OBAMA RIPS FOX: ‘WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE HOW THE MEDIA REPORTS’
For going on seven years we have learned three things about President Obama: 1) He loves the poor so much he continues to create more of them. 2) He loves the poor so much he does everything in his power to keep them poor. 3) He doesn’t see the opposition as loyal, but as bad players — his enemy. This is especially true of Fox News, which Obama ripped as anti-poor bigots during a Wednesday afternoon summit on poverty.
We’re used to this Obama, the forever-partisan who has never seen himself as president of all the people but only of those who worship him.
What was most revealing about the president’s comments was his expressed desire to “change how the media reports.”
Speaking of Fox News, the poor, and the way GOP leaders think, Obama said, [W]e’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues.”
Here is the full transcript:
I think that the effort to suggest that the poor are sponges, leeches, don’t want to work, are lazy, are undeserving, got traction. And look, it’s still being propagated. I have to say that if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it is a constant venue. They will find folks who make me mad. I don’t know where they find them. They’re all like, “I don’t want to work. I just want a free Obama Phone, or whatever.” And that becomes an entire narrative that gets worked up. And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress, which is much more typical — who is raising a couple of kids and doing everything right but still can’t pay the bills.
And so, if we’re going to change how
Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)and40%Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)think, we’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues, and how people’s impressions of what it’s like to struggle in this economy looks like. And how budgets connect to that. And that’s a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news.54%
After seven failed years, to watch Obama sit there and discuss the poor as though he is part of the solution and not the problem, is laughable.
And let’s not forget that Obama knows nothing about poverty. He has lived a privileged life.
Obama attended prep schools as a child, lived with his well-to-do grandparents in Honolulu as a teen, where he attended Panahou, a fancy private school. Both of his grandparents were well educated; she even worked as the vice president of a bank. For a time, Obama had a nanny! From there Obama attended Occidental College in California, was well off enough to visit Pakistan for 3 weeks; he then attended two of the most prestigious colleges in the country: Columbia and Harvard.
The closest Obama has ever come to experiencing anything close to poverty was during his time as a community organizer in Chicago. And in that dynamic, the poor were just pawns for Obama to manipulate to achieve his political ambitions.
Obama knows nothing of struggle, or what life is like for those who do. And after 7 years of his failed economic policies, we also know he doesn’t give a damn enough about the poor to change his policies in a way that might actually help them.
Obama likes poor people fine — he likes them dependent on the government.
He also likes the news media to do what it’s told.
Replies
Since we all know that FOX have been very fox-like in their reports and that their duty to truth have been seriously mismanaged, should we really be upset that a president now wants to do some change to that?
FOX has been lying to the world for as long as I've known of it, and now you're upset because Obama rips on that? *facepalm*
If you're against the Cabal, you should be WITH Obama on this.
why don't the bama supporters speak up about his anti democratic rhetoric? because the loony left adore dictators. especially their own marxists-i have workers from Uruguay who said the socialists crept into government in the 80's and 90's by lying that they were moderate but slowly gave the poor more and more subsidies - almost free housing that guaranteed re-election- and crippled the economy by over taxing businesses and personal income so that out of a population of 3 million about 350,000 had to leave to work in the US, Italy, and Spain and send money home-where will Americans go to work?
Socialism ruins economies
They do speak up! Very little press around willing to represent these efforts. Though there are some good alternative media out there that is doing its best to share the truth.
From my perspective there is no democracy, anti or otherwise. And none of the so-called isms work either. It is all a game of control. People believe what they want to hear, elect those they hope will represent their interests and end up with the same old game. As far as I can see the only way to pull out of this game is to divest oneself psychologically from supporting any of these systems. So I guess you could say I am anti the whole lot of schisms that prey on humanity.
They are all a sham, like a game of shells. Under which shell is the prize. The truth is there is no prize. Humanity's interests are not represented by any of the government systems in place on earth at this time.
The question is, do we look the other way when people fall under those systems, so we can continue to line our pockets, or do we recognize the divinity in ALL and change the policies that cause suffering and pain.
I am not left, right or center. I AM ONE.
You're correct Pet Rock. Socialism does ruin economies. But so does fascism and corporatism. And it doesn't keep the trains running on time.
Freedom of the press? That was lost long ago, with freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, right to privacy etc. etc. etc. From what I have seen Obama plays to the tune of the one's who have been working to abridge all of our freedoms. He's very good at offering the feel good rhetoric, but many of his policies are being driven from the same power brokers that have been running things for centuries. For the record, on a personal level I like Obama, but I don't recognize the man who showed up as president. In this case however, I agree with him. The media does need to change how they do their reports. Truth and fairness in reporting would be welcome, not to mention real disclosure of what is going on behind the scenes and with regard to our star families that are waiting for humanity to catch up with the truth of their existence.
Kathryn
KATHRYN: a free market that offers freedom of speech under certain marketable conditions is a tyranny. As much as I can't stand CNN, Fox, or MSNBC, they have a right to broadcast their teleprompter verbatim bullfeathers script. And the same applies to Infowars, The Grudge Report, and yes, even Fox News.
Awakened people are suckers for the truth.
“In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” G. Orwell
Dear Malcolm,
I agree they do have the right. But the fashion in which these rights are exercised is an abomination. Nothing more than propaganda. I believe this is an important conversation to enter the public discourse. When people stop supporting the media directed mind control tactics of the elite, then things can begin to change. I neither support the elimination of free speech nor the abuse of it.
However, the abuse of media and the abuse found in the justice system has risen to epic proportions. People in America are starving, homeless, unemployed, and are being shot down in the streets. This is in part due to the media's propensity to demonize the poor, immigrants and people of color. Racial and religious intolerance, global conflict and war have been and continue to be instigated by the media.
For me it is not just the messenger, it is also the message. While I understand your concern about potential legislative censorship, for me, it is equally important to address the whole problem. To protect the abuse without addressing the harm caused by it is in incomplete solution. By the way I love your Orwell quote. It suggest a level of responsibility that goes along with reporting the truth rather than distorting the truth.
I believe you are right in that executive orders will not solve the problem and may well exacerbate the problem. It would give the next group of elected puppets more power and control over what is being reported and would potentially cause problems for alternate media. The solution is for people to stand up and demand the truth while refuting the lies and distortions.
Best, Kathryn
PS: One of the reasons Obama can so deftly manipulate the poor and people of color is because he is able to effectively articulate the concerns and issues. Anyone who would like to challenge this would also need to address these concerns in a real way. Most black people realize that Obama, like all of his predecessors, is only the current face on a very old agenda, and realize that he is not likely to do anything to affect real positive change. But their is still the pride over his election, and hope that his presence will make a small difference. As much as I talk to people, friends and family about seeing the truth for what it is, I have been largely unsuccessful.
KATHYN: Racism topics have increased under Obama's term; skin color focus is the sign of someone who assumes skin color is an important factor socially and not the content of character. Also note that over 14 million people on welfare have been added to the numbers since Obama was elected president, and he has yet to address this fact.
Obama is no different than Bush in terms of foreign and local policy. The exception is that Obama had childhood instruction from a communist in Hawaii.
For the most part I do not disagree with your assessment of Obama.
However, skin color becomes important when black men are targeted by "stop and frisk" policies and are brutally beaten, shot in the back or taken for a rough ride in the back of a police van. We have to wonder if their is any consideration of the content of their character, or for that matter, for a just application of the law. In many cases these brutal acts are being perpetrated on people who have not committed or been charged with a crime.
It is representative of acts of terrorism being committed on poor communities and communities of color. I would ask" what about the content of the character of those who would execute such acts? Should this not also be an issue of concern?
Some times people think this form of state terrorism is only meant for the lowest casts in society and that they themselves are immune. But I believe that the police are cutting their teeth on vulnerable communities. It will only be a matter of time before the same brutality will be visited on anyone who opposes state power. Look at the Occupy Wall Street movement. I saw with my own eyes. many fine upstanding people, not considered to be people of color, brutalized, beaten and jailed.
Does having a person with brown skin in the presidential office really change anything. Not really. Is it right to excuse abhorrent behavior because a brown skinned man is in office. Absolutely not. Should we blame him for every atrocity. Maybe, but there is a long list of presidents and power brokers behind him that laid down the protocols and continue to call the shots. Your photo display is very illustrative. Why not go all the way back 200 years, 2000 years. The same phenomenon will hold true. The face at the top represents the interest that lay behind it.
If the legal and justice systems that are currently in place change, someone with integrity could have a chance of being elected to office. This can only happen if each person looks at how they are supporting the existing system or neglecting to work towards change.
It is time for ALL people to be FREE.
I am not arguing with you. In many ways we are saying the same thing, but we have a different perspective due to having had a different life experience. Best, Kathryn
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next