Currently Online 
| coolbeans said: Well...erm...okay then. While I'm going to take what you're saying now at face value, I must admit I'm thrown off by this play you're doing here. Nothing against you, I'm just not familiar with your approach to arguing on here. And I don't think it's good posturing on your part especially with how you directly threw dirt at me earlier regarding this very thing; in fact, I think it's disingenuous arguing on your part. But fine...let's just move past that. Now I can absolutely understand frustration w/ certain right-wing media stories against Obama--like the ones you've pointed out. And I should clarify a few points: -I don't consider it any worthwhile criticism against Obama to say "GASP! He had an unfavorable attitude against media that opposed him!" or wasn't too keen on giving Fox as many interviews as with other networks (I don't know the tally across all of them; only bringing this up b/c of previous comments). -The issue comes when that unfavorable attitude is translated into action. As others have pointed out, this--by all means temporary--banning of a correspondent for a singular press event didn't just materialize b/c Trump was angry at CNN FAKE NEWS. No, said correspondent acted out of line previously and this is the WH's response. Do I still believe this action is a wrong-headed move to make? Yes, you can still grasp the full context of the situation and still believe it's over-reaching. Plus, Trump acts belligerent to them as well so it may as well remain a two-way street at this point. -Where I decided to jump in was in respect to a...whataboutism-lite comment to show that this isn't exactly new territory when looking back at the Obama admin too. I was incorrect about the Washington Free Beacon link, but I believe I made 2-for-3 in respect to my other points raised. I'm worried about the road we're going on in respect to press freedom too, but I think people need to reassess their...suspiciously convenient comatose between '08-'16 and acknowledge precedent for this type of behavior was set before Agent Orange came into office. |
I am still not sure if the first link is an Apple to Apple situation. Not inviting Fox news to an interview they never ask for really isn't the White House Job. Also if they stated they would prefer Fox not attend is totally different then them saying Fox cannot attend.
As to this reporter, we will see where this goes. I noticed once Trump is able to do one thing he will take it to the extreme. So if we say this reporter was out of line and the temp ban for this event is warranted. Lets see how far Trump will take this. If anyone from CNN gives him tough questions at any time and they feel banning them is warranted then we may have an issue.
