• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why didn't Obama call negative coverage the White Devil News?

An excellent point, but Obama still had more class about it than Trump even though both are hostile to the free press.

So? The OP seems to think Obama wasn't hostile to the press.
 
Not sure what the "white devil" reference is, but he did berate negative coverage and tried to ban Fox News from the White House press corps.

I cannot find anything that supports the claim that Obama attempted to ban Fox News from the White House press corps.

So, in turn, you are saying that Trump has banned CNN from the WHPC? Sources?

How on earth did you get that from what was actually posted?

Listen, its really not difficult to reason if you have the capacity. Trump never tried to ban CNN, so why would the ill informed poster bring up banning Fox? If there is another implication of the silly post, I am listening... and if its truly silly, I am sure you are in possession of those telling 'facts'.

He brought up "banning fox" because another poster made the claim and he was simply questioning the claim. And then you attacked him for bringing it up. Did you even read his post before replying?
 
I was asking for support for your claim. There is literally no other way my post could be interpreted as an implication to anything other than asking for someone to back up their claim.

Minor correction, it was Harshaw's claim.
 
How would you of felt if Obama constantly berated negative coverage as the White Devil news?

Barack Hussein Obama did not have to. Barack Hussein Obama weaponized the institutions under his department to go after them directly in an authoritarian manner. Simple berating and calling opposition out for lying is free speech and welcome across the land by those who believe in the first amendment. Thinking is difficult for many but most people can talk and this is how others can aid them in increasing their powers of critical thinking.

Obama's Weaponization of Government

Justice Department settles with conservative groups over IRS scrutiny

If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama

Department of Justice investigations of reporters 2013

and on and on and yes...on some more.

Recently Jim Acosta is clearly speaking out as opposition masquerading as a "reporter".

To contrast:

When Barack Hussein Obama is actually asked a question:.

The reporter is thrown to the dogs by his own....

Neil Munro, reporter who heckled Obama, out at Daily Caller


"In June 2012, Munro shouted a question at Obama in the middle of a Rose Garden announcement about changes to immigration policy. "Why'd you favor foreigners over Americans?” Munro yelled."

It is both hypocritical and revealing of themselves in light of today's events. They actually called the question "heckling" and lined up to metaphorically whip this guy for asking the question and circle the wagons around Jim Acosta for berating and arguably committing a C class assault on a young intern.
 
Last edited:
I really have no idea what you think you're on about here.



Obama's hostility toward the press was noted again and again and again during his Presidency.

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-b...s-legacy-will-be-one-of-secrecy-and-hostility

First of all, that's a blog post.

Second of all, Obama's rhetoric was not as caustic as Trump's. I know his administration mishandled the Snowden leaks. And aggressively went after sources of journalists. I know his administration stood idly by while the police shut down the Occupy movement. Even though, that Occupy movement did kind of rot from the inside. But, that's ancillary to the point I'm making. Obama never commanded his supporters to distrust the news the way Trump has.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/...utlets-report-news-they-know-to-be-fake-false

this poll says 72 percent says the news makes up stories out of whole cloth. What percent of the country would believe the news was flat out racist if Obama had branded them the White Devil news? And can you see how that is damaging to the country.. as well as just flat out wrong to do?
 
First of all, that's a blog post.

So? It contains copious factual information, including many quotes from members of the press noting Obama's hostility.

Second of all, Obama's rhetoric was not as caustic as Trump's. I know his administration mishandled the Snowden leaks. And aggressively went after sources of journalists. I know his administration stood idly by while the police shut down the Occupy movement. Even though, that Occupy movement did kind of rot from the inside. But, that's ancillary to the point I'm making. Obama never commanded his supporters to distrust the news the way Trump has.

I think you went into this thread believing that Obama had not been hostile to the press, or at the very least unaware of the extent to which he was.
 
Not sure what the "white devil" reference is, but he did berate negative coverage and tried to ban Fox News from the White House press corps.

Apparently based on what happened to Acosta, he would have been well within his rights to revoke Fox's credentials. I mean, if you believe Trump...
 
Barack Hussein Obama did not have to. Barack Hussein Obama weaponized the institutions under his department to go after them directly in an authoritarian manner. Simple berating and calling opposition out for lying is free speech and welcome across the land by those who believe in the first amendment. Thinking is difficult for many but most people can talk and this is how others can aid them in increasing their powers of critical thinking.

Obama's Weaponization of Government

Justice Department settles with conservative groups over IRS scrutiny

If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama

Department of Justice investigations of reporters 2013

and on and on and yes...on some more.

Recently Jim Acosta is clearly speaking out as opposition masquerading as a "reporter".

To contrast:

When Barack Hussein Obama is actually asked a question:.

The reporter is thrown to the dogs by his own....

Neil Munro, reporter who heckled Obama, out at Daily Caller


"In June 2012, Munro shouted a question at Obama in the middle of a Rose Garden announcement about changes to immigration policy. "Why'd you favor foreigners over Americans?” Munro yelled."

It is both hypocritical and revealing of themselves in light of today's events. They actually called the question "heckling" and lined up to metaphorically whip this guy for asking the question and circle the wagons around Jim Acosta for berating and arguably committing a C class assault on a young intern.

You're behind on the times. The new administration approved line is that he wasn't "respectful" towards Trump. At least know your talking points.

Why do we need Obama's middle name? Does the name "Hussein" scare you?
 
I'll say it's correct when I see evidence of such. As of yet you've provided absolutely none.

I linked to some. If you wish to deny it, that's fine.
 
I linked to some. If you wish to deny it, that's fine.

Nothing I've seen shows your claim that Obama tried to ban Fox News from the press corps. The best I've seen is that there might have been an argument at some point about the treasury department giving a fox news reporter access to an interview with a senior official. But the link you provided also stated that the whitehouse had nothing to do with the interview and that the treasury department denies the allegations. So if you think that proves anything you are out of your mind.
 
Nothing I've seen shows your claim that Obama tried to ban Fox News from the press corps. The best I've seen is that there might have been an argument at some point about the treasury department giving a fox news reporter access to an interview with a senior official. But the link you provided also stated that the whitehouse had nothing to do with the interview and that the treasury department denies the allegations. So if you think that proves anything you are out of your mind.

:roll:

As for the White House, it continued its confrontational tone with Fox News while also denying any attempt to bar them from yesterday’s interview, TPMDC reports:

“This White House has demonstrated our willingness to exclude Fox News from newsmaking interviews, but yesterday we did not,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest

* * * * *
 
Where did I make this claim?

Don't worry, it's normal for some conservatives, to put words in liberals mouths. I've become accustomed that they will often even come to an opposite conclusion to what you say. I've come to a realization, that some just scan, and don't fully even read what you write. Some also just have a prefab image of how all liberals think, that they act upon.
 
You think if Trump would have placed opposing news people under secret investigation, like slenderman misadministration spying on the FOX news journalist James Rosen and his parents...which is ostensibly worse than taking away the press pass of a constant annoying self absorbed showboat, that you folks wouldn't birth a cow screaming to low heavens?

Right.

And its not "you of", your "of" should be a form, a contraction form of have... so you've...

Just saying.

Please provide a credible link for that claim. We don't have to accept that claim as valid without if being supported.
 
Not sure what the "white devil" reference is, but he did berate negative coverage and tried to ban Fox News from the White House press corps.

Would you be able to prove that--"Obama tried to ban Fox News?"

Don't bother. We all know you made that up.
 
What other implication were you going off half cocked shooting at then, eh? If not, what were you even trying to convey... an unreasoned non sequitur, perhaps?

LMAO sweet irony maybe YOU should read the whole thread before YOU go off half cocked and your posts dont look so monumentally stupid. Literally nothing you just said happened . . .

There was no implication by them, there was no going off half cocked and there was no unseasoned sequitur by them . . . all of those were you :lamo

Feel free to admit your mistake and apologize to that poster. you're welcome!
 
You said "ban them from the press corps". Not inviting them to do interviews has nothing to do with that.

Whatever you need to tell yourself.
 
Whatever you need to tell yourself.

He is 100% right
What you claimed and what you provided are no where close to the same .. . now maybe what you said is true and there is evidence of it out there

but again not doing extra interviews is no where near banning from the white house LMAO
 
Whatever you need to tell yourself.

It's called the truth.

Lets see if I can explain it to you in an undeniable way.

Day A: Treasury officials invites members of the press core to do interviews, but they don't invite reporters from press company X.

Day B: The president bans Press Company X from being in the white house press corps.

If this happened, and on Day A you told me "the president banned Press Company X from the press corps!", what would you tell me on Day B? Would you tell me that he banned Press Company X? Because you told me that happened the day before.

These are different things entirely.
 
Fox News was never banned from the White House...Just more What About What About Obama Bull****
 

Newsmaking interviews aren't press briefings.

The White House doesn't grant newsmaking interviews to everyone.

Your quote from Earnest doesn't back up your claim that Obama tried to ban Fox News from the press corps.
 
Back
Top Bottom