Silencing Dissent

The White House administrative staff is continuing with its non-sensicle attack on Glenn Beck and his employer Fox News. The fact that this administration finds it necessary to critique the only cable news channel that expresses disagreement with them is not only stupid, it's congruent with totalitarian regimes the world over.

The freedom of the Press was established in the constitution to be a "check" on Government, to be the civilian's oversight. They were given access to the inner-workings of Gov't with the freedom to say what they wanted about elected officials and their policies. It was another way to keep tabs on what is being done "for the people". The fact that the White House staff would even consider trying to convince other news agencies to put a kibosh on Fox, is an indictment of new journalist who have allowed their oversight of government operations to take a backseat to their own personal politics. To the credit of some left leaning journalists, this time, Fox's rivals found their backbone, but I personally doubt it's because of journalistic integrity.

The question you have to ask is why are they doing this? Anita done, the idolizer of mass murdering communist revolutionaries, stated anger over Chris Wallace's fact checking of administrative officials. She said she had never even heard of a Sunday News show fact checking a public official. Really? I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Chris Wallace had this to say:

She criticized 'Fox News Sunday' last week for fact-checking -- fact-checking -- an administration official," Wallace said Sunday. "They didn't say that our fact-checking was wrong. They just said that we had dared to fact-check.

She also claims Fox ignores Republican Scandals, specifically sighting a lack of coverage on the Senator John Ensign scandal. However, once again encountered with the truth, it seems fox was on par with other news agencies in this arena. Anita Dunn does not seem to be finding much support in her crusade. Then again, even MSNBC would have a difficult time defending the worship of a person like Mao.

From the Fox News Website

Observers on both sides of the political aisle questioned the White House's decision to continue waging war on a news organization, saying the move carried significant political risks.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile said on CNN: "I don't always agree with the White House. And on this one here I would disagree."

David Gergen, who has worked for Democratic and Republican presidents, said: "I totally agree with Donna Brazile." Gergen added that White House officials have "gotten themselves into a fight they don't necessarily want to be in. I don't think it's in their best interest."

"The faster they can get this behind them, the more they can treat Fox like one other organization, the easier they can get back to governing, and then put some people out on Fox," Gergen said on CNN. "I mean, for goodness sakes, you know, you engage in the debate. "

"What Americans want is a robust competition of ideas, and they ought to be willing to go out there and mix it up with some strong conservatives on Fox, just as there are strong conservatives on CNN like Bill Bennett."

Bennett expressed outrage that Dunn told an audience of high school students this year that Mao Zedong, the founder of communist China, was one of "my favorite political philosophers." "Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not...a small thing; it's a big thing," Bennett said on CNN. "When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she's deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that -- I mean, that is crazy."

Crazy like a fox, in her opinion. Anita Dunn is not alone in her idiotic attacks on the fox news network. Rahm Emmanuelle and David Axelrod have both been quoted this week in attempts to persuade other media outlets to disenfranchise fox to the level of a tabloid or op-ed journalism (as if they weren't all that). Whatever you think of Fox is not the issue. I personally, think its a republican news network. I also think that almost everything else is heavily democrat.

The White House administration has been under a greater focus since last week when the Communications Director was recorded bragging that they own and control the news. Then again, they are probably victims of a vast Right Wing, Fox News, conspiracy.

The point is not that Fox news is objective, I don't think they are. I don't think any of them are. But, I have a serious problem with the government attacking a free business enterprise. I have a problem with the public image of the president being more important then our constitutional rights. I have a problem with the white house attacking the thoughts and opinions of American citizens without ever responding to the claims they call "outrageous". It's not a long jump from what's going on here, to a Venezuelan style stifling of dissent. It's very disturbing and it should bother people at every level of the political spectrum. Oddly enough, it probably won't bug Fox News Shareholders, as their viewership and advertising dollars have benefited quiet well from this idiotic exercise in totalitarianism.