God in heaven! You can’t get away from the damn Obamas even at the Oscars.
^^Wah! Wah! Wah!
If you want to make sure you don’t see Mr. Obama just watch a real news program. He’ll never show up there.
The Academy should have had Bush announce the winner of the best foreign language film.
If anybody spoke a foreign language, ’twas him.
There: a shot to the left and a shot to the right. Cal me Mr. Bipartisan.
The marriage of Hollywood and Washington is now complete with the First Lady helping to present the Oscar for Best Picture.
Hey… there is nor marriage between Hollywood and Washington… and most of Hollywood ISN’T Liberal.
I mean, sure, they fawn over the President, Liberal interest groups, and get very vocal about Liberal policies… but, um, they’re also really rich! And as we all know, that means they can’t possibly be Liberals! Because rich people are eeeeeevil.
So don’t read too much into Mrs. Obama presenting an award. She’s not really Liberal either, because she’s very rich.
Just don’t think about it. Look over here. *jingle jingle* Shiny keys.
I’m not understanding why CNN didn’t introduce a fresh set of graphics for Around The World. They took the same package as before, changed out the name (quite well, I’ll admit), and it still doesn’t appear like anything else on the network in style. Huh.
“If anybody spoke a foreign language, ’twas him.”
He spoke Texan. The rest of y’all speak a foreign language! :)
The conservative pro gun lobby are now bullying states saying if states change gun laws making them more restrictive they are going to refuse to sell to law enforcement.
Guessing there won’t be much outrage from Hannity and the other conservative guests and opinion hosts at FNC.
‘they’ are gun companies, not States, not lobbies.making that call.
Piss on me. Piss on you.
Ice is not stupider than Andy, just intellectually lazy.
Obama better not try to buy a gun from Larry Arms, cause it don’t sell to socialists.
I will sell him my special jock itch remedy.
My point is that the gun stores with I’m sure the full support of the NRA and pro gun groups are now going to bully states into not passing stricter gun control laws with the threat of not selling guns to law enforcement, yet everyone wants to cast the liberal gun control groups as the evil people who want to re write the constitution.
There are bullies on both sides pushing their agenda.
Is Megyn Kelly trying to top Jeanine Pirro for the title of most goofy host of a cable news show?
She’s jokes around way to much.
Nope, actually just stupid.
Wait… you mean gun manufacturers have gotten upset with some states calling them murderers, and blaming gun violence on them, despite their not having done anything illegal? You mean they’re not happy that some states are looking to restrict their business, want to impose legislation they think is unfair, and unfairly targets them?
And as a result, they’re not willing to do business with those people who have-in their opinion- treated them poorly?
Wow. I. Am. Shocked.
So because I don’t agree with you I’m stupid? That’s wonderful comment.
Can we have a discussion here without name calling?
I’ve never called anyone else posting here stupid because they don’t agree with me.
Consider it a sign of affection.
stevengregory @stevengregory of Clear Channel tweeted:
When Michelle Obama was introduced by Jack Nicholson most of the reporters in the media room groaned….loudly
4:56 AM – 25 Feb 13
On the one hand, FDR, Reagan, and Laura Bush did Oscar spots. On the other, I groaned when Michelle showed up, too. It was gauranteed to blow up the conservative side of my Twitter timeline, which is exactly what happened. It was kinda depressing..a dumb move on the Academy’s part. I would have preferred they left politics out of it.
Well… Reagan makes sense, being that he was an actor prior to politician.
But, I’m unfazed by Mrs. Obama at the Oscars. There are bigger fish to fry.
There are going to be some who say Mrs. Obama appearing on The Oscars was bad timing with the whole budget and sequester talk going on.
I wonder if Hannity is going to complain on FNC?
Looks like the reporters at Politico have gotten into the paint chips again…
“We can’t keep careening from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis.”
Who is this “we” you speak of, kemo-sabe? YOU’RE the one who refuses to make any commitment longer than 6 months so that you can keep bringing it up and playing Whack-a-Boehner.
By the way, we wouldn’t be “careening” if there was some long-form document that detailed the annual revenues and expenses the government entails. It’s been a while, but as I remember, it started with a ‘b’ and ended with an ‘udget’. Surely one of those would keep us from reliving these crises, wouldn’t you agree?
“Democrats — like me — need to acknowledge that we’re going to have to make modest reforms in Medicare if we want the program there for future generations”
I assume Websters has updated their definition of “modest” to include “fundamental, program structure-altering” as part of the definition. Because that’s what it’ll take to keep Medicare solvent. If only we had a press and/or fact-checking apparatus to let the reader know that pretending these “modest” reforms will fix anything is nothing but a fantasy.
“[Republicans] need to adopt the same approach to tax reform that Speaker Boehner championed just two months ago.”
Ah, so you admit we’ve already completed work on the revenue side of the equation. And in the spirit of “balance” and “compromise”, it’s only fair we focus solely on spending.
“For states, one big burden for infrastructure is red tape, and oftentimes that comes out of Washington with regulations,” Obama said. To help states, the administration is establishing regional teams focused on “unique needs”
So, we’re going to limit the amount of red tape by … adding another layer of bureaucracy that has to approve a project!
GIVE THAT MAN ANOTHER NOBEL!!!!
It’d be one thing if Reagan was “just” an actor. But he was also a 2-time president of SAG. That’d be like complaining about Bush’s appearance at a convention of former Major Leage Baseball owners or John Kerry’s attendance of a Heinz shareholder’s meeting.
No. I think tonight Hannity will mix it up a bit.
And complain on CNN.
The only time I can remember Hannity going after Michelle Obama was the “proud of my country.” comment.
I’m guessing he won’t make a big deal about the First Lady announcing one of the awards.
I mean, what else is she supposed to do? She doesn’t make policy. Go out and do stuff, and don’t embarrass yourself or the country.
The most you really can do is groan, which is what I did. I don’t think it’s the place for the First Lady to be presenting on award shows but it was ultimately harmless.
In the latest FNC promo the voice over person says “The fight is on and we won’t back down.”
Who is FNC at war with? FNC is a news channel not a militia.
Let me also add you guys were right about the FNC promo style change.
After The State of The Union they are still using the white text on a black background with the fire and effect for all promos so it was not done just for the SOTU related promos.
I still don’t like it and don’t understand why the fire effect is needed.
Who is FNC at war with? FNC is a news channel not a militia.
Therein lies the heart of the problem with FNC: It’s a political movement which sees itself as under siege, disguised as a news channel. That’s where all the defense of the network from employees on air comes from. It’s a bizarre phenomenon.
Well, an argument could be made that since it is well known that the administration is not a fan of FNC that FNC wont let any animosity stop its pursuit of finding the truth wherever it may be. Or FNC is operating as the propaganda network for the Republican Party, whichever makes you happiest.
Ice, why do you watch FNC at all? I’m legitimately curious because you don’t seem to like any of the personalities or anything or their programs be it news or opinion, and all you seem to do is criticize FNC.
I suspect if you live in a basement on a diet of Hot Pockets, bitching about Fox is the most fun you can have.
MSNBC is not disguised as anything anymore. Even blockheads like Joe eventually will get tired pretending .
As I’ve said before it’s funny that FNC pretends to be Fair & Balanced when they have turned into a conservative news talk channel. Just get rid of the Fair & Balanced slogan.
There’s nothing wrong with FNC being a conservative news talk channel.
I’m not complaining about MSNBC because they don’t present themselves as an unbiased news channel. They are a liberal news talk channel.
Ice is where I was at a couple years ago: A liberal trying to watch FNC so I could see what they were up to, plus know what my righty friend(s) were talking about. He won’t be able to keep at it forever; the constant need to throw shoes at the screen gets old after a while.
Fox News Watch, a show ostensibly devoted to “media bias”, chose to dedicate a segment to some teacher who banned the use of Fox News as a source. How is that of any possible significance, and what does it have to do with “media bias”? Every program is a potential forum for the discussion of Fox News, and how it’s under threat, or how flawed other news-sources are. It’s becoming pathological, or at the very least, annoying.
yet you keep coming back.
If Ice doesn’t melt, the next evolutionary stage is Joe.
I firmly believe Zucker’s long term CNN plan is to replace both Piers Morgan AND Anderson Cooper with Jay Leno.
The sequester is the top story on FNC and MSNBC.
On CNN the top story is The Oscars. :P
Is CNN trying to be an alternative to the politics talk?
Yeah, looks to me like CNN is throwing in the towel on all politics and going the counter-programming route. I think that’s smart. There aren’t enough political junkies to support a third middle-of-the-road option during non-election years.
What’s not necessarily smart is what Zucker wants to cover instead. Cable news needs to be broadened, especially during primetime. But doing lengthy reports on lowest common denominator stuff like Oscar fashion cheapens the CNN brand. Before you laugh at that last part (does the CNN name mean anything anymore?), remember that audiences still flock to CNN for hard news and major events. That won’t last if they get carried away with the Access Hollywood impression.
Who were the people in the commercial, Ice? The politicians?
If they’re from both parties, the message is “We’re not letting up on either side.”
Gotta know the visuals to give the accurate answer.
Sequester will be the greatest gift the Democrats have ever received. When it happens, they can almost immediately say, “don’t want spending cuts like this, then pay more taxes”.
I’m not complaining about MSNBC because they don’t present themselves as an unbiased news channel.
Not according to Rachel Maddow. In her eyes, MSNBC is playing it straight down the middle.
“don’t want spending cuts like this, then pay more taxes”.
Unless, of course, the world doesn’t end. And Republicans can say “See, a little belt tightning never hurt anybody.”
And even if it does, Republicans still have the argument of “Nobody told Obama that he had to cut the army & the 3rd grade. We suggested the NEA and foreign aid to Egypt.” in their back pocket.
Do you pay income tax Andy?
They don’t have anything in their back pockets because most people who pay attention to politics aren’t stupid and know that foreign aid to other countries isn’t even pennies in the bucket.
I saw a really stupid segment on OutFront. Erin teased before the break “Did Michelle Obama make a mistake appearing on the Oscars?”, then came back to interview Donny Deutsch. “Yes.” That was it. She presented a question no one is asking but her – people are questioning the Academy’s decision, not Michelle’s for agreeing to do it – then presented one guest who would agree with it. It was cheesy even by FNC opinion-show standards.
And that is why many governments are in poor fiscal shape. ‘That’s insignificant’, ‘that’s just $1 million’. It has to start somewhere. The concept of mathematical addition seems to be lost in the debate.
On a related note, would the GOP be smart enough to bring it out of the back pocket and would it pass through the predominantly liberal media?
MSNBC shows another edited video that this time makes John McCain look like he is giving a heartless answer to a woman who lost her child in the Aurora movie theatre shooting. What’s with them and their selective editing? O’Reilly showed McCain’s full answer.
MSNBC really isn’t taken seriously so we let them be.
MSNBC is evil.
I was questioning if Michelle Obama made a mistake doing the Oscars. Thanks Donnie for enlightening me.
most people who pay attention to politics aren’t stupid and know that foreign aid to other countries isn’t even pennies in the bucket.
Funny, but those same people were told by Obama that raising taxes on the rich “just a little” and changing rules on the depreciation of corporate jets would erase the deficit AND pay for all new stuff too. And they bought it hook/line/sinker.
… just pennies in the bucket.
Yes. Those are the comments we always hear from left-wingers… when someone brings up Israel. “Just pennies.” They’re always so humble and supportive.
With Obama, Biden, and now John Kerry the Three Stooges live again.
Here is Kerry defending Andy:
I made fun of Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher on THIS SITE the other day, and now my account won’t work over at Mediaite again.
HA! See, he does read this site… he’s just too cowardly to admit it. Thinnest skinned man, ever.
Tommy is a wonderful fellow and makes Mediaite shine.
The liberal path is another “French revolution” where you decapitate the wealthy and take their money to cover debts, spending and deficits. What part of broke do they not understand? And so happy with a President determined to become “european” and become royalty!!
I don’t forget that during the day time FNC was a “news” channel, of course a center right bias. But it was not like a talk radio show where they had clips queued up for entertainment purposes. And they never did any fake follow up questions like they do now as they read what the prompters says, and using a script to playback those clips. One also remembers that they were the only cable net to do live news programming on the weekend. There were weekend editions of Studio B, and Gibson’s old show mixed in with that newswheel “Fox News Live”.
Their glory days has ended as they have moved onto “personalities” (i.e. dumb people with no real social live outside the boob tube) and its becoming such an emotional and sensational news product than it was 5 years ago.
I don’t watch much news since the beginning of this year. I typically consume it in traditional media anyways.
The question has been raised whether MSNBC, already a left-leaning network, has gone too far in hiring former officials of the Obama White House. Of course, Fox News, the competition, employs contributors who once worked in the Bush (43) administration (Dana Perino, Karl Rove)…
But a real difference is that these guys at Fox weren’t hired while Bush was still in office. They were hired to provide expertise on the inner-workings of the White House, if from a critical perspective of President Obama. At MSNBC, Gibbs and Axelrod, who were surrogates for Obama’s reelection campaign, are (by nature of the timing of their hiring) serving as reinforcement for the current administration’s message.
It’s time to pull the plug on Alex Wagner’s show. It’s not edgy, it’s not interesting, it’s not anything. Her show adds nothing to the discussion and, at times, is honestly nothing more than a left wing snarkfest. Just……..pull…….the……….plug…….
Gibbs and Axelrod invested large chunks of their adult lives to getting the president elected twice, then defending his administration. Now they’re independent pundits? Um..no.
Makes you wonder who they think they’re fooling.
Joe still has his integrity. Often his stubbornness swamps it, but it’s still there.
MSNBC has dumped the hand-off from Wagner to Andrea Mitchell. I’ll bet money Andrea told them she was sick of some smirking college kid being her “buddy”.
I’m all about the integrity. Get off my lawn.
There has to be a way of having a liberal or conservative POV network while at the same time presenting professional and quality news. Doesn’t there? You’d need a strong news director and clear and bright lines between opinion and fact.
Ailes can do it if he wants, but clearly doesn’t. He has the cache. Griffin can’t do it nor does he care. Zucker? Who knows.
Somebody give me a $1 billion and I’ll give it a shot.
Okay, $500 million and free parking.
Get off MY lawn.
If you are going to have a Gibbs/Axelrod type on you need to give them a very short leash and have them questioned by an aggressive and equally strong (personality-wise) questioner.
Can’t just give them a platform. Which is what Andrea Mitchell did with Axelrod.
We see a similar problem with Rove where the Fox interviewers just let him go. O’Reilly would occasionally slap him down but not enough.
There’s a role for these types – albeit having them comment on an Administration still is power is questionable – but you need to keep them in a box.
Why would we blame MSNBC for Obama-promoting editing when all the national broadcast networks do so?
I understand the annoyance with The Smirk and Alex Wagner’s undeserved self-regard. But are we living in an alternate universe in which her ascendancy isn’t still well underway? Her ratings were up more than anyone’s during 2012, and the demo numbers are great. She’s not going anywhere. You’ll be lucky if she isn’t bumped into a stronger timeslot.
I am not sure if you are poking fun at my avatar (which features a TV news logo that is “four”) but if that is the case I do have a name which is Steven.
Opps, I shouldn’t be “feeding to the trolls”!
Erich: Of course it’s possible to do real reporting, analysis, etc. with a POV bent. Chris Hayes does it every weekend, and got Gibbs to disclose the quite unflattering-to-Obama news that he was instructed not to acknowledge the existence of the drone program. Brett Bair and Mike Wallace do their fare share of honest interviews and reports, and so does Anderson Cooper (even as his POV has become a bit more obvious). Rachel Maddow can be an intellecually honest TV essayist and interviewer at her best.
But it takes strong personalities with genuine intellectual curiosity to do that right. Once POV has become a network-wide brand, it’s so much easier to fill time with hackery.
I think the best news channels were treated as local O&O station. CNBC was one example in a way. the head of WNBC-TV in the early 90s, Bill Boster headed CNBC in the late 90s. At the time with the headcount and footprints, CNBC was much like an NBC O&O at that time. Now its this bloated behemoth in a larger than life studios and to build that thing was like a quarter of a billion dollars today I bet with the in/deflation costs.
FBN can do some center right business coverage and yet again its operated like a large market O&O. I’ve heard Ray Hennesy referred as the “news director” there.
Maybe someone should take Erich’s lead. It has been done, and it can be done if people can get their head out of their behinds!
Steven, we ignore LarryKelly…he’s just an angry Texan. :-p
Look at this horsecrap. This is the lead story on NBCNews.com. A legitimate news site freaking out because some screeching conservatives are upset about the First Lady being on The Oscars, so now they have to do a front page headline about “some are saying” to prove they’re not “biased”. It’s embarrassing.
I guess I should have phrased my question/complaint as: “Why won’t they” as opposed to “Why can’t they.”
They clearly can; the question is why won’t they?
Just ratings? It seems to me that MSNBC and Fox can still attract a liberal/conservative audience without having to give them (mostly) 24 hours of ideological cotton candy.
I am not angry.
Can’t believe my charm offense draws criticism.
People. Pay attention to your friendly commenters’ links. The author Laura is linking at Politisite is Laura. Geez, do I have to explain everything?
I had seen the FBN attack promo against CNBC’s super-arrogant booking policy earlier, and I just couldn’t stop laughing! it was the best on FBN has done.
This this one of the worst PR disasters of a cable net in years, if not ever (for business news.)
While I did not like those annoying FBN jabs at CNBC for being off when the stock market is closed they are totally right on the booking promo.
What’s up with the empty room sound from Wolf’s mic on “The Situation Room”? The worst sounding audio from any studio on cable news.
Yes Joe, you do.
Obama administration has been using “improvements” in Afghanistan as justification for the speedy withdrawal timetable. Turns out they are sounding a bit like the Johnson Administration with their body-bag count. Taliban attacks in 2012 were not less than 2011 as the Secretary of Defense had reported, but were about the same. Seems we overlooked the Afghan Defense Force was not turning n their scorecards.
While I’m might not agree with all that he was saying, Democratic Senator Keith Ellison did a good job standing up to Hannity who was trying to did his usual talk down to and bully the liberal guest act. Hannity can only have a respectful discussion with people who agree with him.
The same can be said for Piers Morgan when he is talking to a guest about gun control.
Something I think Larry will agree with,
the Presidents Sequester Scare Tour is comical.
Spend that time getting a deal done instead of fear mongering.
I think he kind of got in a rut, and even his friends wonder if he will ever stop campaigning.
Many years ago my company brought in some experts to school us worker bees in the trend of the day, Time Managemt. It actually was helpful. One thing I remember is a problem that most people do what they are good at instead of concentrating on what is important. Obama is a good campaigner.
POTUS is lost on this one. The country at large has no idea what the sequester is, and doesn’t mind the thought of across-the-board spending cuts in the abstract. Once we get there and it starts pissing people off, it’s hard to say which side will get more of the blame.
The whole gang are a bunch of idiots who should stop pandering and get a deal done.
The POTUS’ problem is that he’s more interested in political victories than helping the country. There’s nothing he won’t do if he sees himself benefiting while simultaneously hurting the Republican party. He’s not a leader. He’s not a President. He’s just an immature guy with thin skin.
Hannity just had another classic wacky segment with Tamara Holder. Bernard McGuirk was also on as they talked about Mayor Bloomberg’s ban on large sodas.
Lonestar mentioned Obama’s skin, that’s racist.
Lonestar is not a serious person.
FBN has tooted their horn on being on air on bank holidays a little too much, one or two jabs were fine but on every stinger all day – yeah too much.
I love Tamara, I have crush on her. For some reason I have a thing for hotties that are so far, far left. :P
For some reason I have a thing for hotties that are so far, far left.
TMI, baby. TMI.
if people are offended by that last reply, then the publisher is welcome to delete it.
I’m not a big Hannity fan, but he had some decent subjects that had some substance.
Just bustin your chops, Steven. It’s a thing around here.
Back atcha, Laura!
Fareed Zakaria visited my province and he destroyed the environmentalists’ global warming argument used against the Keystone XL pipeline. If the pipeline isn’t built, “the oil is [still] going to be burnt, it’s just going to be burnt in Asia.”
Obama is truly more concerned about party politics than your country’s welfare. He’s waiting until June to announce his decision on this major project that is expected to produce a large number of jobs for Americans. What is he waiting for?
^ Oil processed and used in China will likely be considerably dirtier to the global ecosystem than would be that same oil if it were processed and (mostly) used in Canada or US.
These asshats can’t be bothered by reality.They have a pipeline to stop.