At least i don't start threads crying for fellow posters to get banned hey Danny boy.. talk about attention seeker :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Printable View
At least i don't start threads crying for fellow posters to get banned hey Danny boy.. talk about attention seeker :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
What a well-written delight this thread is, with typically pertinent, eloquent contributions from some of the forum members whose contributions it is always a pleasure to read.
Exactly how many of the posts are on topic?
Quite. A slick bigger than any in a generation and we have a p*ssing contest! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Here is oneQuote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-no...t-about-obama-Quote:
Critics Saluted Media Slams on Bush During Katrina Crisis; What About Obama’s Oil Mess?
Photo of Rich Noyes.
By Rich Noyes (Bio | Archive)
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 11:11 ET
The last time a major disaster threatened the U.S. Gulf Coast, journalists dropped any pretense of objectivity and openly scorned what they saw as the ineffective response of the Bush administration to Hurricane Katrina. And top media writers found it just wonderful that the press was taking a side, with New York Times’ critic Alessandra Stanley saluting “a rare sense of righteous indignation by a news media that is usually on the defensive.”
Now, there are gentle suggestions that the Obama administration dropped the ball in the days after the oil rig explosion that triggered a 5,000 barrel per day leak that threatens to eclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill as the worst in U.S. history. Today’s lead story in the New York Times determined that “a review of the response suggests it may be too simplistic to place all the blame for the unfolding environmental catastrophe on the oil company. The federal government also had opportunities to move more quickly, but did not do so while it waited for a resolution to the spreading spill from BP,” a theme echoed in an editorial, as Noel Sheppard notes below.
Not exactly “righteous indignation,” but the story isn’t over, yet.
In contrast, here’s some of what the critics had to say about the media’s adversarial approach when George W. Bush was in the White House:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post, September 5, 2005:
Journalism seems to have recovered its reason for being....For once, reporters were acting like concerned citizens, not passive observers. And they were letting their emotions show, whether it was ABC's Robin Roberts choking up while recalling a visit to her mother on the Gulf Coast or CNN's Jeanne Meserve crying as she described the dead and injured she had seen.
Maybe, just maybe, journalism needs to bring more passion to the table....
Alessandra Stanely in the New York Times, September 5, 2005:
The last time reporters and anchors were so personally and passionately involved in a story was early in the Iraq war, when journalists who accompanied troops for weeks at a time became bullish supporters of the soldiers and their mission.
Hurricane Katrina has had a similar but opposite effect: after spending time with the storm refugees in the Superdome and the convention center in New Orleans, normally poised, placid TV reporters now openly deplore the government's failure to help the victims adequately. And their outrage, illustrated with hauntingly edited montages of weeping mothers, sickly children and dead bodies rotting on the street, traveled up the news division chain of command, from camera operators to anchors and across the spectrum from CNN to Fox....
It's the kind of combative coverage that Richard M. Nixon faced during Watergate, that Bill Clinton faced during his impeachment trial and that most presidents have endured sometime in their tenures. But ever since the Sept. 11 attacks, this president had been spared the harshest questioning -- even with troops bogged down in Iraq, his White House news conferences have been so tame they are parodied by "Saturday Night Live" and Jon Stewart....
The switch mirrors public outrage, but it is buoyed by a rare sense of righteous indignation by a news media that is usually on the defensive.
—Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center.
And another:Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/01/cr...ulf-oil-spill/Quote:
May 2, 2010
Criticism mounts against Obama for government’s handling of the Gulf oil spill
By Pat McMahon - The Daily Caller | Published: 05/01/10 at 1:36 PM | Updated: 05/02/10 at 2:29 PM
The massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is slowly shaping up to be one of the worst environmental disasters in American history, as well as something of a political disaster for President Obama.
Since April 20, hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil have been released into the Gulf, with little response from the federal government until recently. British Petroleum has been leading the cleanup efforts and attempting to halt the seepage of oil from the bottom of the ocean, but recently revealed that they are unable to complete the task themselves.
As calls for the government to respond to the disaster have grown, President Obama announced today that he would be touring the Gulf Coast region within the next two days.
The New York Times today took aim at the administration’s response to the spill:
“The federal government also had opportunities to move more quickly, but did not do so while it waited for a resolution to the spreading spill from BP. The Department of Homeland Security waited until Thursday to declare that the incident was “a spill of national significance,” and then set up a second command center in Mobile, Ala. The actions came only after the estimate of the size of the spill was increased fivefold to 5,000 barrels a day. The delay meant that the Homeland Security Department waited until late this week to formally request a more robust response from the Department of Defense, with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano acknowledging even as late as Thursday afternoon that she did not know if the Defense Department even had equipment that might be helpful.”
The Washington Times took a more direct shot at President Obama and the peril that he faces:
“The rapidly expanding environmental catastrophe caused by the oil spill off the coast of Louisiana is presenting a growing political challenge to the Obama White House, with Mr. Obama and his aides at pains to defend the response and forestall comparisons to the Hurricane Katrina crisis.”
…….
“Failure to get control of the relief effort and contain the environmental challenge could pose the same kind of political threat to Mr. Obama’s popular standing that the much-criticized handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina did for former President George W. Bush. And unlike Katrina, it is likely the federal government will be the clear lead authority in dealing with the BP spill.”
Even liberal stalwarts, like Bill Maher, are unhappy with President Obama’s handling of the oil spill:
“Okay, so I mentioned in the monologue I’m a little mad this week,” Maher began after introducing his guests.
“I’m mad at the oil company who didn’t obviously build their rig well enough,” he continued. “I’m mad at America in general because we should have gotten off the oil tit starting in the ’70s.”
Hold on to you seats: “But I’ll tell you who I’m really mad at which is Barack Obama…So, why isn’t Barack Obama getting more s–t for this?”
Remarkably, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the situation was nothing out of the ordinary:
“I think that given the serious nature of the problems that we face as a country, you could say that about any event on any day,” Mr. Gibbs said in an interview, responding to suggestions that the president’s attendance at the correspondents dinner might look unseemly while an environmental calamity was under way.
Dude, I know you come on here to stalk Ben, Eki and myself but this has to stop. You've got a wife, you've got your training as a urinal cake salesman and we've all got lives to live. Perhaps you should move on and give up on being such a bitter crusty little person who comes on here purely to disagree with people you don't like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Basset
:dozey:
Stop being so sensitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
:D Yes, we made a mess of this entire thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I agree with Easy Drifter when he stated that the job should get done first and then we can squabble over blame. I just had to smirk over some of the articles posted by Tony. Anything for a cheap shot even though the clean-up efforts are underway. Typical.
Wow! How typical....Did you even bother to see what this thread really is about?Quote:
Originally Posted by gloomyDAY
Why don't you take some time and check it out.....That way your agenda won't be so obvious.
Yes, of course I know what this thread is about. I'm not sure if you read that I agreed with Easy Drifter. Just get on with it and then we can sort out the blame later. You just have a hard time acknowledging that the President is working diligently to avoid an environmental disaster from getting worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
The original post is what set this thread off course. I just don't see how you can draw parallels from two completely different events. Also, Obama visited the mess left on the Louisiana shore. I think his statement at the press conference was adequate to dealing with the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy Drifter
No magic pill, just plain work ahead. Those little of the Federal government are turning.