Yesterday President Obama and French President Francois Hollande held a joint news conference at the White House to address the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris. They presented a united front against terrorism and each delivered opening statements that virtually mirrored one another. The gist was that, as Obama said…
“This barbaric terrorist group — ISIL, or Daesh — and its murderous ideology pose a serious threat to all of us. It cannot be tolerated. It must be destroyed.”
It was a forthright statement of unequivocal determination to prevail over evil and nothing Hollande said surpassed it in tone or substance. Nevertheless, Obama’s critics in the American media snarled predictably about what they viewed as the weakness of his remarks, as compared to Hollande, without citing a single instance of how they differed. For example, Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post (and Fox Nation website) disparaged Obama in a headline article as being “dangerously nonchalant about ISIS threats.”
However, where they went cascading overboard was with their wildly absurd misinterpretation of comments both leaders made about the upcoming United Nations Climate Conference in Paris. For the record, here are the excerpts from each opening statement that addresses the conference:
Obama: Next week, I will be joining President Hollande and world leaders in Paris for the global climate conference. What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.
Hollande: There is no greater symbol than holding this conference on climate in Paris with some 150 heads of state and government. Never before did France host so many leaders of the international community. They’re coming to sort out the climate challenge, and again, to work and to find the right agreement so that we can limit greenhouse gases emissions and make sure that our children and our grandchildren live better, or simply can live.
What is plainly obvious is that both men were declaring their resolve to forge ahead with the conference despite the attempt by terrorists to stir panic and to disrupt the lives of free people in Paris and everywhere else. It was a proclamation of their commitment to proceed with life’s affairs without being hobbled by fear. But the Fox News crowd is either to stupid to recognize that, or they are deliberately twisting it to arrive at a ludicrous conclusion that fits their anti-Obama narrative. Here is a sampling of their mindless exercises in disinformation:
- Rudy Guiliani: You know, you know, I really feel very stupid. I consider myself somewhat of an expert on law enforcement, terrorism, cybersecurity, security, and I never thought of the fact that if we just waged war on global warming we could defeat ISIS, and that’s really going to shake them up. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anything more absurd from a president.
- K.T. McFarland: President Obama thinks that climate change is the greatest strategic and geological and existential threat to our future. You know, here we are — and the irony, if it were not so tragic it would be funny — here we have ISIS, which is attacking with suicide vests and Kalashnikovs and potentially chemical weapons in the French water supply. What are we doing? We’re going to fight ISIS. We’re going to have windmills. We’re going to have solar panels. We’re going to show them. It’s just really — all it does is it gives encouragement to the terrorists who feel that they have been selected and chosen by Allah to establish the caliphate and kill everybody who disagrees with them.
- Eric Bolling: At the White House news conference alongside the leader of France today, President Obama really stuck it to the terrorists by reminding them he’ll be attending a weather summit soon.
- Kimberly Guilfoyle: Wow, we’re going to stick it to the terrorists when we start talking about climate change.
- Jesse Watters: He’s saying we need to fight terror by using a poem on the Statue of Liberty. OK, I don’t even know what that means. And then he’s going on and saying the biggest rebuke to terrorism is to talk about the weather. […] I don’t think Americans care if we rebuke the terrorists. I think we should be nuking the terrorists.
- Andrea Tantaros: Obama: wait til they get a load of us at the Climate Summit in a few wks….”a rebuke.” Because nothing scares jihadists like the weather.
- Peter Johnson: I think the people join me at home today on this in being confounded and astounded … by that statement that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, the most potent weapon in his arsenal against ISIS, against al-Qaeda, against all of these terrorists, is somehow convening a conference on global warming, on climate change.
These maroons actually believe that Obama was arguing that Climate Change reform was his response to terrorism. They are so intellectually feeble that they could not grasp that he was talking about proceeding with the conference, rather than canceling or rescheduling it, as the “rebuke” in that it demonstrated that the terrorists could not upset our lives with their barbarous tactics. We will persevere no matter what they do, they cannot force us to retreat into bunkers. It is a message of strength. And even though the Fox dimwits directed their insults at our president, while praising Hollande, they completely ignored the fact that Hollande said exactly the same thing.
How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.
This is what happens when people allow themselves to become so consumed with hate that they can’t hold a coherent thought in their diseased brains. It exposes them as frauds who have only their own narrow interests at what remains of their heart. But most of all it signals an innate idiocy and inability to engage in critical thinking. Which may be a good thing for Fox News pundits. Because their audience is even less able to understand simple concepts or process information in any logical manner. Fox knows who they’re playing to, and their audience appreciates being talked down to – and even lied to.
Fox news gets away with it because Barack Obama isn’t respected and his approval rating isn’t good. I looked back at Bill Clintons approval ratings while he was treated by Fox News the way this clown is and he maintained decent ratings. Barack Obama may not deserve everything he gets but if he was even half way competent, Fox News wouldn’t get away with it with the public – as they didn’t when Bill Clinton was president. He’s a joke – accept it. His approval ratings stink http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
so he reaps what he sows. He gets the treatment he deserves. A real president who is respected would be able to fight off this kind of thing – hatred or not, he is a loser and useless president.
You must have an IQ to match your age. What a loser.
Brent, I must have hurt you.
Why steve I believe you’ve finally worn out your welcome.
Our President’s approval ratings are higher than ever…you must get your info from Faux News.
But, thanks for your misinformation…it was quite entertaining!!!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/19/poll-obamas-approval-rating-hits-an-18-month-high-is-back-over-50-percent/
And your source is a month older – you’re wrong. Keep up.
You did look at the link I provided right – real clear politics, not fox news. It averages a bunch and your conclusion is clearly wrong.
Go open it and look for yourself.
The graph pretty much shows a trend of his approval rating HOLDING STEADY. If you’ve noticed, for the past few months his approval rating as been hovering between thr 48-52% rating, going up and down but staying in that range. In fact the graph shows a RISE in approval from 40% early in the year and a drop of disapproval from above 54% for the same.
Yet somehow because his latest approvals have fallen, the people “disapprove” of him according to you.
Your Obama hate truly knows no bounds.
The FoxPods have never been capable of lateral thinking when it comes to Obama. But of course, it’s more important for FoxPods to demonstrate how “presidential” anyone who isn’t Obama is to prove that Obama isn’t. Especially when, as you noted, Mark, they are saying exactly the same thing.
Still, I think both men are somewhat naive here. It would be nice if every country could present a united front against terrorism, but the FoxPods and their ilk will ensure that will never happen. So, I hope FoxPods enjoy living on a planet completely befouled in its own wastes caused by their who-cares attitude regarding the environment and the never-ending terrorist attacks (since Obama is personally responsible for each when FoxPods are capable of recognizing both are major concerns).
“Fox knows who they’re playing to…”
With this particular “news” segment, and I’m sure with all of them, the producers and talking heads are sitting in their pre-show meetings knowing full well their viewers are dumber than a box of rocks. They have little respect for the dummies that watch and are confident in their ability to manipulate them. Been working for years. But, you know, ratings.
The prolonged drought in Syria helped create the environment for Daesh in Syria.
Fox is filled with idiots.
Stove in York, we get it, you don’t like President Obama. Now back to the basement with you where you can sniff your fingers.
I’m the only one here who sees him for what he is. You will follow him no matter what he does – accept his failure as president – he is a good example of an affirmative action hire and the results are as expected. How come I can call GW Bush for what he is with no disagreement, argument, nothing from the peanut gallery here. But when I call this clown out for being every bit as incompetent – it’s off limits. You are a pathetic bunch. I’m more honest than the lot of you put together.
Incompetent huh?
Unemployment below 5%.
Job growth up the last 71 months.
Stock market at all time highs.
Insurance for millions of uninsured
Must be doing something right.
On a personal note I’ve done quite well under our President.
Before you go on your rethuglican talking points, about the 55 million people out of the work force. Let me educate you on these facts. Of the 55 million you rightards spout, It contains 10th 11th 12th grade high school students. College students 18 to 23 year olds. The handicapped,the disabled , stay at home moms. And, let’s not forget people who are retired.
If you disagree that the unemployment is higher than 5% it may as well be. However, it’s the same way the government has been tracking it for over 50 years.
Be honest for once Steve, admit you hate this President, because he’s black.
Greg, the president doesn’t create any jobs, he doesn’t run the economy, he/she has nothing to do with any of those numbers. You’re the typical liberal moron – do you actually have any clue as to how economies run and operate. You must think the president, this one or any other actually directs it. I’ll give you something he has a lot of impact on – and it’s a good thing – the deficit is much lower now (still high), but much better. Beyond that, which you didn’t even state, NOT ONE THING on your list is assignable to him. And try spending some time with those numbers – they aren’t what you think. I’ve done well too – but he has zero to do with it. I have actual skills that have value and will for a long time. Why don’t you spend some time reading and understanding before you try to engage. When you figure out how jobs are created and economies work, try again. And if you’ve done well – is it because of him or something you did right? Try giving yourself the proper credit – no one is more responsible for your own success than you.
Creating jobs, sure isn’t your cuntservative way of lowering taxes for the rich. You still never answer anyone here, about hating the President because he’s black.
Keep hoping – only leftists focus on race – conservatives including me focus on merit and ability an d quality of human being – he is lacking all.
Greg, the president doesn’t create any jobs, he doesn’t run the economy, he/she has nothing to do with any of those numbers.
Give me a break. And if the president was Rethuglican (which you prefer) and the statistics were equivalent, you would have rushed to give that president all the credit in reviving the economy. But, it’s happening under Obama, so you FoxPods can’t be bothered to give him any credit. So f’n predictable…
Kali, there was probably a time when what you note was true – but that was when I was much younger and didn’t know any better – a pre-cynical time period.
For me to be successful, I had to put all those naive beliefs behind and grow up. If I still believed that, I would need to look at where my life went wrong as I clearly would not have learned anything. If I was a public employee, then maybe I would look at it that way.
Also Kali, if the markets were down over 50% and unemployment was 12% like they were under President Bush, Steve would go on about how this president tanked the economy. If you noticed Steve I called him President Bush. I at lest show respect for the POTUS. No matter whom it is.
Greg, you can keep on complaining, but it does no good.
Can’t reply directly to the post in question so I’ll just quote it here:
Yeah only lefties focus on race. I guess you haven’t been very familiar about how your fellow conservatives behave with regards to race. Nothing about the attempts to whitewash racism, deny it exists, attack the black guy in the whitehouse, no none of these things, it’s the LEFT that are focused on race according to you.
Well, one thing that right wingers are good at is projecting, and they’ve even taken to calling attempts to call out racism as racism itself. So yeah this is par for the course.
But let’s test your theory out then Mr Conservative. You say that conservatives look at the “merit ability and quality” of a person rather than race and you say that Obama is lacking in character as a person. I’d wonder what exactly you mean by “merit ability and quality” and what sort of “merit ability and quality” traits you’d consider worthy of being a President, but then there’s a very easy way to tresh that out.
If what you say is true, then the conservative Republican voters for the GoP primary would naturally, simply due to being conservative, be voting, by and large, on their candidate based on their human character traits right? In other words, they vote for the candidates based on their CHARACTER, to see if they possess the character worthy to become President.
Let’s look at who is currently leading the pack (and has for some months now). Donald J. Trump. So this is the guy whom conservative Republicans think is worth of the whitehouse due to his “merit ability and quality” traits.
And if they are anything like you, I’m confident to assume that they believe that he would be MORE worthy than the current President.
That’s very convenient, because now we have a living example that can exemplify the sort of “merit ability and quality” traits that conservatives feel should best fit their ideal image of an ideal President. In other words, what sort of “merit ability and quality” traits does Donald J. Trump have that makes him worthy, MORE worthy in fact than Obama?
Do proceed governor Steve.
It’s funny when you claim that the President doesn’t create jobs…because it’s what the Republican candidates for congress since 2010, and again in 2014 have run on.
They promised jobs for the people, they promised job policies would be passed.
Well? Where are they? The current congress seems more interested in attacking PP or denying Syrian Refugees from entering America, among other things except jobs.
But then again, what DOES create jobs? You never really elaborated, but let’s look at it from the Republican POV and also from what most economists say.
Republicans believe that the job creators are the ultra rich, the 1%ers, the big corporations and millionaires. They claim that since these guys do the hiring, they are the ones that can best be called job creators. To that end, they attempt to pass or pass economic policies that fiscally benefit this 1% group, cutting their taxes. providing them with subsidies etc. Even at the cost of raising taxes or not allocating funds to either the lower economic classes or to policies that benefit them such as welfare.
Economists say that the real job creators are those from whom demand springs from, and in almost all cases, demand comes from….the population at large, the lower to middle class who spend a significant amount of their income on the market for everyday products etc. This demand is what prompts any of the corporations to hire in the first place. Without demand, it would make no sense to hire more workers since each worker also constitutes an expense to the company that, ideally, should be covered in terms of the monetary value of the labor that the worker produces. Without demand, that labor would not be needed and the expense incurred by hiring a worker and paying his wages would be unjustified where profits are concerned.
This is demand side economics, 101, I’m no great shakes at economics, but I at least understand that much. The Republican ideology is focused on SUPPLY side, the 1%ers. Pour money into them and the economy would jump start.
President Obama, as well as most of the world’s economists accept the views of demand side economics as being the accurate measure of how the economy works. I think that it makes more sense to me too (pouring $ into supply isn’t necessarily going to mean that more workers will be hired if no new demand springs up yes?).
I’m assuming you go for the supply siders because that’s NOT what Obama is supporting. Do explain how they are more correct with regards to “who the job creators are”.
“A sensible media would be debating which of Obama’s two great accomplishments — the stimulus or the Affordable Care Act — is a bigger success; which better proves that the government can successfully intervene to prevent suffering while reshaping our economy to be more sustainable; or about which Republicans were more wrong.
But conservatives won’t let that happen. They’ll focus on metrics that languished before Obama came into office — we’re very concerned about labor force participation all of a sudden! — and blast him for not solving all of the failures of conservative economics and foreign policies.
Despite these successes, Republicans have to see Obama as a floundering, economy-shrinking, deficit-creating failure, or risk questioning their failed worldview.”
That being plagiarized, I take my Thanksgiving Message from the Las Vegas Sun:
“Obama’s administration has been as free of corruption and, well, peccadillo as any in memory. It’s the first two-term presidency not to be derailed by scandal since Eisenhower. A few will stay in paranoid lather about Benghazi or Fast and Furious, but those pseudo-scandals don’t compare to Watergate, Iran-Contra, Bill Clinton’s carnal antics or the phony evidence used to justify attacking Iraq.
Obama has weathered a recession, invisible racism, a reckless Republican Congress, a lily-livered Democratic Party, attacks from the richest pressure groups ever (super PACs) and a 24/7, ADHD press corps under existential pressure to deliver page views and Nielsen ratings. He has done it with the “No Drama Obama” style that befits the office.
Obama isn’t a performer like Reagan or a preacher like Clinton. He’s head over heart, cool over warm. Yet, he did his pastoral duties after Sandy Hook, the Boston Marathon and Charleston. He wasn’t a catalyst for same-sex marriage but nourished the culture that made it possible.
It is harder than ever to see the big canvas and thus find fresh perspectives. We view current events as puny rivers of tweets, not grand chapters in the ultimate story — history.
In that longer view, we should feel well served. So, Mr. President, on behalf of an ungrateful nation, thank you.”
The stimulus??? Do you actually think it’s hard for any politician to spend money. And where did that money come from? The banks – so they created the problem and then government goes to them to “solve” it – only blind statists can think that is a success. If he had arrested and thrown some of them in jail – then he would be something special – needless to say that didn’t happen.
You’re doing a simple thing called “shifting the responsibility”, something that right wingers do with regards to things like Osama bin Laden’s assassination.
With regards to your question, I’ll ask you, do you think it’s hard for any company to spend money?
The answer to that, and also to your question is, “it depends on the consequences of accepting responsibility for said spending.” CEOs have to justify their spending to their board of directors or else risk losing funding from them (as they are shareholders) or being replaced by them.
The President too can be censured in a similar manner….through the polling booth. At least that’s how it should work.
The main issue however is that the stimulus is credited by many economists today as being a big factor in lifting the country out of the recession it experienced. you seem to have conceded this too (and no, the money for the stimulus didn’t come from banks, banks don’t “create money”, it ultimately came from the same source as the funds for the Iraq war, the American people).
What you conveniently left out however was where your fellow conservatives stood with regards to it. The answer obviously was in vicious opposition to Obama. They fought real hard against the stimulus spending and actually succeeded in getting it reduced.
The effects of that, as economists have noted, is the current rate of recovery. Remember how Republicans have been bitching about how Obama does no good for the economy and it doesn’t recover fast enough? Well according to economists, if they hadn’t impeded the stimulus spending so much and caused it to get reduced as it did, the current rate of recovery might have been even faster (it’s good enough already as it is, America took far longer to recover from the Great Depression of the 1920s, largely because they DIDN’T do what they did in 2008).
So yeah, what were you saying about how this isn’t an accomplishment by Obama? Against fierce opposition no less.
Nicely done, on all counts.
I’m sure you are aware, but for Steve’s benefit I would also add that whether it’s supply side or demand side, a sacrifice/investment is ask of the tax payer in both instances;
1)On the supply side, if taxes are cut, we do without the tax revenue the 1% would have provided and still remain at the mercy of the “job creators” who will always do what’s best for them, not the population at large.
2)On the demand side ,invest in something like infrastructure rebuild or something new like high speed trains and renewable energy…all of which the President has called for. The new jobs created would stimulate the economy and gives the real job creators a say in what and when.
On a side note, the taxes we pay for gov’t programs designed to help those in need go right back into the private sector as those people will spend every nickle.
You call out “W” correctly. He was a loser of a President. Our country hasn’t been the same since he was elected; the world has changed even more significantly since his interference and is STILL suffering the consequences of his influence
Obama, by any measure, is a success. I would go further and say had any other successful President been placed in his shoes with the same circumstances, they would not have fared as well. You never say what your issue is with Obama. You just say he’s incompetent and use “polls” to influence your thinking. I seriously don’t know if you are a racist or not, but when you don’t provide good reasons for the “incompetent” comments
…it makes one wonder.
By any measure? really? Why don’t you give me your list or the measures you choose to follow. The general public – and I’m talking about approval polling which is in the link I provided has a very nice graph showing long term support by the public – going back to 2014 and his approval rating was never at 50 percent in the timeframe presented – I assume you can read graphs, numbers don’t lie.
Well, I stand corrected. I should have said any intelligent measure. Greg provided several. I agree with the sentiments Drawfire listed from the Las Vegas Sun quote.
And you STILL haven’t said what he’s done that makes him incompetent.
Being black is my guess.
It sure appears that way.
Bigtoe, I’ve been down this path with you (specifically) too many times – I answer a request by you to support what I’m saying in specific terms, providing exactly what you ask – typically a long list, and you concoct reasons to not accept them. I assume we live in the same reality so if you can’t see it, there is nothing I’m going to say that you’ll accept – so keep the blinders in place. Keep making stuff up and believing the fantasy. I appreciate all the attention
I tend to try to compose a cogent comment on these articles, but today’s just leaves me sad. I re-read the attempts at belittling Pres. Obama vis a vis Premier Hollande and it was so pathetic and treasonous.
He brings it on himself – hold him responsible for his own problems. I’m more sad for the country than him.
To understand this we have to get a hold of a few moments of our time and evaluate the functioning oof our dayy to day life.
After showing to him what pellets really were, he said so itts just alll the wood
left overs. Clean up is simple’use water to wipe off
the stove and ensure fire embers are completely out (i.