Fox News draws parallels between Obama and Lincoln

[capncrunch]

I never thought I'd see the day...

Obama's 'Team of Rivals' Approach Mirrors That of Abraham Lincoln

"Lincoln's reasoning: "We needed the strongest men. These were the very strongest men. I had no right to deprive the country of their services."

None of this has been lost on Obama, who said in May that Lincoln's inclusion of former foes "has to be the approach that one takes."​

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Obama is a student of Lincoln's history.

Having read many books about Lincoln and his administration myself, I see a lot of similarities in the two. Like Lincoln, Obama seems to be devoid of ego. A great quality in a political leader. Some in Lincoln's cabinet as well as his generals routinely treated him with disdain but Lincoln never retaliated or took offense. McClelland for example, couldn't hide his distatse for Lincoln who he thought was an intellectual lightweight.

I think we will see a very diverse cabinet. Obama is meeting with John McCain tomorrow. Apparently the talk is to see how they can work together in the Senate but I would not be surprised if he was offered a cabinet post.

Giving McCain Homeland Security would be a brilliant move and Obama is prone to brilliance.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Several frequent flyers on this forum compared Obama
and Lincoln. So much for the flawed 'experience' argument.
So much the better for the 'judgment' factor.

Its always a pleasure to be vindicated.

While I share your sentiment it's too early to be claiming vindication.

Is FOX now groveling and seeking credibility?

Like the GOP they love, FOX may be in the process of re-inventing itself.

If so, I imagine Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reily will be polishing up their resumes.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

His debate style may be bland, but his focus and
temperament impressed me. He struck me as being
very judicious in his approach.

Lets hope its a true indicator.

Amen to that.

 

[Aardvark154]

Like the GOP they love, FOX may be in the process of re-inventing itself.

It is only in North America that we consider it strange for there to be a political spectrum across the media.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

It is only in North America that we consider it strange for there to be a political spectrum across the media.

It's especially strange when one considers FOX's record to date.

 

[fuji]

It is only in North America that we consider it strange for there to be a political spectrum across the media.

I wonder though... people think of FOX as the far right TV station. However that might just be a historical accident: It might really be a blow-with-the-wind station. Maybe FOX is just pro-status-quo, and Obama is now the status quo.

Maybe FOX will turn out to be biased in favour of whatever the current administration is.

Or maybe not. Maybe they'll continue to be hard right blow hards.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Maybe FOX will turn out to be biased in favour of whatever the current administration is.

If so, there will be heads rolling at FOX.

I can't see Bill O'Reily towing the line

 

[capncrunch]

I wonder though... people think of FOX as the far right TV station. However that might just be a historical accident: It might really be a blow-with-the-wind station.

Maybe FOX will turn out to be biased in favour of whatever the current administration is.

Well, I wouldn't call Fox "far right," as that particular moniker is reserved for the likes of Le Pen in France, Nick Griffin in the UK, Pauline Hanson (retired) in Australia and Joerg Haider (real dead) in Austria.

I'd consider Fox as a shrill right-of-centre. But I don't see them changing their political bent anytime soon. They were all over Bill Clinton even before the chubby intern scandal and lionized Reagan as almost god-like.

 

[Aardvark154]

I wonder though... people think of FOX as the far right TV station.

But is this bad?

In most over parts of the world it is common for there to be spectrum of political beliefs in the media from left to right.

It is only on these shores that we appear to want to make one size fit all. Further, this is a fairly recent development, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the press in the U.S. and Canada did cover the spectrum of political opinion.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

But is this bad?

In most over parts of the world it is common for there to be spectrum of political beliefs in the media from left to right.

It is only on these shores that we appear to want to make one size fit all. Further, this is a fairly recent development, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the press in the U.S. and Canada did cover the spectrum of political opinion.

For editorials this is fine but when presenting actualy news events, it should be presented without bias or commentary.

This assumes a sincere desire for the press to establish a decorum of professionalism while ignoring ratings.

 

[WoodPeckr]

In most over parts of the world it is common for there to be spectrum of political beliefs in the media from left to right.

Agreed!
Guess that means you will be glad when this 'spectrum of political beliefs' is also extended radio where the righties gloat at having a stranglehold on the airwaves at present!...

 

[Aardvark154]

For editorials this is fine but when presenting actualy news events, it should be presented without bias or commentary.

This assumes a sincere desire for the press to establish a decorum of professionalism while ignoring ratings.

In most of the rest of the world you know the political viewpoint of the Newspaper or station and make your choices accordingly. Of course in many/most places those who do not make a profit go out of business.


For example even without them knowing anything about the British Media, I daresay most people can rapidly tell the viewpoints of The Guardian and The Times merely from reading the news articles for a few days.

 

[fuji]

For editorials this is fine but when presenting actualy news events, it should be presented without bias or commentary.

It's well known that even then there is considerable bias. What is a newsworthy story worth reporting on? Which aspects of the story are significant, and which are omitted in the name of conserving space? The media has a "summarizing" role whereby they do not tell you everything that has happened, nor do they give you all the details about the things they report on. They attempt to reduce the news to the bits that are interesting, but therein lies considerable bias.

Is the case of a welfare cheat newsworthy? How about the case of a deserving family who were denied benefits for months because of red tape?

For that matter there is bias even in the decision of how many pages to allocate to domestic/economic issues versus social issues versus foreign affairs. By allocating more pages more stories of that sort will appear and therein again lies bias--is the impression that most of the problems in the world are of a domestic, or a foreign nature? Of a social, or an economic one?

 

[onthebottom]

Obama = Lincoln .... does this mean the US is heading for another North vs South Civil war.

My feeling is that Obama will be a very unique POTUS.


bbk

You have to go back 158 years to find someone equally inexperienced. With any luck we'll get two good rookie POTUSs. Obama will certainly face some real challenges.

OTB

 

[WoodPeckr]

Obama will certainly face some real challenges.

OTB

'Challenges'????
Fixing up your poop boys MANY ClusterFu*ks!...is a more accurate term, bottie!..

 

[Aardvark154]

Woodrow Wilson had less.

And what a disaster he was! Helping to make a thoroughgoing mess of Central Europe (and to a certain extent Eastern Europe as well) that only almost a century latter finally seems to be resolving itself.

God preserve us from well meaning, overly educated, ‘do-gooders!’

 

[capncrunch]

And what a disaster he was! Helping to make a thoroughgoing mess of Central Europe (and to a certain extent Eastern Europe as well) that only almost a century latter finally seems to be resolving itself.

God preserve us from well meaning, overly educated, ‘do-gooders!’

One can say a lot about Wilson, but blaming him for the mess in central Europe after WW1 is hardly one of them. America was a johnny-come-lately bit player in WW1, and the League of Nations, while well-intentioned, quickly collapsed due to infighting, partisan nationalism and a thousand other reasons. Remember that the US was never part of the League due to Republican opposition, specifically Henry Cabot Lodge.

 

[Aardvark154]

One can say a lot about Wilson, but blaming him for the mess in central Europe after WW1 is hardly one of them. America was a johnny-come-lately bit player in WW1

Remember Wilson's "self-determination of people's" and points 9 and 10 of his 14 points? Further the U.S. had no reason to declare war on Austria-Hungary other than a failure to renounce Germany, which Wilson as well as the rest of the world knew impossible.

 

[WoodPeckr]

God preserve us from well meaning, overly educated, ‘do-gooders!’

Yeah Right!
Here's a perfect example of why the GOP prefers idiots like Dubya, Quayle, Sarah & Joe the Plumber as their leaders!....