Jolie Rouge

Backing Obama, MoveOn Urges Congressional Dems to Join Fox Fight
The Nation Tue Oct 20, 1:25 pm ET

The Nation -- MoveOn.org jumped into the battle between Fox News and the Obama White House on Tuesday, urging its 5 million members to call on Congressional Democrats to stay off the network for the rest of the year -- the same timetable announced by the White House.

"To draw attention to its biased coverage, President Obama will not appear on FOX for the rest of this year," notes a MoveOn email, citing recent reporting by The Times. "It's about time Democrats stood up to FOX," continues the missive, which calls on MoveOn members to sign a petition "asking Democrats to support President Obama's stance by staying off FOX as long as he does."

While Obama aides have forcefully singled out Fox for two weeks running, Congressional Democrats have been oddly subdued, as The Hill recently reported:

In the House and Senate, Democrats who pledged to follow the administration's near-boycott of Fox were hard to find, although many expressed support for Obama's stance. And there is no evidence of any joint strategy by Democrats at either side of Pennsylvania Avenue to coordinate their efforts against Fox.

Pointing to that article, MoveOn argues that "Democrats will only find the courage to join Obama if they hear from enough concerned voters."

Media Matters, another liberal group, also dialed up its efforts against Fox on Tuesday, releasing a new web ad cataloging how the network's daytime "news" programming echoes opinionated and sometimes inaccurate content from its evening "opinion" programming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20...ation/15486549

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

The Censorious Sound on the Left
L. Brent Bozell
Wed Oct 21, 3:00 am ET

Creators Syndicate – Rush Limbaugh was convicted of racism in a kangaroo court of "objective" media and dropped as a potential owner of the St. Louis Rams football franchise. His accusers claimed he once said slavery "had its merits" and that the assassin of Martin Luther King deserved a "Medal of Honor." The story circulated on the Internet and was eventually picked up by the major media, including both CNN and MSNBC.

But no one bothered fact-checking.

In fact, his accusers and those media that repeated the accusations never stopped to ponder that there was no need to fact-check this, so obvious were the fabrications.

Start with this reality: One could clearly dismiss these quotes as fabrications based on the simple fact that Limbaugh would never have uttered them, since he doesn't believe them. Period.

Add to it this second piece of common sense: Were Limbaugh guilty of uttering this garbage back in 1998, would we really be discussing it for the first time in October of 2009? Common sense tells us that if he made these comments on his show, his advertisers would dump him so quickly, he'd be out of a job by sundown.

Let's give the media a break and conclude that when it comes to Rush Limbaugh, they just have no common sense. Fine. That's where fact-checking comes in. A couple of minutes on the computer would have proven that these quotes were pure fantasy put forward by radical leftists, with no substantiation whatsoever, purely to assassinate this man's character, as is their wont.

But the Left — including many in the "news" media — is so blinded by its hatred of Rush Limbaugh that it will accept any accusation as authentic, and the more salacious, the better.

Start with CNN. This network is so prideful of its professionalism that it fact-checks comedy skits on "Saturday Night Live." Clearly it needs to focus less on comedy shows on NBC and more on the "news" coming from its own anchors. On Oct. 12, afternoon anchor Rick Sanchez showed his expertise at hit-and-run journalism by repeating the "slavery had its merits" quote as fact, with no effort whatsoever to authenticate it before moving on. When it was made clear that no authentication existed, and an apology was in order, instead Sanchez made matters worse. The following day, again he read the offensive fabrication, but this time added Limbaugh's denial, "to be fair to Rush," thus keeping alive the possibility that the accusation was truthful. On Friday, four days after they broadcast a falsehood, Sanchez finally delivered an apology.

MSNBC was even worse. They kept pushing the fake quotes even after it was apparent to everyone that they had not been substantiated. Their on-screen citation for the slavery quote was even sillier. It wasn't a newspaper. It was a linebacker: "Cited by James Farrior, Pittsburgh Steelers." After sliming Limbaugh from Monday to Thursday, on Friday MSNBC's David Shuster finally acknowledged they needed to "clarify" their sloppiness: "MSNBC attributed that quote to a football player who was opposed to Limbaugh's NFL bid. However, we have been unable to verify that quote independently. So, just to clarify."

No retraction, no apology.

Earth to MSNBC: The best time to verify your quotes is before you broadcast them across the nation for four days. But that would have hurt MSNBC's pressure on the NFL to dump Rush. "Clarifications" can wait until the damage is done.

These cable networks were not alone. Newspapers from USA Today to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published these howlers from sports writers, and liberal talk-radio hosts put the lies in heavy rotation. Washington Post sportswriter Michael Wilbon spewed the phony slavery quote on his ESPN show, "Pardon the Interruption." That show could now be called "Pardon the Fabrication."

Now match this war on Limbaugh with the White House's war on Fox News, and what you see is a blatant campaign by the Left to "delegitimize" conservative talkers and alternative media outlets. Is there anything that sounds more hermetically sealed in a liberal bubble than claiming Fox News is not a "legitimate" news network because it reports information with a "perspective"? If there's anything more bizarre in the last week than watching Al Sharpton attack anyone else for being "racially divisive," it's watching David Axelrod complain to George Stephanopoulos that the news shouldn't come with a partisan "perspective."

Team Obama's idea of "straight news" is that which goes straight from Rahm Emanuel's cell phone into Stephanopoulos' mouth. Team Obama's idea of news without "perspective" is Brian Williams broadcasting publicity stunts like Obama buying hamburgers for his staff and the "news" of the day is how many apples can be spotted at the White House.

The only thing in their way is the emerging alternative media, which is why they're out to destroy Rush Limbaugh.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20091021/...box/op_2311713

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Thursday, October 22, 2009
Obama tries to ban FOX from press pool

Unbelievable and chilling. Any guesses on what they might do next?

Unprecedented: White House tries to ban FOX from press pool http://directorblue.blogspot.com/200...o-ban-fox.html


Dan Riehl: http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...ouse-pool.html


Allahpundit: http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/2...wing-pay-czar/

http://www.punditandpundette.com/200...ress-pool.html

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Carrots and Sticks: Obama's split media strategy
By Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer
Mon Oct 26, 6:55 am ET

WASHINGTON – The same president who aggressively harnesses the power of the press to promote his agenda has taken to lacing his comments with criticisms of the media, with no bigger target than the gabby culture of cable television.

President Barack Obama's critique is biting: The media prefer conflict over cooperation, encourage bad behavior and weaken the ability of leaders to help the nation.

The White House's attempt to discredit Fox News as an arm of the Republican Party may have been getting the headlines, but it is only one recent window into Obama's already complex and crafty relationship with those who cover him.

All of Obama's frustration comes as he not only welcomes the ratings-mad media's constant demand for his presence, but also aggressively seeks maximum exposure to serve his own agenda.

He went on Letterman and Leno. He's held as many nightly news conferences in his first six months as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton did in eight years, and conducted far more interviews than either had at this point in their presidencies. He is the first Oval Office occupant to do five Sunday morning talk shows in a one day.

In essence, Obama's strategy is not to tame the media to his liking or blame it for his troubles. It is both.

Obama defends independent reporting as vital to society. He touts the value of providing more openness to the public and accountability by government — indeed, it was one of his more prominent campaign promises.

And then, he's the media's chief critic.

Lamenting the rise of instant commentary at a memorial for news anchor Walter Cronkite, Obama said that "What happened today?" is now replaced with "Who won today?"

"The public debate cheapens," he said. "The public trust falters. We fail to understand our world or one another as well as we should — and that has real consequences in our own lives in the life of our nation."

Sometimes the compliments and condemnation come in practically the same breath.

"The 24-hour news cycle and cable television and blogs and all this, they focus on the most extreme elements on both sides," Obama told CBS News, echoing those comments in the three more network interviews that made up his Sunday show blitz last month.

Blaming the media is almost tradition among politicians. It helps Obama by bonding him with his audience against a common target: the influential press, which many people consider to be biased or untrustworthy. But it does carry a risk of backfiring by elevating Obama's critics or making the White House look petty for pinning its problems on the press corps.

The president is sophisticated about what attracts coverage, what's in the media each day, and why. Unlike Bush, who publicly claimed little interest in news from papers or TV, Obama dives into it.

Aides say he reads four or five newspapers each morning. He catches bits of TV coverage on the sets around the Oval Office. Obama also goes online, has articles flagged for him by staff, reads news magazines on Air Force One and likes to hear which stories have aides buzzing.

So though he often does not differentiate in his criticism among the "media," he's well aware it is actually a diverse mix of print, TV, radio, and Web that is hardly homogenous in its choices about what story to cover or how.

But with more than 70 percent of Americans saying television is their main source of national and international news, according to a Pew Research survey, it's clear that Obama and his advisers are most riled by what's on nonstop cable.

With its hours and hours of TV time to fill, cable news and punditry can whip up public debate and then cause spillover coverage in other forms of media.

Senior White House leaders still mock the front-page coverage given to whether Obama's back-to-school speech to the nation's students was an attempt to indoctrinate them. Obama was openly incredulous over the media's minute-by-minute anticipation of Obama's so-called "beer summit" with a policeman and a professor at the center of a racial controversy.

And when the president gave a major speech to Congress on health care policy, the coverage for days centered on Joe Wilson, the South Carolina Republican lawmaker who had heckled Obama by shouting "You lie!"

"You've got to be careful about them cable networks," Obama cautioned a man at a Montana town hall who had just told him that cable was his main source of news. Earlier at that same event, Obama had pointed out that only the town halls where tempers were flaring were getting covered. "TV loves a ruckus," he told the crowd.

"If you replaced just a portion of the back and forth on something like Joe Wilson with coverage of the issue and some real discussion about what was at stake..." White House press secretary Robert Gibbs wished aloud.

The irritation has reached another level recently over Fox News, which Obama and his aides have brazenly tried to marginalize by calling it a Republican outlet that shouldn't be treated like a real news network. Yet publicly singling out one news organization is but the most highly publicized push-back from an Obama White House that began back during last year's campaign building a reputation for aggressively confronting reporters over stories it doesn't like and using hardball tactics to try to get its way.

Not to be lost in Obama's pique, however, is that he has a point, said Jill Geisler, a former broadcaster who teaches leadership at the Poynter Institute, a nonprofit school for journalists. Noise makes news. Nuance often does not.

"I think each of us in journalism must ask: Are we contributing to a deeper understanding of complex issues?" she said.

Predictably, Obama's media coverage has turned more negative since the start of his term.

That reflects the partisan tensions in Washington, setbacks on many of his top agenda items, and the traditional adversarial, watchdog role of the White House press corps.

But even presidents who start with glowing press coverage always end up complaining about how they get beat up, said Martha Joynt Kumar, a political science professor at Towson University who studies White House communications.

"The press is there as a surrogate for the public, to ask the questions the public wants answers for," Kumar said. "Their job is not to stand there and provide him an opportunity to talk on any subject he wants."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091026/...Fycm90c2FuZHN0

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Nielsen: Fox News ratings up almost 10% since WH declared warposted at 9:53 pm on October 26, 2009 by Allahpundit
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/2...d-war/?print=1

It’s a nine-percent bump in the two weeks since Anita Dunn’s whine heard ’round the world — in terms of overall audience.

Among the coveted 25-54 demographic? A 14-percent bump.

Good work, Barry.

People keep telling me that this PR offensive by the White House benefits both sides but I don’t see how that’s true. If the goal is to contain Fox by framing the stories it breaks — Van Jones, ACORN, etc — as somehow illegitimate, then every tenth of a point that Fox’s ratings go up undermines that goal. There will come a point where other news nets will follow Fox’s lead simply for business reasons, ideology or no ideology; follow the link, eyeball the list of top 20 news shows, and ask yourself how far we are from that point, really.

To put it in perspective: “Red Eye,” at 3 a.m., is beating Campbell Brown at 8 p.m. on CNN in the demo. (Worse, perhaps: Anderson Cooper is getting beat by … re-runs of Nancy Grace.) CNN’s made a noble attempt at semi-objective coverage in primetime while FNC and MSNBC resort to bombthrowers, but this experiment must be near its end. I wonder what they’ll end up putting in the 8 p.m. slot. Some sort of updated version of “Crossfire,” perhaps, with a new, younger, edgier cast? Andrea Tantaros versus Meghan McCain on a nightly basis? I’d watch.

Here’s a quote to ponder. Remember, when they say “last,” they mean out of four networks — CNN, Fox, MSNBC, and Headline News. Quote: Exit question one: How long before CNN’s getting beat by Joy Behar?

Exit question two: Glenn Beck is number two in cable news — at 5 p.m. How long before Ailes moves him to primetime?

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/2...-declared-war/

See also http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/20...nns-whinefest/

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/200...dentity-theft/

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Barack Obama: Editor-in-Chief
October 30, 2009
by Howard Portnoy

I’m not here to glorify or defend The New York Times, but doesn’t it have an editor-in-chief (more or less)? An incident that occurred this morning makes you wonder. As reported by Nice Deb, a story that ran in the Times this morning seemed critical of Barack Obama’s visit to Dover Air Force Base in the wee hours of this morning presumably to pay his respects to the fallen servicemen being brought back to the States. The story, by Jeff Zeleny, originally contained the following paragraph:

Curiously and inexplicably, the same paragraph was edited later on to read as follows:

The mention of Obama’s intention to convey was suddenly gone.

What gives? That’s what I want to know. Is the White House now editing copy by its friendly publications when it is deemed unfavorable? The Times is certainly mum about the change.

Speculation today has been running high that the visit to Dover was yet another staged Obama event, complete with news cameras to record his solemn salute. Some rightwing commentators have attempted to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, claiming no one could be that base and callous. How charitable of them. Others have ascribed motives, ranging from his wanting to look concerned, so the public will understand his waffling over his general’s request for more troops, down to Obama’s setting the stage for a pullout.

I am not going to add my own speculation, but I will tell you that I would put nothing past this guy. For someone so hell-bent on changing the tenor of politics in this country, he has acted consistently in a fashion that encourages cynicism. If he wants the respect and trust of the American electorate — and not just the part that voted for him — he’s going to have to earn it big time, and not through another crummy speech.

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives...itor-in-chief/





Friday, October 30, 2009
Obama at Dover

President Obama made a trip to Dover Air Force Base to be present when the coffins of troops and DEA agents were returned from Afghanistan.

I have no problem with it.

One thing I've learned in life is that everyone mourns in his or her own way.

I reject the attempts by some on the left to use this event as an excuse to attack George W. Bush, who chose to mourn in private with the families of soldiers killed in action, rather than greeting coffins in public.

I similarly reject attempts by some on the right to use this event as an excuse to attack Obama, who chose to mourn at the scene of returning coffins with photographers recording an event he considered important.

To each, his own.

Posted by William A. Jacobson at 5:42 PM http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.co...-at-dover.html

3 comments:


[quote=ΣΤΙΝΥΝ]
ΕΛΛΑΣ ΚΑΙ Η ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ: Συμπεράσματα από τις εκλογες στην ...
Για τη χώρα μας δύο είναι τα νέα προβλήματα: Η εμμονή του Μπερίσα να προωθεί «νομίμως» ή παρανόμως την αλβανοποίηση των περιουσιών των Βορειοηπειρωτών και η αμφιλεγόμενη στάση της νέας βουλγαρικής κυβερνήσεως στο θέμα του αγωγού ...
August 29, 2009 5:38 AM

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

The pro-Fox Democrats
Daniel Libit
Sun Nov 1, 6:02 pm ET

Democratic pundit Bob Beckel has been under contract with Fox News for six years. And in the midst of the White House war against the cable network, some of his liberal friends think that’s six years too many.

They invited him to lunch the other day for an intervention: Why is Beckel — a true-blue Democrat who worked for Robert F. Kennedy and ran Walter Mondale’s 1984 presidential campaign — giving comfort to the enemy?

Beckel’s response: “I talk to more persuadable voters in a month than anybody on MSNBC and CNN talks to in a year.”

In the eyes of some of their party brethren, Beckel and other Democratic strategists and pundits who appear regularly on Fox News are traitors to the cause. Or at least gluttons for punishment.

And some of them feel that way, too.

“It sucks,” says Democratic direct-mail consultant Liz Chadderdon, a regular on the network. “It is very, very tough to be a Democrat on Fox.”

During an October 2007 hit on “The Factor,” Chadderdon referred to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay as “victims.” It was a verbal faux pas, and she knew it. But no sooner did she get off the air than she received a death threat — the first of a handful she says she’s received after appearing on Bill O’Reilly’s Fox show.

More recently, Chadderdon has been invited to talk business with Fox’s Neil Cavuto — on the main network and on the two-year-old Fox Business Network — even though she readily admits that she has no background in economics.

“Speaking about those issues is not my forte,” said Chadderdon. “And I’m getting the tar kicked out of me.”

So why does she keep doing it? For pretty much the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks. Fox is where the viewers are — No. 1 in the prime-time news ratings and drawing more than twice as many viewers on weeknights as either MSNBC or CNN.

“You know how I know nobody watches CNBC?” said Chadderdon. “I compared the pope to my 11th-grade algebra teacher, and nobody sent me a letter.”

Lanny Davis, former White House counsel for Bill Clinton, says some of his fellow Democrats privately encourage him to keep appearing on Fox — even as they boycott the network themselves.

“I get very positive but whispered reinforcement,” he said.

Davis made news during last year’s Democratic presidential primaries when he said that Fox was the fairest of the cable networks in its treatment of Hillary Clinton.

And now, he insists, the claims of bias directed at Fox are overstated, at least insofar as they come from devotees of one of its competitors.

“Is there a difference between Fox and MSNBC?” he asked. “You count the number of guests on Rachel [Maddow] and Keith [Olbermann] who are conservative Republicans. If you get to double digits, I’ll buy you dinner for each one.”

Susan Estrich is perhaps the most identifiable Democratic pundit on the network. She’s been on the payroll for more than a decade, having first gotten to know Fox News President Roger Ailes when they were working on opposite sides of the 1988 presidential campaign.

Estrich says they’ve become good friends and that when she’s had beefs about the network’s coverage, management has been receptive.

“If there is something I think is not right, I pick up the phone and I call,” she said. “What I have been hopefully able to do is offer my thoughts both inside and outside.”

Estrich encouraged Democratic pollster Doug Schoen to join Fox Nation at the end of the 2004 election. Weary of the unpredictability of other networks’ schedules, he was happy to sign on — and says he’s encouraged his Democratic friends to do the same.

“They are the most professional network of any I have dealt with,” he said. “If you are a Democrat who wants to deliver mindless talking points on Fox, it’s probably best to go to MSBNC and hope you get a chance to recite them. I think Fox encourages critical views of all sides, asks different kinds of questions and wants to have diversity of view.”

Beckel believes Fox viewers are more open to the Democratic side of the story than stereotypes might suggest. And indeed, a 2008 Pew Research survey found that while almost half of viewers who regularly watch Fox News identify as Republican or Republican leaning, 39 percent tip Democratic and 12 percent have no stated angle at all.

Chadderdon is skeptical that her Fox hits do much to advance the progressive cause. But she says they’re good for business.

“The clients I have dealt with will say to me that they are impressed I have gone on [Sean] Hannity and O’Reilly,” she says.

Nevertheless, Chadderdon has been dialing it back in recent months, making polite excuses when bookers call to inquire about her availability. Plus, she has adopted a personal policy of not going on Hannity’s show after he was condescending to her on the air last summer.

“When the hit was over, I ripped off the microphone and started screaming at the producers,” Chadderdon recalls. “They ignored me and said, ‘Thanks for coming’ and hung up.”

Fox News did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

Peter Fenn knows what it’s like being the cable news version of Sisyphus — pushing the political boulder up the hill week after week. After regularly appearing on Fox for many years, Fenn says he started to pull away following the 2006 midterms. A few months prior to the elections, a “Hannity & Colmes” episode on which Fenn appeared alongside conservative pundit Ann Coulter was the mocked subject of a “Daily Show” feature called “Great Moments in Punditry as Read by Children.”

“After that, I thought this was getting ridiculous,” Fenn said. He continued to appear less frequently, until calling it quits after a show in May 2008 in which Michelle Obama’s patriotism was being served up for debate.

Beckel said he’ll persevere, even if it means taking blows from liberals who weren’t even born when he was fighting the good fight.

“There is a frustration when you are getting yelled at by people who weren’t even a gleam in their daddy’s eye when you were getting beat up by hard hats on Wall Street [while] protesting Vietnam,” he said.

He looks at the bright side.

“I get on Hannity every Monday night and say Obama is the greatest economic president since Franklin Roosevelt and watch Hannity’s jaw drop,” Beckel said. “And that is one of the great moments of my week.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/28999

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

Sesame Street"'s jab at Fox News sparks backlash
Thu Nov 5, 3:49 pm ET

Next week will mark “Sesame Street”'s 40th year on the air, and while many are celebrating the iconic PBS show that's become what the New York Times recently labeled "messianic," some conservatives are crying foul over the re-airing of a sketch that jabs fun at the right-leaning Fox News network.

In the clip of the sketch that originally aired two years ago without controversy, Oscar the Grouch is playing a reporter for the "Grouch News Network," also known as "GNN," which certainly sounds familiar. After Oscar conducts an interview in which he shares hugs and kisses with his royal interview subjects, an irate viewer calls him to complain that his coverage of the news wasn't quite grouchy enough, saying "From now on, I am watching Pox News," adding, "Now there’s a trashy news show!"

Watch the sketch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO-1j...layer_embedded

The post generated hundreds of comments, ranging from the supportive (“AMEN! As a child born in the mid 60s I've had the full benefit of the Left's assault on our culture in media, print and society”… “Yank their funding! NOW!”) to the critical (“If we conservatives are to be successful in the media, we can't keep grabbing our skirts and shrieking every time we are parodied, especially when parodied on a equal level with left leaning counterparts. Man up.”)

The "Pox News" incident isn't the first time “Sesame Street” has ruffled conservative feathers. False rumors that the show had caved to pressure from liberals promoting healthy-eating habits and was converting Cookie Monster into Veggie Monster sparked some scorn. The story was sensationalized by some in the media and an Internet petition calling for a boycott of the show was widely circulated, reminding some of a previous crusade by the religious right to boycott the PBS show “Teletubbies” over one of its character's "subtle depictions" of homosexuality. However, Sesame Street representatives said at the time that the infusion of fruits and vegetables into Cookie Monster's diet was merely part of the show's effort at "broadening his eating habits."

In response to the criticism expressed over the "Pox News" episode, Sesame Workshop vice-president of corporate communications Ellen Lewis told Yahoo! News, "Sesame Street is well-known for their parodies and the show did a parody involving the Grouch News Network and in it one of the characters, Grundgetta, Oscar the Grouch's friend, mentioned Pox News Network." She added, "This is just another one of the many parodies that Sesame Street has done over the years."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/200911...ws/ynews_pl968

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/sr...enough-for-me/


Fringe Idiots exist on both the Left *AND* the Right...

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Jolie Rouge

I wish I xcould have posted this in the thread about the Telepromter ... but it seems a home here as well ... dealing with misplaced priorities


The Washington Post this afternoon reported "President Obama delivers remarks on Ft. Hood shooting at end of tribal leaders conference." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...110504202.html

The transcript begins:

Ah, the dangers of giving shout outs without a teleprompter. Crow is not a Medal of Honor recipient. As noted by the Congressional Medal of Honor Society:

Crow's name is not included on the Society's Medal of Honor recipient list. He was, however, awarded the Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor, in August.

Obama, often described as "cerebral" by the mainstream media, should know the difference between the Medal of Honor and the Medal of Freedom, especially since he [i]personally awarded the latter to Crow[/]i. Don't expect his blunder to receive wide coverage. It's not something he can blame George Bush for.

Here's why he should have known


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ba...inner-who-isnt




( http://www.thoseshirts.com/ )

Updated: It Gets Worse/ Obama's Not Ready For Prime-Time Presidency

My God, what a contemptible fool is Obama. h/t Instapundit.

A CONGRESSIONAL MEDAL OF HONOR WINNER who isn’t.

Tragically, the latest gaffe from our Not Ready For Prime-Time CIC is more like the recent SNL, than the old. He simply is not funny. Worse than that, he is a disgrace. That he might be able to change, or even simply influence the direction of this nation to any extent is a pathetic joke of history, one of possibly historic proportions we must defiantly fight against every single day of his term.

But instead of a somber chief executive offering reassuring words and expressions of sympathy and compassion, viewers saw a wildly disconnected and inappropriately light president making introductory remarks. At the event, a Tribal Nations Conference hosted by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Indian affairs, the president thanked various staffers and offered a "shout-out" to "Dr. Joe Medicine Crow -- that Congressional Medal of Honor winner." Three minutes in, the president spoke about the shooting, in measured and appropriate terms. Who is advising him?

Anyone at home aware of the major news story of the previous hours had to have been stunned. An incident like this requires a scrapping of the early light banter. The president should apologize for the tone of his remarks, explain what has happened, express sympathy for those slain and appeal for calm and patience until all the facts are in.

That's the least that should occur.

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...residency.html

__________________
Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?