remark on the previous post. I only mean that we all have good intentions, well mostly. That is not what decides things, however, unfortunately.
I was trying to persuade Art to take responsibility for himself for several reasons.
If he wants to continue writing things that less people read…. that is up to him…. I’ll continue scrolling… so will many others…
I don’t know the full history of your communications with him, so I can’t make a judgment one way or another. But it sounds like you have already told him these things… and he has obviously decided already based upon his available options.
So what do you think is accomplished by continuing to pressure him more on this? He has chosen, has he not. Do you think he needs more help? From whom. Me?
When a person tells me he has good intentions. I believe him as I believe you, unless he gives me cause to do otherwise. When a person tells me he has no time to edit and still produce the same quality of work, I believe him. How am I going to ‘help’ Art when he has already said what he has said on his options? I can’t ‘help’ him have another view, that’s his decision, not mine. I don’t consider it ‘helping’ by making other people’s choices for them or pressuring them to make choices I think are their ‘best bet’.
I won’t address things that assumed I said things that I didn’t.
I did not make the claim that you said those things. I made the claim that you aren’t those things or that you didn’t do those things. If you did, I’m listening. If you were offended by the implication that my post dealt with something that was present in yours, that was not my intent. I take full ownership of the origin of my statements, and do not explicitly attribute them to someone else unless I believe it is theirs.
If people wish to offer feedback, they can go back a few threads to see what constructive criticism/feedback really is.
I, Art, nor any other author of any work cannot possibly change the entirety of our writing styles based upon the preferences of a few. It is possible to clarify a few specific points and answer a few specific issues, or to address specifically quoted questions for summarization and distillation, but to change an entire style is not feasible.
I’m sure your feedback to Art is useful on this score. So accept my feedback on your comments, that they are not feasible. That even if writers wanted to accept them, they could not. It is too nebulous, and too broad reaching.
Editors will tell an author to cut their novel to within a proscribed word number. And they’ll recommend specific sections to be cut, sometimes. Anyone else here can do the same. Or they can choose to exercise their other rights.
How many screens does it take to cover a football field?
One Artfldgr post.
Julia: that was a good post, but I’m not sure about your intention with the last sentence. Was in sarcastic? Please clarify. As you probably know, Neo has pointed out brilliantly in many blog runs, there is no need to feel sorry for this man. Others here have concluded the same. Obama is the captain of his of this ship, you can be sure of that. He calls the shots in consultation with Axelrod and Emanuel. And you can bet your last dollar that he is 100% behind this denigration of a legitimate American news outlet. There are some 39 more months left. Feel sorry for us.
(darn.) ugh .. . those errors above were on purpose.
if i tried to make either happy, i wouldnt be expressing myself, but would be expressing some product i would want one or the other to “buy”.
That’s pretty self-indulgent.
Every writer needs an editor. Neo edits you–It’s her blog. I typically read your posts she edits.
I like to hear your take on things, ‘cuz you’re smart; not a “data-dump” of things I could have read somewhere else.
I would enjoy reading your thoughts and feelings on subjects if you provided URLs for backup material.
More beef! Less bun!
I second John C, Julia. The man is despicable, and misplaced sorry feelings are an ingredient in what has got us where we are today.
Ymarsakar Says:
October 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
,,,,, nobody can do math now a days without a calculator.
The contact list in their cell phones has also insured that they don’t remember any phone numbers. 🙂
Actually, on “back to school night” a few years ago, my daughter’s 6th grade teacher rattled off a math problem with 10 different numbers and only one person had the answer.
Me.
My daughter’s parent. 🙂
My idiot liberal neighbor said one day to ALL of us in the court.
“Both me and my wife work for the state of CA so our family has a 30% pay cut!”
Obviously he added his 15% pay cut and his wife’s 15% pay cut and came up with a 30% pay cut due to furlough’s.
Problem is …. his total family income dropped only 15% not 30%. If his wife had a job outside the state that didn’t get cut his total family income would’ve been cut 7.5%
But then again – liberals seem to have zero math skill some times. It’s the main reason they have problems with economics 101.
JUST TEASING!
“The war on Fox may be dumb… ”
Sounds like a good setup for a joke…
The war on Fox may be dumb… but they make up for it with volume.
The war on Fox may be dumb… but it’s shiney.
Obama is back to the bottom of his Rasmussen poll numbers. He is still making mistakes like this attack on Fox. He just got double-snookered by Russia and Iran. He is openly and obviously dithering on Afghanistan, the “war of necessity.” The economy and jobs are still getting worse.
I’m thinking more and more that Obama’s fecklessness is his most important feature.
Obama may well blunder us into a terrible situation, but he won’t craftily ensnare us in fascism. He doesn’t have the brains or the courage.
I say that our most important task ahead is picking up the pieces after Obama implodes.
One thing to be said for recent Obama events is that they’re giving us plenty to laugh at. Remember when folks were worried that political humor would suffer during this administration because Obama wasn’t funny? No longer. See, for example:
http://thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=4221
If one adds up all Grays posts nibbling on arfldgr, they are as long as one of art’s posts. Adjust your scrolling speed, Gray. Do you have a wheel mouse? If so, it is an easy task to increase how many lines it scrolls per flick of the wheel. You can fly right by one of art’s posts in no time – like I am now thinking of doing to yours.
I was taught to never say in four or five sentences what can be said in two or three. That is, if your aim is to truly get across a point and reach your target audience. And limit your topics – keep it simple and concise.
If one meanders on in what appears to be a spontaneous, sometimes random, and sometimes undisciplined fashion, it can certainly serve as therapeutic exercise for the writer, which in and of itself serves a useful purpose for him or her. But the message itself will reach fewer people and he or she should not be deluded to the contrary.
It makes no difference to me whether somebody wants to post a screed the length of War and Peace in a blog comment. I’m short on both time and attention span, and I’ll scroll past it. But if he or she truly wishes to really communicate with people and convince them, or educate them, or REACH them in some fashion, as opposed to simply self-luxuriate in a healthy full-fledged “vent” – then short, concise, and to the point will better serve that goal.
Either way is the writer’s choice.
Blam.
Sorry to get off the current fascinating discussion regarding the length of various poster’s comments, but thought I would toss out a consideration regarding Obama’s underlying motives in attacking FOX news.
Quoting the book of neo:
“Oh, and one more thing: yes, the attack on Fox is a distraction from the rest of Obama’s program. But in the eyes of the administration that’s a feature, not a bug.”
A topic of discussion in an earlier thread was whether Obama was being destructive to the nation out of intent or incompetence.
Some thought it was intentional, others believed it was simply he was in over his head.
Going back to neo’s last comment, I was considering the reasons on either side as to why this tif with FOX could be considered either a bug or a feature.
Then I got to thinking – what if it’s a matter instead of Obama attempting to create a crisis, during which his various proposals could be offered up as solutions which the public was supposed to grasp at desperately as their only hope?
What if he was successful at creating the crises, but unsuccessful at implementing his solution?
The crises would then churn on unabated, and he would appear impotent (which appears to be the case).
This war with FOX could be an effort to distract attention from his own complicity in the underlying causes of the crises, just as much as an attempt to divert attention from his proposed solutions that have been so publicly rejected…..
It doesn’t matter if Obama has personally ordered the attacks or is simply letting his advisors do whatever they want. He put them in place. He gave them the presidential seal. They speak for him.
This attack isn’t a momentary gaffe by a single spokesperson. This is a coordinated attack by a number of people over an extended time frame. Therefore, it is the policy of the BO-zo administration. They are his agents. They speak for him. He’s aware of what they are doing (if he’s not, we’re in even bigger trouble).
He’s on the hook.
He knows exactly what they are doing, it matches his statements made during the campaign, I think this is going to blow up, they have over stepped.
News flash, new acorn video is devastating:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,568830,00.html
Watched it earlier but seems to have been pulled, this is a big one, has a lot of people lying on camera about what happened….
Adjust your scrolling speed, Gray. Do you have a wheel mouse?
It’s burned out from use.
SOSWN!
(Save Our Scroll Wheels Now!) 🙂
video is back up:
http://www.breitbart.tv/breaking-acorn-sting-team-releases-new-video-from-philadelphia-office/
Breitbart continues to gut the MSM and their in-the-tank supporters (Media Matters). Will it make any difference? If you think it will, you are still living in the pre- 2008 la la land where facts and truth made a difference and one could believe that most media folks cared about such things.
“The war on Fox may be dumb…”
It may also be pernicious…
http://www.slate.com/id/2212662/
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09101409.html
“Welcome to the road to China’s Xinhua News Agency and Russia’s Channel One TV.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/claudiarosett/first-they-came-for-fox-news/2/
Mrs Whatsit Says:
October 20th, 2009 at 4:27 pm…
Excellent perspective, worth rereading….
More, indirectly related to the compelling issue of freedom of expression:
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1082/Fighting-the-Reign-of-Islamic-Correctness.aspx
I like to hear your take on things, ‘cuz you’re smart; not a “data-dump” of things I could have read somewhere else.
well.. when i do that, there is a different reaction, not everything is as easy as you say.
first of all, i am most likely telling you something you dont know, or an angle that you havent seen.
i am good at pulling together disparate things and making them fit when no one else can even see they are related. and i DO give links to most stuff.
i can also abstract things a lot.
go back and take a look at my shorter posts…
what happens is what happens when someone takes some plates out of a flack jacket. the opposition, which is not you, tends to focus on the missing part.
doesnt matter how smart i am if others dont have the information leading up to it. that is, if they dont know the train of thought and the data that got me there, then what are they deciding by?
That’s pretty self-indulgent.
no it isnt…
i am an artist… i have LOTS of freinds who are artists, and some of them famous. some of them are authors.
the one thing that poisons authors, painters, and lots of others is to listen to critics like you. it creates self doubt, it creates the attitude that to be liked you have to be what others want you to be.
in our society this abnormal collectivist thing is seen as norma, hence your statment. i am not writing for the collective, so i must be selfish or self indulgent.
no… i am not trying to shuck and jive you by saying what is convenient like obama just so i can win you over to my group. my group doesnt exist.
I have a freind who is a new author. he is going good, and he sends his work to me sometimes to read. i like it. he once took an idea of mine, spun it and sold it. that was fun.
but he is younger than me, and he wanted me to critique his stuff in different areas. i refused to. i said your doing just fine, and that i will say I like or dont like it, but i will not critique the details.
why?
i explained to him that if he does that he will not be writing his own work, he will be poisoning his work with the moves i will give him for the only reason that he likes me as a freind and respects me.
if i let him do that, that would then abuse the respect he gives me and i have for him.
he is doing well, his publisher who is paying him and getting contracts for him, they can give him opinions, what to cut out, its their business, they are paying him, and so forth.
by the way… when i get something from him, its great. i dont know what it will say, or how the story will go. when he did that to my idea, it was totally surprising and original.
if i would have given him kvetching masqurading as advice and abuse his judgment by saying what i wanted is in his interest, would i be respected by so many people others respect?
gray…
the whole idea of socialism is that you can summarize reality so that you can make choices from that summary and have them work.
heck we dont even realize that because we have 10 fingers and work in base ten we arbitrarily split things up into clean groupings!!!
imagine in those two paragraphs above, you had no idea what socialism meant. not even a wrong idea. what could you understand? not much. because the burden of the paragraphs understanding requires you understand the premises and terms i am using and in what way.
here is a paragraph that a friend who i am working with wrote me. he is assuming i know all the terms (i dont), or that by the time i am finished i will know the terms.. he has seen me do this a lot, and so he just writes things out for me.
I will have genomic tools at my disposal such as the ability to take time resolved global snapshots of the amounts of each expressed protein (mass spec proteomics) and mRNA (RNA-Seq digital gene expression) and sites of transcription factor occupancy ChIP-Seq) in the cell as well as the ability to randomly turn on or off any gene in a cell by treatment with a library of morpholinos and then select function by some kind of optical readout.
do you understand that stuff?
i do now
we are working together in pluripotent vs toti potent stem cells. while my day work is writing software.. outside that, i take celeb fashion images, and create new tech. some of it i do for the researchers so they can have tools..
the point is that if i decided to tell you what that paragraph was about or something with it, i could use a short paragraph too and assume you know the info or will look it up.
in our case, we want to talk about this subject as neo puts them up, but we dont want to admit we dont know, and even give a cursory glance at information to refresh us before we start debating.
I have spent a life time being the tall poppy and the bent nail. i have then spent a life time listening to people who know less, can do less (because their desire), and so forth, who genearally have a internal habti of equalizing things.
that is, if a person has skills and they dont hide them, call them arrogant.
if a person knows a lot, and throws in information that others dont know, and its a lot, then make fun of him for larger postings than the group
if a person has an outlier opinion, do the saem to get them in line.
the list goes on… (and in the inner city, it can include knives, and deadly games as in my youth).
i WANT to write smaller…
but you still didnt answer whether you knew the information in my post.
i understand that a comic book frame with too many lines is noisy and less pleasant to read. i know that large paragraphs are hard for people who are more recently educated.
but you cant grow past a certain point unless you can take in enough calories.
translated: if you cant handle more than a certain amount of information, and you filter it, you can never get past a certain point.
Gramsci wrote nine volumes.. i have yet to meet someone here or else where in debates who refers to him, and has actually read him as i have.
here is a link.
i put up a link to bella dodds book.
did you go read any of it?
i asked you if you knew what i wrote already (at least then you were paging through to not be bored by what you know, rather than to preserve your current state of ignroance).
here is a link…
anyone want to bet with me that Gray will not follow it after he said to include them
[another equalizer the burden i have to meet is much higher than the burden of the other. so its a tactic of use up my energy. the fact that i have so much, tends to maket his a bad tactic with me]
here we go for about the 5th time:
Bella Dodd School of Darkness
yamaguchy.netfirms.com/7897401/dodd/dodd.html
first seven chapters.
now lets see what will actually happen
been doing these experiments for about 30 years, and they dont just need the internet. my friends and i have expressly removes the barriers in front of whiners, and then watched them. you get a photographer who really wants to be a fashion guy. we give him a prime seat in our team, he gets to be credentialed, we find a loaner camera for them. we get it early so they can practice. etc. in 10 years of it, 99% crap out the first 24 hours. then some other imp pops up running the exact same lines… (same thing happened to oprah for one of her series of shows!!)
now i challenge you…
read it and lets here something of it.
so far the ONLY person who has taken a book off the list has been OCCAM.
and he read it, and commented back.
i think actually he may have read two..
Obama may well blunder us into a terrible situation, but he won’t craftily ensnare us in fascism.
he already did… to the tune of how many trillions, how many sectors nationalized at all, and has seiu running the soviet.
so far the ONLY person who has taken a book off the list has been OCCAM.
and he read it, and commented back.
i think actually he may have read two.
Nah. I just looked at the pictures… /g
pst314 Says:
October 20th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Obama did something similar to Jack Ryan when he ran for the Senate: His campaign secretly pushed to have the court records of his divorce case unsealed, while publicly pretending to oppose any such action.
Before Jack Ryan (R) in the 2004 general election, there was primary opponent Brett Hull (D) who also had his divorce records unsealed, revealing the allegations of wife-beating. Hull was the strongest of the democrats that spring but the wife-beating finished him off.
And before that, in 1996, there was the primary election battle for IL State Senate in the 13th district. Obama was in the primary along with Alice Palmer and four other Democratic candidates. ALL FIVE OPPONENTS were thrown off the ballot by Obama lawyers, who successfully challenged most of their nominating petition signatures. Btw in Chicago the real election is the primary.
I wrote about Obama, Ryan, and Hull in the second half of this post.
pst314, stop it. You’re inflaming my conspiracy suspicions. /g
😀
I stand by my post. I do feel sorry for him. To have not had the character building experiences of a truly accomplished person, puts him at a great disadvantage in his job. However, I do feel more sorry for us. There’s a lot of sorry going around.