What Faux highlighted after 90 minutes of Qaddafi's rambling (Calling Obama "our son")

[RamboLiberal]

Fox -- which refuses to broadcast speeches by President Obama -- put Libyan President Muammar Qaddafi on air for 90 minutes Wednesday. (CNN and MSNBC also broadcast the bizarre speech.)

When Fox finally cut Qaddafi short, 'reporter' Eric Shawn immediately said "the top news" of Qaddafi's speech was that "he kept on calling Barack Obama 'our son'...because of the President's African heritage."

FOX REPORTER ERIC SHAWN: Let me start with what is probably one of the top issues that he raised, the top news, in the sense that he kept on calling Barack Obama "our son." Muammar Qaddafi referred to him as "our son." He called the President of the United States "my son." He says this because of the President's African heritage.

By the way, remember that the same Fox News that just gave Qadaffi a 90 minute platform to spew his propaganda attacked President Obama earlier this week because a U.N. seating chart may end up seating President Obama near the Libyan leader during a Security Council meeting

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/23/785536/-What-Fox-highlighted-after-90-minutes-of-Qaddafis-rambling

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Very predictable

The birthers are gonna go orgasmic over this.

[RDANGELO]

2. A ten year old can figure out that the President has no

control over what Qaddafi says, but the Fox listeners will be motivated by it because they operate on tribal instincts instead of logic.

[SIMPLYB1980]

3. I'm shocked!!!

:sarcasm:

[Cha]

4. And, someone at the NYT had the stupidity to say

"vengence" was the reason PO didn't go on fauxsnooze propaganda machine to talk about Health Care Reform?

Jackeens (1000+ posts) Tue Sep-22-09 11:00 PM
Original message

"Why the hell should he give Fox an interview? How dare the NY Times take the president to task...."
New York Times's snide attack reflects US media disillusion with Obama

The Guardian (UK) - Roy Greenslade

You can certainly tell that the media bloom is off President Obama when the New York Times makes a snide attack on him.

In this article yesterday, dealing with Obama's round of five TV interviews on Sunday, the writer noted that he declined to appear on Fox News, remarking:

"That made his star turn look less like a media blitz than Medici vengeance — Fox did not broadcast Mr. Obama's health care speech to Congress on 9 September, so Mr Obama did not speak to Fox News Sunday."

Hang on. Vengeance? This is the channel where broadcasters have attacked Obama variously as a racist, a fascist and a communist while misrepresenting his health care reforms. As one monitor, Media Matters, points out, Fox hosts have also repeatedly compared Obama to Hitler.

So why the hell should he give Fox an interview? How dare the NY Times take the president to task in such circumstances. Isn't this the paper that lectures others on journalistic ethics?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8666912

[brooklynite]

5. This morning on FAF...

...they led off an interview with UN Ambassador Susan Rice with "so who will President Obama be meeting with without preconditions?"

[leftynyc]

6. She should have just laughed

at whoever asked the question, told them to grow up and walked way.

[Clio the Leo]

7. lol, did they mention the part where Qaddafi said he wanted Obama to be Pres. forever? NT