Legendary White House correspondent, Helen Thomas, talks about her latest book and Obama’s stance on business.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Will someone please summarize the video for those of us without speakers?
who is that old bird?
That’s rich. A FOX hack asking why the country is so divided. Thanks for the laugh.
None of this video can be true.
I mean, it’s on FOX, isn’t it? And every Liberal knows FOX can’t tell the truth!
Not being a fan of the whitehouse stenography pool, my opinion of Helen Thomas was generally negative-that she didn’t amount to much, a fixture kept around for tradition==but she WOWed me here.
The caption really should read: “Helen Thomas shows the bias of Faux News and highlights the reality of the Republican Party.”
Well done Helen Thomas, would that all the stenographers would follow your lead.
Makes me think of how I formed my initial opinion: Helen Thoms, only covered by the Lame Stream Media when she can be made to look a gadfly.
Rravo Helen Thomas. May you live to see Obama finally perform.
Ah Yea–have another cup of Joe and watch it again. Fox was shown to be a treasonous group of f*cktards. Only two ways you could have missed it—one, lack of coffee, two===== ??.
What a sweet old dame. When did FOX hire a commentator with a British accent. And I wonder why.
Helen did a great job in “Clash of the Titans”. She was the one holding ‘the eye’.
#6, I don’t drink coffee. I guess that says it all…
Now the question is, would this ever happen (in reverse) on MSNBC?
Would Olbermann, Ed or Rachael EVER be caught dead saying to a stanch conservative, “It’s an honor having you here”?
#2 orizzle – That “old bird” is one of the last people left in D.C. who can still remember what politics is actually for. If you had spent any time watching her over the last 40 years, you’d know she is far from a steno. Listen to this video – sorry Ben, no summary can do it justice – and you’ll see a consummate professional honestly speaking with a pack of perfidious amateur hacks- monkeys in suits really.
Tragic.
Can someone please summarize the video for the audio-impaired?
This is Fox BUSINESS not Fox NEWS. I don’t (think) I get Fox Business so I don’t know anything about it but if you are going to slam the channel at least be right about which channel you are slamming…
Ah yea==I don’t recall them saying “honor” but all the bobble heads tend to thank their guests regardless of the obvious disdain that was just demonstrated. You aren’t engaged by that “theater” are you???
Speaking of Rachel Madow, I think she is currently putting on the best “researched” opinion show on the tube right now. Really bringing forth important issues not covered elsewhere. She is female and laughs and smiles. Maybe too fact based/elite for the Republitards to go after yet.
“Don’t quote me accurately–its a partisan attack that is not fair.”
Benji–go on Craigslist and get a pair of speakers for $10. The video is worth the effort I think==plus all the good music etc.
In short summary–the host of the show tried to criticize her for being an Obama supporter and anti business and her response was that Obama was not doing enough and that anti-business given what business was doing was the only appropriate response. She deftly parried every idiot biased question that was sent her way and made me proud she supported the “ultra left wing progressive part” of the Dem Party. She was criticized for bringing a political point of view to the white house stenography pool, and she retorted she was an opinion journalist.
Well Done Helen. RESPECT.
Crazy knows no age limit. Although Helen was on the downward spiral around Reagan’s 2nd term.
#16 v- Crazy? Crazy, Brett, is is living through the meltdown of an invisible and completely unregulated 600 TRILLION dollar derivatives market – and nearly the rest of the global economy with it – and pretending that doing nothing about it is wise.Crazy is demanding “compromise” from your opponent and then not accepting it when it’s offered. Crazy is creating one crisis after another and then blaming everybody else for the results.
Really crazy – as has been pointed out by many – is forgetting or ignoring the past and expecting all new results.(see “madness of crowds” e.g.)
She is way over-rated.
#15 Thank you bobbo. I flagged it for watching on my other computer.
Bobbo, you should watch the video till the very end. The closing moments are of genuine admiration. Something you will never see in MSNBC, the National Enquirer of cable news.
These two links speak to Maddow’s journalistic integrity.
http://tinyurl.com/qsyc8y
http://tinyurl.com/235unbm
Ah Yea–“genuine admiration?” Pulease. I don’t expect them to kick her but there is no admiration at all except for her television notoriety and character fame in the DC circuit==maybe something in the hoped for boost in their ratings. “Honored to meet you” is formalistic, not evaluative. But lets say everything was right on the surface: they admired NOTHING about her political views and spent the entire reportage trying to tear her position (her!) down. A sincere thanks at the end means nothing.
Thanks for the links. REgarding Limbaugh–using diputed material from 5 or 12 years ago is not good. Regarding the kill the gays, I don’t feel like reading it again to parse what was said and what the defense was. Too many on such issues say whatever is appropriate to the audience they are in front of and then defend an attack from one by quoting statements from another==ie, frauds.
Put I didn’t say or imply she was perfect. How silly of you to point out lack of perfection as any response at all to being the best.
I do respect your often used reference to links. You just need a better sense of balance.
I need more coffee…
Ah_Yea said,
Bobbo, you should watch the video till the very end. The closing moments are of genuine admiration. Something you will never see in MSNBC, the National Enquirer of cable news.
That may be true but again this clip is from Fox BUSINESS not Fox NEWS so comparing it to MSNBC isn’t really accurate. Fox Business goes against CNBC not MSNBC.
Is Obama hard on the business sector? I am not sure but it might be helpful to look at another side of the issue.
Why did certain businesses take federal money(bail outs) if they didn’t want the federal government up in their business?
bac==I’ll bite, why?
She’s one tough old gal. You gotta love that.
Bobbo, I might have been in a rhetorical mood when I wrote that question. I have no clue as to why a business would feel that the government was being meddling after the business took federal bail out money.
Conservatives hysterically claim that EVERY Democrat leader is the most liberal politician to ever walk the face of the earth.
They said this about Clinton and Gore and Kerry and… blah blah blah. But all these guys are moderates.
When are Americans going to wake up to the fact that conservatives have abysmal political judgment?
The healthcare bill is the biggest handout the government has EVER given business. Requiring ever American to buy insurance from these curropt organizations is the real crime.
American business needs to get the fuck out of American politics.
#27–bac==its not subtle that you changed the question, rhetorical or not.
My answer to your question is that certain banks were coerced into taking Fed Money so that there would be no taint on banks that took money if other banks weren’t. Such Banks were then as always acting in their own perceived self interest==just like always. Thats why the not so needy banks have given the money back quickly to stop the government medling although as far as I know the only real medling was the “threat” to control CEO pay. More constant corruption.
Your actual question and your rhetorical musings are vacuous. You can choose not to post when you have nothing to say.
The most salient point she made was that Obama was not liberal enough.
That is outright saying he is a centrist with only slight movement to the left. Which confounds either side of the radical swings of the pendulum.
I find that ultra rights will jump to anti-business or anti-family or anti-religion when someone is pro-ethics or pro-compassion or pro-tolerance.
Just as far lefts will jump to slamming anything conservative when dealing with security and profitability.
There has to be balance or else everything runs amok.
Cursor_