Obama has Coffee with Progressive Media Stars

[red states rule]

This was a waste of time. If these "media stars" got every single one of their viewers/listeners/readers to vote for Obama that might add up to 50,000 votes for Obama.

Why does Obama feel he needs to shore up his far left kook base anyway?




An all-star list of progressive and liberal media folks came to the White House today to chat with President Obama over coffee in the Roosevelt Room.

The group chatted with the president about economic messaging, his agenda for 2012, the various campaign arguments against different GOP candidates, the desire among some Democrats for him to highlight his foreign policy accomplishments, fighting corporate influence and the “crappiness” of the Senate filibuster , as one attendee put it.

Those there included the Washington Post (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/business/companies/washington-post.htm)‘s Ezra Klein and Greg Sargent, MSNBC anchors Ed Schultz (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/reporters/ed-schultz.htm), Rachel Maddow (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/rachel-maddow.htm), and Chris Hayes, the Nation’s editor and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel, the New York Times (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/business/companies/new-york-times.htm)‘ Frank Bruni, and stars of the interwebs Arianna Huffington (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/reporters/arianna-huffington.htm), Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo,

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/potus-has-coffee-with-progressive-media-stars/

[logroller]

This was a waste of time. If these "media stars" got every single one of their viewers/listeners/readers to vote for Obama that might add up to 50,000 votes for Obama.

Why does Obama feel he needs to shore up his far left kook base anyway?

Its quite brilliant really; go to the pundits and ask "What do you want me to say?" That way, when he says it, they'll be right there to parrot him, presenting a streamlined position. As opposed to the GOP candidates who, to win the primary, must attack other conservative candidates-- which presents a less united front. That's politics; it reminds me of that old joke about not having to outrun the bear.

[red states rule]

Its quite brilliant really; go to the pundits and ask "What do you want me to say?" That way, when he says it, they'll be right there to parrot him, presenting a streamlined position. As opposed to the GOP candidates who, to win the primary, must attack other conservative candidates-- which presents a less united front. That's politics; it reminds me of that old joke about not having to outrun the bear.


Why bother? The num ber of people these libs reach with their shows is little to nothing

Again, why does Obama have to shore up his kook left base? I know some feel he has not been liberla enough but he has succeeded in runining the US economy, run up $5 trilllion more in debt, put millions out of work, increased the number of people on government assistance to a new record high, and pushed the green agenda despite losing billions of tax payer money on the projects

One would think the far left would be delighted with Obama

[logroller]

Why bother? The num ber of people these libs reach with their shows is little to nothing

Again, why does Obama have to shore up his kook left base? I know some feel he has not been liberla enough but he has succeeded in runining the US economy, run up $5 trilllion more in debt, put millions out of work, increased the number of people on government assistance to a new record high, and pushed the green agenda despite losing billions of tax payer money on the projects

One would think the far left would be delighted with Obama

You clearly, and I think purposefully, underestimate the influence of media-- which is how Obama got elected to begin with, remember???

To answer your question, far left is all he's got to work with. A better question is why is this even reported on? Obama sitting down with the far left media :yawn: Hannity, Rush, and O'reilly sitting down with Obama over coffee to talk campaign strategy and talking points...that'd be a story.

[red states rule]

You clearly, and I think purposefully, underestimate the influence of media-- which is how Obama got elected to begin with, remember???

To answer your question, far left is all he's got to work with. A better question is why is this even reported on? Obama sitting down with the far left media :yawn: Hannity, Rush, and O'reilly sitting down with Obama over coffee to talk campaign strategy and talking points...that'd be a story.

The ones he brought to the WH do have a tiny audience LR.

There is no doubt the liberal media was, and still is, the Obama re-election staff. However. even they cannot mask the terrible Obama economy

I also remember how the liberal media had a fit when - gasp - conservatives showed up at the Bush WH. I also rememebr the griefy they were giving Pres Bush over his policies as well. I suspect no outrage here when libs visit the Obama WH

As I asked before, are these libs PO'd that Obama has not been liberal enough?

[logroller]

The ones he brought to the WH do have a tiny audience LR.

There is no doubt the liberal media was, and still is, the Obama re-election staff. However. even they cannot mask the terrible Obama economy

I also remember how theliberal media had a fit when - gasp - conservatives showed up at the Bush WH. I also rememebr the griefy they were giving Pres Bush over his policies as well. I suspect no outrage here when libs visit the Obama WH

As I asked before, are these libs PO'd that Obama has not been liberal enough?

Small maybe, but staunch in their support. Come election time the number of people paying attention will go up. I'm sure they realize they got a tough campaign ahead, but they still gotta try. I don't know who gives a shit about what media people sit down with the pres; I know I don't. I'm sure you say lib media; but you also say they have a small audience, I'm assuming because not many people care what they say, so why should you RSR?

[red states rule]

Small maybe, but staunch in their support. Come election time the number of people paying attention will go up. I'm sure they realize they got a tough campaign ahead, but they still gotta try. I don't know who gives a shit about what media people sit down with the pres; I know I don't. I'm sure you say lib media; but you also say they have a small audience, I'm assuming because not many people care what they say, so why should you RSR?

I care because they are the ones on TV and in the newspapers proclaiming how "objective" they are as they slant and lie in their "reporting"

Meanwhile they scream how Fox News is biased and is the RNC mouthpiece

A classic example of the hyprocisy is how these same members of the liberal media (and the liberal media in general) covered two stories. the Tea Party and the OWS crowd


http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?33657-Media-Double-Standard-Occupy-Wall-Street-and-the-Tea-Party


Read for yourself LR, and these are the people who want to pick the Republican nominee as they once again try to carry Obama over the finish line in 2012

[ConHog]

Small maybe, but staunch in their support. Come election time the number of people paying attention will go up. I'm sure they realize they got a tough campaign ahead, but they still gotta try. I don't know who gives a shit about what media people sit down with the pres; I know I don't. I'm sure you say lib media; but you also say they have a small audience, I'm assuming because not many people care what they say, so why should you RSR?

I'm with you. Who cares who Obama has coffee with? Maybe he's just friends with these folks. Who knows or cares. The guy can't just have a cup of coffee with people without some loon acting like it's the greatest injustice ever known to man?

[logroller]

I care because they are the ones on TV and in the newspapers proclaiming how "objective" they are as they slant and lie in their "reporting"

Meanwhile they scream how Fox News is biased and is the RNC mouthpiece

A classic example of the hyprocisy is how these same members of the liberal media (and the liberal media in general) covered two stories. the Tea Party and the OWS crowd


http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?33657-Media-Double-Standard-Occupy-Wall-Street-and-the-Tea-Party


Read for yourself LR, and these are the people who want to pick the Republican nominee as they once again try to carry Obama over the finish line in 2012

I can't tell you how many times I get emailed some forward from people who believe it, not because its true, but because they want to believe its true. People tend to believe what they want to believe. Media caters to this. If you believe fox news doesn't do the same thing, then it is because you wish to believe as such. Obviously, just because they say they're objective, fair or impartial, it doesn't make it so. Its the duty of viewer/reader to question the objectivity, not the media; they're just a source, and like any source, it needs to be questioned. The degree to which it need be questioned is subject to the whims of the opinion. What I take issue with, and what I try to communicate to you, is when you constantly bash liberal media, it makes me question your objectivity. You really do present a lot of good information, but I constantly have to read through what I assume to be a biased argument. I recognize you are free to say whatever, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but I believe you'd reach a broader audience and communicate your message more effectively if used the term 'liberal' less pejoratively.

[ConHog]

I can't tell you how many times I get emailed some forward from people who believe it, not because its true, but because they want to believe its true. People tend to believe what they want to believe. Media caters to this. If you believe fox news doesn't do the same thing, then it is because you wish to believe as such. Obviously, just because they say they're objective, fair or impartial, it doesn't make it so. Its the duty of viewer/reader to question the objectivity, not the media; they're just a source, and like any source, it needs to be questioned. The degree to which it need be questioned is subject to the whims of the opinion. What I take issue with, and what I try to communicate to you, is when you constantly bash liberal media, it makes me question your objectivity. You really do present a lot of good information, but I constantly have to read through what I assume to be a biased argument. I recognize you are free to say whatever, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but I believe you'd reach a broader audience and communicate your message more effectively if used the term 'liberal' less pejoratively.

Liberals and I mean ALL liberals are evil and no true conservative does anything wrong.


THE END.

[logroller]

Liberals and I mean ALL liberals are evil and no true conservative does anything wrong.


THE END.

I'd disagree, but you've been accused as the expert 'round here. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

I'm with you. Who cares who Obama has coffee with? Maybe he's just friends with these folks. Who knows or cares. The guy can't just have a cup of coffee with people without some loon acting like it's the greatest injustice ever known to man?

Now CH I would not call you a loon

An obnoxious arrogant jerk yes

But not a loon


I can't tell you how many times I get emailed some forward from people who believe it, not because its true, but because they want to believe its true. People tend to believe what they want to believe. Media caters to this. If you believe fox news doesn't do the same thing, then it is because you wish to believe as such. Obviously, just because they say they're objective, fair or impartial, it doesn't make it so. Its the duty of viewer/reader to question the objectivity, not the media; they're just a source, and like any source, it needs to be questioned. The degree to which it need be questioned is subject to the whims of the opinion. What I take issue with, and what I try to communicate to you, is when you constantly bash liberal media, it makes me question your objectivity. You really do present a lot of good information, but I constantly have to read through what I assume to be a biased argument. I recognize you are free to say whatever, and I wouldn't have it any other way, but I believe you'd reach a broader audience and communicate your message more effectively if used the term 'liberal' less pejoratively.

Ah, I have posted email in the humor section LR - not in the discussion forum.

Sems to me you look at the word liberal as a others see 4 letter words. Perhaps that is more telling about liberals and liberalism than anything I could ever post

In most cases I post links to credible sources and sometimes I post videos so you can see the liberal (or libs) int heir own words

I do hope you are not going to tell me outlets like ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, and CNN are unbiased and do not openly support Obama and the Dems

I do like Fox News since they constantly have reps from the left to offer their opinions on the days topics. I often shut down the libs I know with this offer. I will give them $50 if they can name me MORE R's that CNN and MSNBC have on than the number of liberals Fox News has on.

In most cases the lib friend thinks for a moment and declines the offer. They know Fox News have many libs under contract to give the other side. That is why Fox News leaves the competition in the dust

What I do want from any news source is to tell the me who, what, where, when why, and how of the story and leave their perosnal opinions and slant out of it

That has not happened for over 30 years LR


Liberals and I mean ALL liberals are evil and no true conservative does anything wrong.


THE END.


Looks like OCA has returned

(sigh)

[ConHog]

Now CH I would not call you a loon

An obnoxious arrogant jerk yes

But not a loon

Umm I'm not the one who made a mountain out of a molehill here.

[red states rule]

Umm I'm not the one who made a mountain out of a molehill here.

Neither did I hotshot

But I guess simply pointing out what Obama says and does get under your think middle of the raod skin

[ConHog]

Neither did I hotshot

But I guess simply pointing out what Obama says and does get under your think middle of the raod skin


Making fun of people who think a coffee date is a big deal is hardly an indication that you have gotten under my skin. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Making fun of people who think a coffee date is a big deal is hardly an indication that you have gotten under my skin. :laugh2:


CH, it is clear if you spoke your mind, you'd be speechless.

BTW, how did the liberla media react when Pres Bush met with conservative radio hosts?

Here is one example

(And I am accused of making a mountain out of a mollhill by simply talking about Obama's meeting with lib hosts)






On Tuesday's Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann fretted about an Oval Office meeting of President Bush and several conservative talk radio hosts -- verbally tagged by Olbermann as "right-wing radio yackers" and labelled on-screen as the "Legion of Doom" -- as the Countdown host contended that Bush was devoting "90 minutes worth of your taxpayer dollars" to the meeting. And in an amusing faux pas, Olbermann's staff, for the second time in less than a year, accidentally displayed a photograph of former liberal Democratic Senator Max Cleland instead of conservative talk radio host Neal Boortz.

During the show's opening teaser, Olbermann proclaimed: "The born again and the born talkers: The President takes 90 minutes worth of your taxpayer dollars to entertain right-wing radio yackers in the Oval Office, and will set up a radio row for them on the White House grounds next week."

During the teaser, a graphic including photos of four conservative radio hosts was shown, including Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michael Medved, and Mike Gallagher. But also appearing in the group was former Democratic Senator Cleland. Viewers would later learn that Boortz was actually the fifth radio host at the meeting.

As documented by NewBusters, on the December 14, 2005 Countdown show, Olbermann's staff had similarly displayed a photograph of Cleland while Olbermann was attacking Boortz (http://www.debatepolicy.com/node/3227) during his regular "Worst Person in the World" segment. On the subsequent night, while correcting the mixup, the Countdown host labeled the liberal Cleland as "one of the best." (http://www.debatepolicy.com/node/3248)

Returning to the October 17 show, after devoting the first segment to the signing of the bill regarding the treatment of captured enemy combatants, Olbermann returned to the topic of the talk radio meeting as a screen behind him displayed a different set of photos of the five radio hosts, this time accurately including a photo of Boortz, while displaying the words "Legion of Doom" in the middle of them. Olbermann spoke disapprovingly of President Bush's "priorities" for devoting so much time to the meeting.

Olbermann: "Back when the President was actually trying to sell that bill to the American people, he publicly answered questions for an hour on the morning of September 15 in the Rose Garden. But it's what he did that afternoon for an hour and a half that perhaps speaks volumes about this administration's priorities."

After bringing aboard Newsweek's Howard Fineman to discuss the day's news, Olbermann's began the interview with a question about the meeting. Olbermann: "In January, the President consulted with 13 former Secretaries of State and Defense about Iraq, spoke for 40 minutes, allowed discussion for 5 to 10 minutes. The figures for the 5 conservative radio show people is double that. Is there an explanation of that that does not include the President using the Oval Office for purely political purposes and even indirectly for political fund-raising?"


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/node/8408#ixzz1hSYdgvWz

[ConHog]

BTW, how did the liberla media react when Pres Bush met with conservative radio hosts?

Here is one example

(And I am accused of making a mountain out of a mollhill by simply talking about Obama's meeting with lib hosts)

Who cares how they reacted RSR? They are stupid for making a big deal out of nothing when they do so as well.

But that is their jobs, over sensationalizing things that really aren't that big of deal.

[red states rule]

Who cares how they reacted RSR? They are stupid for making a big deal out of nothing when they do so as well.

But that is their jobs, over sensationalizing things that really aren't that big of deal.

I guess being a middle of the roader means NEVER holding anyone to any standards or accountable

After all, we need to just get along and learn to work each other (gag, choke)

[ConHog]

I guess being a middle of the roader means NEVER holding anyone to any standards or accountable

After all, we need to just get along and learn to work each other (gag, choke)

to what standards? You claim your dating a liberal yet you don't think Obama should be having coffee with one?

My God you are stupid.

[red states rule]

to what standards? You claim your dating a liberal yet you don't think Obama should be having coffee with one?

My God you are stupid.

Remember CH Jesus loves you but everyone else thinks you're an idiot.

[ConHog]

Remember CH Jesus loves you but everyone else thinks you're an idiot.


You insulting someone's intelligence isn't nearly the insult you imagine it is.

[red states rule]

You insulting someone's intelligence isn't nearly the insult you imagine it is.


How can I insult something you do not have?

Your intel has never been questioned. In fact it has never been mentioned

[ConHog]

How can I insult something you do not have?

Your intel has never been questioned. In fact it has never been mentioned

Do you EVER give your hate a rest? Let it go man, it's Christmas.

[red states rule]

Do you EVER give your hate a rest? Let it go man, it's Christmas.
Sorry I can't think of an insult stupid enough for you.

[ConHog]

Sorry I can't think of an insult stupid enough for you.

I reiterate , Merry Christmas.

[Kathianne]

I'm closing this. It's being discussed and see no more reason to comment or take comments.

Why doesn't everyone go drink some spiked egg nog or glogg? Merry Christmas!