Dear friends,
I just watched a debate between Terry McAuliffe and Karl Rove. The debate was “if the Obama administration’s targeting Fox News as an enemy is a good thing for the Administration to do… Or not.”
Terry McAuliffe made several points;
That Fox News had interviewed an Administration official, then, the next week, had pointed out factual errors in her points. Terry then said that had never been done before. The Fox reporter claimed that he had never seem such disregard for the facts and felt he had to point out the truth of the matter.
I am of the opinion that it is the job of news organizations to point out the facts. No matter who is the President. To do otherwise would make a news organization biased on point of fact if not in opinion.
Terry said that Fox News is an arm of the Republican Party.
The premise of this statement is that “if a news organization is too critical of a political party, (as seen by that party) it is a tool of the other political party.” In a two party system… With this definition of a yellow news organization at hand much mischief can be done. Not the least of which is the obliterating of the first amendment to the Constitution.
Once it is acceptable for a faction to claim it is being preyed upon by some news entity, and can justly use the apparatus of government to damage the interests of that news organization, any party or faction in power can do this. When that is the case news must become a tool of the party in power. Else they risk their franchise. Like in Venezuela.
Terry also claimed Fox had not shown Barok Obama’s address about health care.
To this point I believe Karl Rove made an acceptable retort.
The last salient point I think he made was that one of Fox News opinion journalists had called Barok Obama a racist.
Premised, I suppose, that calling anyone a racist is unacceptable. Else Terry could mean that only calling Obama a racist is unacceptable. Or he could have meant that only calling a democrat a racist is unacceptable.
Only the first premise is acceptable in logic. The others have obvious flaws. (To go into them would require much more room then my blog has). If calling anyone a racist is unacceptable and anyone who calls someone a racist is bad. And that Fox news is bad by association because one of it’s opinion journalists called someone a racist and is bad. Then everyone who associates with people who call others racists are bad by association as well.
Former President Carter called everyone in the US South racist and is bad for saying that. And by association, the Administration is bad, for it’s association with someone who calls others racist.
Only by pointing out the universality of an argument can we sometimes see the flaws in it.
Terry also tried to change the subject to health care.
Although not having anywhere near as much microphone time Karl Rove made several points;
That The only Presidential Administration that has ever made a news organization an enemy was the Nixon Administration.
The much despised Nixon Administration. (Nixon had the audacity to prosecute Alger Hiss)! Nixon had an enemies list that included news outlets. Nixon was much reviled for this by the very people who are doing it now.
Karl Rove also claimed it is bad policy to target individual news outlets as enemies.
To do so is an attribute of despotic governors.
In retort to Terry McAuliffe’s points Karl pointed out;
That it was Fox Entertainment not fox news that didn’t show the President’s Health care address. Fox news did.. But the Administration is targeting Fox News not Fox entertainment. To it I would add, then, are all entertainment outlets, news affiliates enemies, that didn’t show the address? The address was not on every channel… Nor should it have been.
Glaucon said, what good (is justice) for the man who is perfectly just if he has the reputation of perfect injustice. He will be stoned and punished as if he were unjust. But the man who is perfectly unjust and has the reputation of perfect justice will be esteemed a great man. So it is only the appearance of justice that one needs.
This Administration is trying to make the just appear to be unjust. Then they will be stoned and tortured. To do this makes the one who engages in it unjust by this action. This is the behavior of people who want to appear to be perfectly just while actually being perfectly unjust.
Is that who we want ruling us… the perfectly unjust?
