19 Comments Add your own

• 1. Neftali  |  July 2nd, 2009 at 2:46 pm

  In typical fashion, Thinking Progress (And Pat) are skewing this story slightly. As you can see, it was initially the liberal press (Helen Thomas and Chip Reid) that were complaining about being manipulated.

  Our buddy Karl Rove is just playing off the Thomas/Reid remarks. So is he really a hypocrite? Meh….I suppose in this instance he is, but that’s just people playing politics.

  Pat has been closely following politics and the press for a lot longer than I have, but I’m fairly certain its not only Bush/Obama, but EVERY administration does this to some kind of extent. I believe Nixon even had the press’s questions pre-screened before the White House briefings.

• 2. mike  |  July 2nd, 2009 at 2:52 pm

  here Pat how hypocritical is the government run press that you are a member of? Here is a story more pertinent than this topic. Ooops ya’all failed to mention this at all. Hypocrites.

  http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102740

• 3. Pat Cunningham  |  July 2nd, 2009 at 3:01 pm

  The story to which mike has linked is about a rape case in North Carolina that has absolutely nothing to do with politics or with the subject matter of this post. Why would I want to comment on such a story? And as for mike’s weird reference to “the government run press that you are a member of,” I have no idea what he’s trying to say. I don’t think he does either.

• 4. shawnnews  |  July 2nd, 2009 at 5:18 pm

  I think you’d like this video Pat.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU

• 5. mike  |  July 2nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm

  Ahhh but it does have to do with politics because homosexuality is getting crammed down everyones throat with gay marriage laws and hate crimes bills. Nice try to divert anyone from reading the links. You did not read the whole article because there is another link.

  As for government run media…..see 90 percent of biased newspapers, magazines, ABC NBC CBS and CNN. You fancy yourself to be an intellectual, so I’m sure you know what I mean.

• 6. snuss  |  July 3rd, 2009 at 8:28 am

  Obama has taken his press hypocrisy to a new level, as the following shows:

  Here are the details of Obama’s plants as revealed by Millbank:

  After the obligatory first question from the Associated Press, Obama treated the overflowing White House briefing room to a surprise. “I know Nico Pitney is here from the Huffington Post,” he announced.

  Obama knew this because White House aides had called Pitney the day before to invite him, and they had escorted him into the room. They told him the president was likely to call on him, with the understanding that he would ask a question about Iran that had been submitted online by an Iranian. “I know that there may actually be questions from people in Iran who are communicating through the Internet,” Obama went on. “Do you have a question?”

  Pitney recognized his prompt. “That’s right,” he said, standing in the aisle and wearing a temporary White House press pass. “I wanted to use this opportunity to ask you a question directly from an Iranian.”

  Pitney asked his arranged question. Reporters looked at one another in amazement at the stagecraft they were witnessing. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel grinned at the surprised TV correspondents in the first row.

  During the eight years of the Bush administration, liberal outlets such as the Huffington Post often accused the White House of planting questioners in news conferences to ask preplanned questions. But here was Obama fielding a preplanned question asked by a planted questioner — from the Huffington Post.

  Pitney said the White House, though not aware of the question’s wording, asked him to come up with a question about Iran proposed by an Iranian. And, as it turned out, he was not the only prearranged questioner at yesterday’s show. Later, Obama passed over the usual suspects to call on Macarena Vidal of the Spanish-language EFE news agency. The White House called Vidal in advance to see whether she was coming and arranged for her to sit in a seat usually assigned to a financial trade publication. She asked about Chile and Colombia.

  Read the rest: http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner~y2009m6d24-The-Obama-news-conference–desperate-to-control-coverage-Obama-plants-questions?cid=exrss-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner

• 7. joe  |  July 3rd, 2009 at 10:20 am

  “Ahhh but it does have to do with politics because homosexuality is getting crammed down everyones throat with gay marriage laws and hate crimes bills.”

  What does the story you linked to have to do with gay marriage or hate crimes? Did allowing this guy to marry another man turn him into a child molester? Would the kid of not been molested if we didn’t have laws against hate crimes? I would love to know how you feel these issues are related to this kid being molested.

• 8. Orlando Clay  |  July 3rd, 2009 at 9:52 pm

  snuss wrote: “Obama has taken his press hypocrisy to a new level…..”

  Sorry, snuss. In this case, President Obama comes nowhere near matching Bush administration efforts to “stack the deck.”

  From Media Matters:
  “On July 3, FoxNation.com features the headline “Obama Busted Stacking Town Hall … What If Bush Had?” But the suggestion that Bush did not screen town hall audiences or questions was refuted by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace, who said on the July 3 edition of Fox & Friends that “town hall meetings … have always been something of an artifice, because I know in the Bush administration, George W. Bush, they had a lot of these town hall meetings, and they chose all the people there. So everybody has always tried to get a home-court advantage.” Indeed, a March 12, 2005, Washington Post article on Bush’s 2005 Social Security town hall events reported, “The carefully screened panelists [at a town hall in Memphis] spoke admiringly about Bush, his ideas, his ‘bold’ leadership on Social Security. If the presentations sound well rehearsed, it’s because they often are. The guests at these ‘Oprah’-style conversations trumpet the very points Bush wants to make.”"

  Not to mention the ridiculous Bush loyalty pledge cards that attendees had to sign. Or the “Free Speech Zones” where anti-Bush protesters were kept, often miles away from the event itself.

  Nice try, snuss. Better luck next time!

• 9. mike  |  July 4th, 2009 at 7:29 am

  Joe said:
  What does the story you linked to have to do with gay marriage or hate crimes?

  The press PURPOSELY left out that these people were queer to advance this ridiculous agenda that is sweeping the nation. They portray homosexuals as innocent non-violent victims and that’s nothing but a big lie.

  Tell me Joe, is it a hate crime when some sicko judge denegrates a beauty contestant over her opinions that he asked her. Did ya see his vileness on the web? Is it a hate crime when a bunch of queers vandalize Catholic churches in San Francisco? Desecrating the Host? The Host is sacred if you don’t know, try doing that to the Koran or try vandalizing a mosque. They won’t, no BALLS.

  Is it a hate crime when a gang of queers start roughing up an old woman when she is demonstrating peacefully against fag marriage?

  What is a hate crime Joe??? A crime is a crime isn’t it? I’ll tell you what one is….it’s something that will impose a harsher sentence on a white male or a Christian. That’s all a hate crime is.

• 10. snuss  |  July 4th, 2009 at 8:51 am

  As Orlando conveniently ignored, Obama had not just “selected” audiences, but planted partisan “journalists”, with specific, prearranged, questions. But, I expect no better from a confirmed Obamaniac.

• 11. joe  |  July 4th, 2009 at 9:54 am

  “The press PURPOSELY left out that these people were queer to advance this ridiculous agenda that is sweeping the nation.”

  You needed the press to tell you the guy sleeping with a boy is gay? I don’t. Somethings are a obvious.

  “Tell me Joe, is it a hate crime when some sicko judge denegrates a beauty contestant over her opinions that he asked her.”

  I’m assuming we are talking about perez hilton here? I wouldn’t call it a hate crime, but it was wrong not to respect her opinion. He then took it to far on his blog. If you want to hate on Perez I would look at how he can get away with calling someone a faggot.

  “Is it a hate crime when a gang of queers start roughing up an old woman when she is demonstrating peacefully against fag marriage?”

  I would say yes.

  “What is a hate crime Joe??? A crime is a crime isn’t it? I’ll tell you what one is….it’s something that will impose a harsher sentence on a white male or a Christian. That’s all a hate crime is.”

  You really think the white guys has it that bad? It really upsets you that you can’t punch someone and call then a fag at the same time? Come on. I’m also blown away that you think laws against hate crimes are laws aimed at christians. What kind of christian would be charged with a hate crime?

• 12. mike  |  July 4th, 2009 at 11:05 am

  joe said:

  What kind of christian would be charged with a hate crime?

  One who is following his faith and stuck in a country that keeps passing laws promoting murder and immorality. I’m blown away that you can’t see what is happening in front of your own eyes Joe. Sounds like you bought into the government run press big lies and propaganda.

• 13. joe  |  July 4th, 2009 at 11:44 am

  What kind of christian would be charged with a hate crime?

  “One who is following his faith and stuck in a country that keeps passing laws promoting murder and immorality.”

  I guess we have read a different bible.

  I Jn 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar:
  for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he
  love God whom he hath not seen?

• 14. Pat Cunningham  |  July 4th, 2009 at 11:52 am

  As I’ve said here before, Mike reminds me of the psychological research indicating that some vehemently homophobic men are worried or confused about their own sexuality and are inclined to make a show of distaste for homosexuality so that others won’t have suspicions about them. Is this you, Mike ? There’s nothing wrong with having such feelings. Only the cretins are going to laugh at you if you come out. The rest of us won’t. Be yourself, Mike. It’s all right.

• 15. Billybeermonicagar  |  July 4th, 2009 at 5:18 pm

  Hey Mike, That’s Pats stealth way of calling you a homo. It’s ok when he does it that way. I’m sure he has research to prove it.

• 16. David Barrett  |  July 4th, 2009 at 8:04 pm

  Billy,
  Pat certainly has read of research that supports what he said about some men who say emphatically anti-homosexual things being latent homosexuals. I have read the same research. Mike’s statements cause me to wonder the same thing. If Mike’s statements are aimed at aspects of himself he is doing himself damage by remaining in the closet. He needs to stop being at war with himself and come out of the closet.

• 17. Henry  |  July 4th, 2009 at 8:17 pm

  Mike -

  Pat probably has, but it was with a women.

• 18. Henry  |  July 4th, 2009 at 8:18 pm

  Post #18 should read ‘woman’ not ‘women’

• 19. mike  |  July 5th, 2009 at 7:12 am

  Dave and Pat: Would you like to find out if I AM!!!!!!! I think your fantasizing that I’m a militant homo and you want to meet me.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed