General Question

funkdaddy's avatar

How will the White House justify excluding news networks selectively?

Asked by funkdaddy (17765points) February 24th, 2017

Today there was an off camera press conference where the White House staff excluded representatives from several major news outlets. Namely CNN, New York Times, Politico, the BBC, and LA Times.

Some of these are the same outlets Trump has recently labeled “fake news” and “enemies of the American people”.

Is this ok with you? How could this be justified if true as reported? Is this illegal?

Source
Another

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

92 Answers

SergeantQueen's avatar

It’s not illegal. He doesn’t want these bullshit news outlets to twist things he says or to make up lies. He’s being smart.

funkdaddy's avatar

@SergeantQueen -Just to clarify? The New York Times, BBC, and CNN are “bullshit news outlets”, not up to the level of Breitbart or One America News Network (est 2013)?

zenvelo's avatar

He doesn’t have to justify it. There is no right of access to White House Press Briefings. Although they did say, “it was just for a smaller press pool.”

@SergeantQueen He only wants news outlets that will pass on the lies theWhite House keeps telling the world.

SergeantQueen's avatar

Yeah, he only wants news outlets that pass on lies. If he wanted that, he would’ve let CNN and all them in.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

He doesn’t like being told “he is not wearing clothes”; when he is his birthday suit.

Or having them quote things he said.

Or asking pointed or inquiring questions.

Breitbart is his !

tinyfaery's avatar

As we all know, Drumph doesn’t need to justify anything he does, mostly because he can’t.

janbb's avatar

And I just upped my next donation to the ACLU.

flutherother's avatar

It’s not OK with me. Trump’s job is to run the country and the job of the media is to report how he is doing. If Trump starts trying to do both jobs we’re in trouble.

Darth_Algar's avatar

Demonize the press, favor outlets that will only run what you want them to run. Right out of the totalitarianism 101 textbook.

flutherother's avatar

The countries with the least free press in the world? Eritrea, North Korea, Turkmenistan and Syria.

ragingloli's avatar

By calling them “fake news” and “enemy of the colonial people”.
The reality of course, is that he does not want to answer tough questions or be confronted with refutations of the constant stream of outright lies he and his neo-nazi regime spurt out on a daily basis.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

In the past, because you can’t get all the reps of the press into one briefing room, the outlets with the largest audience were chosen to be at the briefings. These decisions were not made on what the outlet’s political agenda was.

If it was, Helen Thomas would have never been invited to the briefings a second time. She was one tough broad and she asked tough questions from the Eisenhower administration on through the Obama admin until her retirement at 90 in 2010. The woman was more bulldog than human. She never let the pressure off until she got the answers. You could almost hear the squeak of White House secretaries’ sphincters tightening up when they were finally forced to call upon her—or she would interrupt to ask a question. The other members of the press corps would go silent when she did this because of the quality of her questions. There were many aggressive journalists at that time, not the patsies you see today. They understood the purpose of their existence.

Currently, there are 49 seats available to the press in the James Brady White House Press Briefing Room. Reporters who haven’t a seat can stand. But there isn’t room for the whole WH Press Corp at any one time. So, arrangements are made by the smaller outlets to share the stories of the larger ones. I don’t know if money changes hands for this service, but I’d like to think that the larger ones hand it over as a professional courtesy.

The White House Press Corps are certified members of the press who have passed White House security clearances. Personal or professional politics are not supposed to be a consideration in this clearance criteria.

These are the members of the present White House Press Corps, you will see many agency repetitions:

Television
Jim Acosta ‒ CNN
Margaret Brennan ‒ CBS News
David Brody ‒ Christian Broadcasting Network
Blake Burman ‒ Fox Business News
Lisa Desjardins – PBS NewsHour
Major Garrett ‒ CBS News
Hallie Jackson ‒ NBC News
Jonathan Karl ‒ ABC News
Michelle Kosinski ‒ CNN
Joy Malbon ‒ CTV News
John Roberts ‒ FOX News
Janet Rodriguez – Univision
Steve Scully ‒ C-SPAN
Margaret Talev ‒ Bloomberg Television
Kristen Welker ‒ NBC News
Cecilia Vega ‒ ABC News
Trey Yingst – One America News Network

Print/Internet
Yasmeen Sami Alamiri ‒ Rare
Peter Baker ‒ The New York Times
Andrew Beatty ‒ Agence France-Presse
Jennifer Bendery ‒ The Huffington Post
Cheryl Bolen ‒ Bloomberg BNA
Dave Boyer ‒ The Washington Times
Paul Brandus ‒ West Wing Reports
Jon-Christopher Bua ‒ EuroNews
Jérôme Cartillier ‒ Agence France-Presse
Tommy Christopher ‒ The Daily Banter
Kaitlan Collins – The Daily Caller
Helene Cooper ‒ The New York Times
David Corn ‒ Mother Jones
Jordan Fabian ‒ The Hill
Andrew Feinberg ‒ Sputnik
Linda Feldman ‒ Christian Science Monitor
John Gizzi ‒ Newsmax
Shane Goldmacher – Politico
Raghubir Goyal ‒ India Globe
Daniel Halper – New York Post
Steve Holland ‒ Reuters
David Jackson ‒ USA Today
Jennifer Jacobs – Bloomberg News
Olivier Knox ‒ Yahoo! News
Keith Koffler ‒ White House Dossier
Anita Kumar ‒ The McClatchy Company
Carol Lee ‒ The Wall Street Journal
Christoph von Marschall ‒ Der Tagesspiegel
Adrian Carrasquillo ‒ Buzzfeed News
Myles Miller ‒ The Daily
Zeke Miller – Time
David Nakamura – The Washington Post
Toluse Olorunnipa – Bloomberg News
Julie Pace ‒ Associated Press
Susan Page ‒ USA Today
Christi Parsons ‒ Chicago Tribune
Katie Pavlich – Townhall
Maria Peña – La Opinion/impreMedia
Shannon Pettypiece ‒ Bloomberg
Sean Quinn ‒ FiveThirtyEightdotcom
Debra J. Saunders – Las Vegas Review-Journal
Michael D. Shear – New York Times
Alexis Simendinger ‒ Real Clear Politics
Charlie Spiering ‒ Breitbart
Sam Stein ‒ The Huffington Post
Jim Stinson – LifeZette
Jonathan Swan – Axios
Glenn Thrush ‒ New York Times
Jake Turx ‒ Ami
Hunter Walker – Yahoo! News
Jon Ward ‒ The Daily Caller
Anna Wilding ‒ Herald de Paris
Lucian Wintrich ‒ The Gateway Pundit

Radio
Jon Decker – Fox News Radio
Don Gonyea ‒ NPR
Scott Horsley ‒ NPR
Mara Liasson ‒ NPR
Mark Knoller ‒ CBS Radio News
Connie Lawn ‒ USA Radio Network
Peter Maer ‒ CBS Radio News
Luis Ramirez ‒ Voice of America
Jared Rizzi ‒ SiriusXM POTUS
April Ryan ‒ American Urban Radio Networks
Mark Smith ‒ Associated Press
Wikipedia

I’m sure every president, from Eisenhower on, wanted to get rid of journalists that do their job well, like Helen Thomas. But, up to now, they haven’t because it is not ethical to do so in a country that is supposed believe in a free press. It just isn’t done. But, evidently, this president missed that day in high school when the First Amendment was covered, and later at Fordham when general ethics were taught. He evidently missed quite a few days of school.

Cruiser's avatar

Apparently you all are approving when Obama blocked Fox news from press briefings and interviews and just as OK with when Obama kicked the Washington Post off his campaign plane and even more approving when he banned press photographers from official events. Tisk….tisk…tisk

”“Journalists are routinely being denied the right to photograph or videotape the President while he is performing his official duties,” the journalists said in a letter to White House press secretary Jay Carney.”

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Cruiser. You know better than to make such claims with out any proof whatsoever.

funkdaddy's avatar

@Cruiser – read the full article, and read the effects afterwards… or link your source. Please. You’re only telling part of the story.

Cruiser's avatar

I will never get used to you guys selective memories.

Deputy White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest bluntly described the White House’s position on Fox News Channel in an October 23, 2009, email to LeCompte

“We’ve demonstrated our willingness and ability to exclude Fox News from significant interviews…”

The Washington Times, N.Y. Post and Dallas Morning News — three newspapers that recently endorsed John McCain — have been kicked off Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s plane in the final days of his campaign

“To exclude the press from these functions”: is a major break from how previous administrations have worked with the press,” the letter states.

Dutchess_III's avatar

What is a “reporter’s pool?” It sounds like some sort of special function that not all news outlets are invited to attended. One of them noted that NBC was “in the first round either.” I don’t know what it even means.

Cruiser's avatar

Now that I got my obligatory Cruiser snipe at the liberals out of the way I will say Trump is way out of line blocking any news agency from covering his administration….that is nothing short than censorship and we are not nor ever will be Russia, China, N Korea or any other Pol Pot regime that controls censors the news. I pay his one dollar salary and his press Secretary’s salary and demand that they provide free unencumbered access to all events, pressers and be available for interviews to all news sources. It is even more sinister when they use an excuse that the press room is too small to accommodate all comers. He needs to cut this shit out…now!

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@Cruiser Welcome to Neo-Nazi land. Bannon’s Beitbart controlled news.

zenvelo's avatar

@Cruiser Rant accepted and read, and thanks for finally stating your thoughts. But he is not going …to cut this shit out…now! or ever. The White House has clearly outlined its plans, Bannon has stated that the Press is the enemy.

Today’s move is a push to test the resistance.

@SergeantQueen You are in for a hard life if you cannot discern the difference between bias as some commercial news outlets are guilty of, and outright lies coming from the President, He has told outright lies so many times it is not even noteworthy.

Google search “Trump Lies” and educate yourself on the lies, mistruths, and propaganda coming out of the White House.

Dutchess_III's avatar

And most of those lies are accompanied by video of him saying the lie.

Cruiser's avatar

Sorry @Tropical_Willie Breitbart was a breath of fresh air during the BS Liberal news crap fest that occurred during the Obama years and strongly disagree with your labeling of Breitbart as Alt-Right. You seem to thrive on ad hominem attacks of anything Republican or conservative. You are entitled to not have an original thought.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@Cruiser I’m a registered Republican
Bannon is Neo-Nazi.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Breitbart.

“Breitbart News Network (known commonly as Breitbart News, Breitbart or Breitbart.com) is a far-right[a] American news, opinion and commentary[10][11] website founded in 2007 by Andrew Breitbart. Breitbart News is known to publish falsehoods and conspiracy theories,[b] as well as intentionally misleading stories.

Conceived by the conservative Andrew Breitbart during a visit to Israel in summer 2007 as a website “that would be unapologetically pro-freedom and pro-Israel”[21] — Breitbart News later aligned with the… American alt-right under the management of former executive chairman Steve Bannon.[22][23] The New York Times describes Breitbart News as an organization with “ideologically driven journalists” that generates controversy “over material that has been called misogynist, xenophobic and racist”.[24]”

It’s the wiki article. It even provides sources to back up what it is saying.

Cruiser's avatar

@Dutchess_III Wiki is one of the worst sources of unbiased political discourse as Wiki has a checkered past of a liberal bias that apparently has not been equalized.

@Tropical_Willie If you are a registered Republican then perhaps you would find this article “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide To The Alt-Right” Breitbart wrote last year.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, what you you make of this false claim made by Breibart?

Germany said it never happened. Country’s (Germany) politicians warn against fake news after Breitbart website said group chanting ‘Allahu Akbar’ vandalised church on New Year’s Eve.

That’s just one. Want more?

Cruiser's avatar

You know @Dutchess_III I would like to believe you and I are so much smarter than to fall victim to these bait click articles and statements. I have better things to do than wade through their BS and hope you do too.

Strauss's avatar

This is another Orwellian attempt to undermine the fourth estate in the US.

Dutchess_III's avatar

You can look for yourself, @Cruiser.

Viveca Novak (July 21, 2010). “Shirley Sherrod’s Contextual Nightmare”. FactCheck.org. Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. “We’ve posted no shortage of pieces on political attacks that leave context on the cutting room floor to give the public a misleading impression. ... The latest victim of the missing context trick is U.S. Department of Agriculture employee Shirley Sherrod. ... a clip of several minutes of her roughly 45-minute speech surfaced on conservative Andrew Breitbart’s website, where he labeled her remarks ‘racist’ and proof of “bigotry” on the part of the NAACP. ... It quickly became clear that the climax, not to mention the moral, of Sherrod’s tale had been edited out of the version Breitbart posted.”

Cruiser's avatar

@Dutchess_III You are going out of your way to reference all the known Liberal machines that pretend to be unbiased. Fact Check is one of the worst offenders. Again… I would like to believe you and I are so much smarter than to fall victim to these bait click articles and statements. I have better things to do than wade through their BS and hope you do too.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

I finally figured it out. Cruiser is a bot. The Cruiser of two years ago died at his desk of a heart attack.

Cruiser's avatar

@Espiritus_Corvus Shhhhh….now that the Life Insurance check has cleared I am looking for some nice tropical property to sequester at….know of any ocean front that is for sale?

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

Jerry Garcia’s beach cottage and horse property on a hill above Stinson Beach just north of San Francisco went on the market yesterday for 4.3 mil. You’re a musician. Can’t beat that for ambience and provenance.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I’m just checking the citations listed in the Wiki artilce.

Conservatives always weep about all the fact check sites because it makes them look like a fool.

Dutchess_III's avatar

And I’m just posting a tiny bit at a time so you won’t feel like you have to “wade.”

Dutchess_III's avatar

Goldstein, Joseph (November 21, 2016). “Alt-Right Gathering Exults in Trump Election With Nazi-Era Salute”. The New York Times. ISSN 0362–4331. “Mr. Bannon was the chief executive of Breitbart, an online news organization that has fed the lie that Mr. Obama is a Kenyan-born Muslim.”

Cruiser's avatar

@Dutchess_III Save your breath….I have been down the garden path that clearly exposes both Factcheck.org and Snopes to be sponsored by Liberal big money and informed people will know better to take most of what they promote with a grain of salt. Go have some real fun, it is the weekend! ;)

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Foxnews.com – November 28, 2016

…Trump has named Stephen Bannon, the conservative media provocateur who shaped the final months of Trump’s campaign, as a White House chief strategist

…Bannon, who previously led Breitbart News and in July described it as a “platform for the alt-right”

…Members of the self-declared “alt-right” have exulted over the Nov. 8 results with public cries of “Hail Trump!” and reprises of the Nazi salute. The Ku Klux Klan plans to mark Trump’s victory with a parade next month in North Carolina.

…[Trump] occasionally trafficked in retweets of racist social media posts during his campaign.

…White nationalist leader Richard Spencer said he believes Trump, Bannon and the “alt-right” are “all riding in the same lane.”

…Spencer said Trump’s election validates Spencer’s view that America must reject multiculturalism and “political correctness” in favor of its white, Christian European heritage.Spencer’s group, the National Policy Institute, drew headlines for its recent gathering where some attendees mimicked the Nazi salute as they feted Trump.

…in fact, Trump drew Klan backing.

…Trump’s rise to political celebrity came as he peddled the falsehood that the nation’s first black president, Barack Obama, was born in Africa, not in the United States.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Snopes debunks rumors about Trump as quickly as they debunk rumors about Obama. And they too include sources.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Snopes debunks rumors about Trump as quickly as they debunk rumors about Obama

Our Trump cheerleader clown will never admit that

Never shutting up is “winning” the argument.

Which is kind of true. Because normal reasonable people quit out of exasperation with the tireless loudmouthed lying asshole.

johnpowell's avatar

My hunch is the move this morning will accelerate leaking. Sort of like a streisand effect.

If this persists CNN and others will switch from access journalism to investigative journalism. There is a reason the politicians prefer the first.

Cruiser's avatar

@johnpowell I hesitate to say I agree with you but will have to offer a caution as your assessment is based on behavior of politicians…Trump is leading this parade and he is anything but a politician. Trump has so far devoured the entire Republican party, laid waste to Hillary Clinton and the DNC and is eating the press for breakfast and taunting all to bring it on. He is just getting acclimated to Washington Politics and when he does…music video

snowberry's avatar

I haven’t seen a news outlet that didn’t promote fake news. Some might promote less of it, but to a journalist, if it won’t sell, it’s not news. I’ve even seen first hand how a seemingly reputable news outlet (ESPN) disregarded the opportunity to interview the guy with the facts and documentation to back it up, to interview a lowlife gossip monger instead. Why? The gossip monger had a juicier story.

So if ESPN does it, they all do it because they’re out to make money. It’s how the media works. If it doesn’t sell, meaning if people won’t watch it, it’s not news.

ANef_is_Enuf's avatar

For the record, I don’t ever recall hearing about Obama supposedly blocking Fox, but I would not have supported that at the time and I would not support it now. I don’t feel this is a partisan issue at all.
There is absolutely no excuse for this, except that his supporters prefer the news that fits their narrative (which is disastrous, we need multiple perspectives in order to form our own understanding, narrowing the information available is never a good solution and un-American to boot.)

johnpowell's avatar

@Cruiser :: It is more about what the journalists will do. Once they don’t have to be nice so CNN can tout “Interview with Trump in 72 hours” and have a ticker in the lower right shit will get messy.

And saying Trump isn’t a politician is like saying Kim Kardashian isn’t a pornstar.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I’m of course opposed to this,and certainly don’t like the patterns emerging from Trump and his people.

If all this wasn’t so dangerous, I’m sure the world would be laughing at the US.

“We’ve come a long way baby.”~

flutherother's avatar

Trump seems very uneasy with the idea of a free press and that makes me feel uneasy too. What is he scared of?

chyna's avatar

@johnpowell Well, I wouldn’t call her a porn star.

Cruiser's avatar

@johnpowell “And saying Trump isn’t a politician is like saying Kim Kardashian isn’t a pornstar.” Your comparison is odd and bizarre…(made me laugh though as I am a sucker for bizarre) and also another fundamental error that I see liberals constantly making. Continuing to discount Trump as a side show freak like Kardashian is to shout out loud and clear you have zero fundamental understanding of the rest of us who voted for this man to be our President.

janbb's avatar

@Cruiser So you’re saying that Trump is not a politician?

Cruiser's avatar

@janbb To label Trump a mere politician is to be ignorant as to just how outside the box this man is. Think about it. Have we ever seen anyone steamroll Washington like Trump? A “politician” could not pull off what he did. The biggest “politician” I have ever seen…Hillary was conquered by Trump. No…Trump is no politician….he IMO is an enigma that is far too soon to slap a label on.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Cruiser

He wasn’t calling Trump a freak show, he was saying that Trump is a political.

He’s in politics, he’s a politician. Your weak attempts to spin it otherwise are laughable.

Cruiser's avatar

@Darth_Algar Where did you get “freak show” from? Again to call Trump a politician is to malign our entire Congress, Governors, Mayors and Aldermen. Seriously

flutherother's avatar

Trump isn’t a politician by nature, he is a ‘deal maker’ but the job he has now is without doubt a political job. That is why Trump is like a fish out of water. He is in the wrong job.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Cruiser

My apologies – “side show freak”.

chyna's avatar

^^And appropriate description.

jca's avatar

@Cruiser: Trump didn’t steamroll Washington. Many Republicans were against him from the start. Smart Republicans threw their vote to Trump because they knew that they really had no choice unless they wanted Hilary to win. The majority of the US population voted for Hillary but she didn’t get the Electoral vote so she lost.

Cruiser's avatar

@jca You apparently did not catch my earlier answer above…

@johnpowell I hesitate to say I agree with you but will have to offer a caution as your assessment is based on behavior of politicians…Trump is leading this parade and he is anything but a politician. Trump has so far devoured the entire Republican party, laid waste to Hillary Clinton and the DNC and is eating the press for breakfast and taunting all to bring it on. He is just getting acclimated to Washington Politics and when he does…music video

Thank God we still have Bernie around to entertain us

SecondHandStoke's avatar

Trump is making a statement.

He’s letting the the mainstream press know that the decades long trend of increasingly unabashed liberal bias and spin is over.

Trump is also reminding his detractors that he is doing, not just saying.

Disinviting the Democratic Party’s various misinformation outlets was an act, not mere words.

funkdaddy's avatar

What I’m hearing is that some of you are OK with a power grab, because it shows his enemies he means business. His enemies are defined as anyone who disagrees with him and an open press.

The President, regardless of political party, represents everyone in the US. Claiming half the population is the enemy to be steamrolled and silenced is the exact opposite of democracy. It is literally everything the country was built to avoid.

If you’re OK with that, I hope you’re OK with history remembering you like those who stood in the schoolhouse door… that’s where we’re at.

It won’t last, but the shame will.

ANef_is_Enuf's avatar

I love how people think it’s awesome to shoot down news with left bias, but right bias is totally cool. Because that’s what freedom of the press is all about!~

Cruiser's avatar

@funkdaddy “What I’m hearing is that some of you are OK with a power grab, because it shows his enemies he means business. His enemies are defined as anyone who disagrees with him and an open press.”

You just illustrated Obama’s approach to the media during his 8 year term. Why is it now so problematic for you?

kritiper's avatar

I think ‘successfully’ is more a question than “selectively.”

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

You just illustrated Obama’s approach to the media during his 8 year term

Trump literally says the press is the “enemy of the people”. Obama never said or acted anything like that.

Trump and his people are spreading false stories about massacres and you are blaming the myth of the liberal press.

What do you think you gain from typing crap like that? Do you think you’re fooling anybody? Does lying like Trump make you feel part of something bigger, like he’s going to give you personal approval?

funkdaddy's avatar

@Cruiser – you’re being disingenuous in order to argue… the two approaches were not similar.

The Obama administration had a problem with Fox News. They did not declare them the enemy.

Other than Fox News, Obama personally and his administration generally had a respectful interaction with the media. Compare a Sean Spicer or Trump press conference with any during Obama’s time. Compare the access given to this point, compare anything you like.

We can discuss individual events if you like, but let’s be honest. Questioning Obama was a national past time for a long time and there’s a big difference between how he responded and how Trump responds.

There’s no evidence Trump will do the right thing if he isn’t forced to.

Cruiser's avatar

@funkdaddy We are going to venture on very thin ice if we keep moving the needle on this point.

“The Obama administration had a problem with Fox News. They did not declare them the enemy.”

More PC bullshit and hence why our country is where it is today. Obama was too soft too weak to call out our real enemies. Whether it be ISIS, Islamic Terrorists, Illegal criminal immigrants or fake News media who deliberately and maliciously mislead you and I. IMHO anyone who intentionally spews lies or misleading half truths should be bull whipped and that includes CNN and Trump. And IMO anyone who believes their bull crap and re-posts it should be bull whipped too.

funkdaddy's avatar

IMHO anyone who intentionally spews lies or misleading half truths should be bull whipped and that includes CNN and Trump. And IMO anyone who believes their bull crap and re-posts it should be bull whipped too.

Thin ice indeed if this is what strength looks like.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Obama was too soft too weak to call out our real enemies. Whether it be ISIS, Islamic Terrorists

Obama ordered thousands of strikes on ISIS, and Islamic terrorists. He also had bin Laden killed and deported more criminal immigrants than any president before.

Your belligerent ignorance is really sad.

Cruiser's avatar

@funkdaddy Did you even watch the video??? Trump is 99% correct. Obama fumble the ball in the Middle East and Isis and Syria is the direct result of his missteps. Trump now has to figure out a way to clean up the hot mess Obama left behind.

@Call_Me_Jay Your gullibility on what you cited is truly sad.

ragingloli's avatar

Obama was too weak to call out the real enemies, the alt-right neonazis, like Drumpf and his voters.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Cruiser What are you disputing?

The airstrikes? The deportations? Killing bin Laden?

You really want to claim those aren’t true?

janbb's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay Let’s focus on what really happened – like the Bowling Green Massacre and Sweden! Sweden!!

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

^^LOL. Yes, the famous Friday Night Massacre in Sweden perpetrated by al-Ikea. Former Prime Minister Carl Bildt tweeted almost immediately, “Sweden? Terror attack? What has he been smoking? Questions abound.”

That’s just fucking embarrassing.

The whole world is watching.

funkdaddy's avatar

@Cruiser – We’re way off track… my fault.

I do not think Obama started, fumbled, or worsened the trouble in the Middle East, but as that’s not my area of expertise and really isn’t knowable, I’ll let Trump say whatever he likes there.

My intent was to show with your quote and the linked article that people are saying, on camera, things so outlandish that they can’t be backed by any worldview. Saying Obama founded ISIS is in no way fact, in or out of context, yet there it is. Repeated by a man with a microphone who wants to “lead the free world”.

But again, we’re way off track. If there is evidence to show that selectively excluding press based on their bias is standard procedure, then I’d take that as something that would change my view. I’m saying that’s not the case and that I’ve looked a bit, but I’m always open to new evidence.

I’m also saying there’s no evidence that it was a mistake, or doesn’t reflect the administrations real views on how things should be handled. It may be a step too far, and they may back away from it, but not because they don’t believe it’s correct (in my estimation)...

I don’t have a political party, I don’t subscribe to either party’s entire platform, but certain things are disqualifiers for me, and this would be one.

If you’d like to discuss that further, I’m all for it. I don’t think we’re going to change much by sniping at the “other side”. I would pose one question though that would be central to all future discussions about this particular politician… at what point would you back away?

If the answer is “Never”, then there isn’t much to discuss.

tinyfaery's avatar

Can’t get over humble. Hahahaha…

Cruiser's avatar

@funkdaddy There is ample evidence that by Obama not allowing support troops to remain in Iraq set the table for an ISIS grass roots to develop. 2 red lines in the sand with Syria empowered ISIS and other Islamic terrorist groups to thrive. Russia also was emboldened by Obama’s weakness hence the push into Ukraine. If you wish, there is plenty here to discuss.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I don’t understand why conservatives are war mongers. And conveniently throw GW’s mess on Obama. GW and the Republican party started these conflicts, and buried the US in debt. Obama had the task of trying to clean it all up.

I think he did the best he could with the dumpster fire he inherited.

There was/is no ”right” answer in the middle east. Especially after the 2nd Iraq war. Leaving our troops there wasn’t going to solve ANYTHING. Extremist organizations like ISIS have popped up since the beginning of time. War in the middle east is apparently a regular norm. The entire region has been destabilized since forever. The US involvement just stirred the shit worse. I’m sorry that the US ever got involved, but I’m glad we aren’t dealing with that quagmire anymore.

Killing civilians, and banning Muslims is the greatest recruiting tool for such organizations. It validates all their propaganda, and will ultimately lead to more terrorist attacks on US soil.

Admission that we fucked up,and pulling out our troops was the best option on the table.

Neither the US,Russia, or anybody can bomb the region into stability. It’s a ridiculous strategy, and the world knows it.

Not to mention that China practically owns the US now,as they are who we borrowed from to pay for the military funding for the conflicts.

If the US would just stay out of other country’s business, we’d have less terrorist problems, and more money than we would know what to do with.

Obama used drone strikes,and special ops as his main tool for handling multiple conflicts. But it could have been much worse if the US went to war at the drop of a hat. Countless lives were spared by Obama’s level head,and diplomacy.

The “the beatings will continue until moral improves” mentality is ineffective in stopping terrorism, and serves nobody except the DOD’s budget.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Cruiser The US left Iraq accoring to the agreement the Bush administration made with Iraq. It wasn’t Obama’s choice. Iraq didn’t want us there.

Also, still waiting for you to answer the question about your claims.

funkdaddy's avatar

@Cruiser – I disagree, but don’t have a strong background in those areas. I’ll quote a friend…

Regarding the war in the middle east…[1]

Anybody who didn’t know the next President to take over was going to be a fall guy for where our country was heading was not well informed to our state of affairs both domestically and internationally. Whether Obama or McCain either was destined to fail as there was and is just way too much going wrong then and now.

And ISIS…[2]

ISIS is a quasi government that is taking care of the people they occupy and from where I sit many there seem OK as it is light years better than the way Assad treated them. If the Middle East first and foremost wants a stable government than they have to find a way for the Sunnis and Shia’s to tolerate each other. A stable economy will certainly help both sides achieve stability. Now that Iran is regaining it’s ability to trade freely again they too will become a believe it or not stabilizing force as I am pretty positive they won’t want to bring those sanctions against themselves any time soon.

We can try and do all sorts of things to prop up one country over another and in the end it won’t matter much until like I said the Sunnis and Shia’s learn to play nice over there and that I don’t see ever happening.

And Ukraine…[3]

Russia is still crippled financially has very little to fall back on other than their gas and oil resources and now that many other countries can deliver what Russia has to offer, their power play is more nostalgic, symbolic and wishful thinking to regain the power and command they once had since they lost it all years back. Ultimately sanctions will once again quickly bleed them dry.

-from a friend… pre-Trumpbot

1 2 3

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

LOL, good job funkdaddy.

Though he’ll ignore that, too. He can never concede a point, never admit an error like an adult. He moves on to the next bullshit talking point received from AM radio.

kritiper's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Unfortunately, it falls to someone to be the world’s police force and I think we, the United States, do a good job of it. It’s a tough job and no body is perfect.
This war started and it will continue for many years, so one can’t just tuck their tails between their legs and haul ass back home. Ignoring the danger is no option. (Read up on your world history concerning the Nazis and US isolationism of the 1930’s.)
War, and the fog of war, is a dirty fact and can’t be deemphasized or sidestepped. Don’t like it? Well, suck it up because that is the way it is, like it or not.
War IS hell!

Darth_Algar's avatar

The idea that we have to be the world’s police is pure egoism. Step back and take an honest, objective look and you’ll realize that most of the problems we’re “policing” are problems that we lit the fuse on in the first place.

Strauss's avatar

@Darth_Algar most of the problems we’re “policing” are problems that we lit the fuse on in the first place.

Also problems that affect our economic security in a given region.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@kritiper . With all due respect, I completely disagree. If the world wanted a “world police,“it would have elected/installed one.

One way of thinking is not meant to be the way of humanity. The US’s own government is structured to prevent this. Why would we have the right to impose our ethics on others ,when we don’t even except that in our homeland?

Police just enforce existing law. Judges are to decide, in as fair a manor as possible, what punishment should, or shouldn’t be appropriate for the “crime.”

Nobody elected America to do this “job.” And most think,correctly, that we should mind our own business. And they are right.

Being pulled into a world war is one thing, but asserting our personal way of thinking on other places/people is asinine.

How would you feel if another country didn’t like the way Trump was elected, so they invaded the US, and stayed here for 10 years,killing thousands of civilians in the process? I wager you would be upset. Maybe even resist.In the “American” view, that would make you a terrorist….

Until the day the world has one leader,and one law system, any medaling in other’s affairs should be considered criminal, unless specifically asked for by the parties involved.

janbb's avatar

@MrGrimm888 I tend to agree with you but the argument bogs down for me when there is a clear case of genocide or other horrors such as what happened in Rwanda and what is happening in Syria today. The non-intervention waters get murky for me there.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^It’s not our fight. It’s not our responsibility. It’s not worth someone I know dying, or killing someone else. Let one of their neighbors deal with it. The world has ,in a way, weakened by the US’s habits of involvement. They need to build their own military, and handle things the way they want them handled. This is precisely why European nations are sweating Russia right now. They always knew America would come running to help. Now they have a substantial disadvantage militarily vs Russia.

Other nations have taxes too. It’s up to them to use some of their income to protect themselves. Many currently rely on the US, like the mafia protecting your store. But the mafia is really only interested in the mafia, like the US.

For clarification Syrian rebels did ask for US support. The reason we didn’t give them all they asked for is that in the past,weapons we give rebel groups are eventually turned on us…

kritiper's avatar

@MrGrimm888 That method of thinking keeps humanity where we are and keeps the world in peril. What you suggest would work in a world that was civilized but that we are not. Hence, my POV. And history agrees with me, for the most part, since mankind is not civilized or perfect. You thinking also suggests that you are an isolationist, which, as history proved in the late 1930’s, didn’t work.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I’m a “mind my own business-ist.” If that makes me an isolationist, so be it.

Isolationism is different than logical ,measured,diplomatic responses to problems in the world.

Violence should be an absolute last resort. Keep in mind that most casualties in every war are not the people who start the fight. The casualties are the poor,who are the majority of most nation’s armies. Or civilians, who have little to do with the conflict. Do you think Putin,or Trump will die from a war between the US and Russia?

The world is only “in peril” at the moment because of countries like the US, China,and Russia. If everyone tended their own flock,only some regions would be unstable, not the whole planet waiting on a miscalculation in Syria to start a war between two of the world’s super powers,whose nuclear capabilities endanger us all….

If you would like to source history, ok,let us.

There has never been a time in history where there was no war,somewhere. Military conflicts only solve problems temporarily, then things flare up again. With that in mind, “war” isn’t a proven tactic either. War is hell, and should be avoided at all costs…

Violence is a dead horse that the world won’t stop beating. If history is of value to you,take a page. War doesn’t do anything but hurt innocent people. We should be far enough along now to understand that. It only benefits the wealthy and powerful. The other 99% of the world suffers…

Give peace a chance,and we as a species will have a chance.

kritiper's avatar

I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work.

Darth_Algar's avatar

Do tell, how has playing world’s police worked out so far? How did it work out in Korea? In Iran? In Vietnam? In Iraq? In Latin America? How has that gone so far?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther