USA Today's Susan Page: Obama Team 'Most Dangerous to the Press' In U.S. History

[rangerrebew]

USA Today's Susan Page: Obama Team 'Most Dangerous to the Press' In U.S. History

By Melissa Mullins | October 31, 2014 | 10:21 PM EDT
 
 
Add USA Today Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page to the growing list of media personnel complaining the Obama administration isn’t living up to its much hyped (and much failed) policy of being the most open and transparent (and ethical) administration in history.

During the White House Correspondents’ Association seminar last week, Page made the following comments:

“My big fear is that this administration has been more restrictive and more challenging to the press, more dangerous to the press, really, than any administration in American history in terms of legal investigations and so on. And I think access to the White House has just gotten worse and worse.”



Only now, after six years into his presidency, a select few in the MSM have taken issue with the (nontransparent) transparent Obama administration.  It was Obama, after-all, who made transparency a key issue on the “Hope and Change” campaign trail to Washington:


"More and more, the real business of our democracy isn't done in town halls or public meetings or even in the open halls of Congress…Decisions are made in closed-door meetings, or with the silent stroke of the President's pen, or because some lobbyist got some Congressman to slip his pet project into a bill during the dead of night. We have to take the blinders off the White House. The more people know about what's going on in Washington, and how their tax dollars are being spent, and who's raising money for who, the less likely it is that major decisions will be hijacked by lobbyists and special interests.”

 

The Obama administration is no stranger to denying media access to even the most basic meetings and photo ops.  Take, for example, last week when Obama met with Nina Pham, the nurse who contracted Ebola and just finished treatment at the National Institute of Health.  Reporters and TV cameras had the door shut on them, but the door was wide open for photographers to capture this photo op.  As Erik Wemple of the Washington Post reported:

“At a briefing with White House press secretary Josh Earnest, Karl asked why. Earnest responded that “many of you did have the opportunity to see [Pham] deliver remarks at the NIH upon her departure from the hospital.”

Karl: “That’s not answering the question. Why was this decision made?”

Earnest: “Because reporters did have the opportunity to see her speak already.”

Also, the press secretary said that neither President Obama nor Pham planned on making any comments at the event. Taken together, those explanations amount to a lump of nothing.

It's so tight-lipped now that Bloomberg White House correspondent Margaret Talev noted how the White House stopped giving details on the fine wines served at state dinners.

What used to be a “love-love” relationship between the media and Obama has is becoming more of a “love-hate” relationship, only we the public are getting mere glimpses of this spat.  In what is probably the most colorful comparison of the relationship, Human Events writes:


Media’s still trapped in her abusive “Fifty Shades of Grey” relationship with Obama, heaving a heavy sigh and donning a blindfold whenever he demands it of her.  She’s not going to make a big public spectacle about how he treats her.  The White House can still plant, and scuttle, stories with relative ease.

 


Source URL: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/melissa-mullins/2014/10/31/usa-todays-susan-page-obama-team-most-dangerous-press-us-history

[MACVSOG68]

Bad as this White House is, I think it will be difficult to beat John Adams' Sedition Act, which provided jail time for publishing false, scandalous or malicious writing against the government or it's officials*.


*Wiki: John Adams.

[musiclady]

Dictators control the image, and that is exactly what Obama is doing.

Only official WH photos release, closed door meetings, shutting out the press.

Welcome to the third world, America.  You got what you voted for..... 

[Bigun]

Bad as this White House is, I think it will be difficult to beat John Adams' Sedition Act, which provided jail time for publishing false, scandalous or malicious writing against the government or it's officials*.


*Wiki: John Adams.

We Agree! (Let's not get to comfortable. It' not likely to happen often!)

[MACVSOG68]

We Agree! (Let's not get to comfortable. It' not likely to happen often!)

Indeed! 

[DCPatriot]

Bad as this White House is, I think it will be difficult to beat John Adams' Sedition Act, which provided jail time for publishing false, scandalous or malicious writing against the government or it's officials*.


*Wiki: John Adams.

Well....let's apply that thinking to today.

If any administration would copy John Adams' deed TODAY, it wold be a Republican Administration, who battles an unfriendly media and 'press'.

Obama OTOH, enjoys a friendly press which covers for his outrage...by ignoring it.

Ms. Page implies that Obama has the media/press cowering in fear of reprisal for NOT going after the truth.

Hope that's not too muddled for a Saturday morning before I've had my 1st cup of coffee.  LOL!

[rangerrebew]

Ms. Page implies that Obama has the media/press cowering in fear of reprisal for NOT going after the truth.
 

There have already been reprisals, not only against the press, for not agreeing with Obama.  More than that, I think they are afraid of being labeled "racist" for disagreeing with him.

[DCPatriot]

There have already been reprisals, not only against the press, for not agreeing with Obama.  More than that, I think they are afraid of being labeled "racist" for disagreeing with him.

It's fear of losing their career and status...unless they are active conspirators.

One would think that once the tipping point is reached, they'd savage him...but it always seems to be when a Republican occupies the White House, does the press attack.

[musiclady]

Well....that's apply that thinking to today.

If any administration would copy John Adams' deed TODAY, it wold be a Republican Administration, who battles an unfriendly media and 'press'.

Obama OTOH, enjoys a friendly press which covers for his outrage...by ignoring it.

Ms. Page implies that Obama has the media/press cowering in fear of reprisal for NOT going after the truth.

Hope that's not too muddled for a Saturday morning before I've had my 1st cup of coffee.  LOL!

You're making a good point, DC, coffee fix or not.  ^-^

Adams, though behaving badly, was dealing with a hostile press, and sought to silence them.

Obama is dealing with a worshiping media, and STILL seeks to silence them.

During those earlier years, the media was divided, and each party had a supportive media.  Adams was seeking to silence (illegally) his critics.  Obama is seeking to shut out those who adoringly elected and built him up, covered up his many illegal actions, and continued to worship him.

They are NOT his enemies.

They are scorned lovers.

VERY different from Adams' situation.

[MACVSOG68]

There have already been reprisals, not only against the press, for not agreeing with Obama.  More than that, I think they are afraid of being labeled "racist" for disagreeing with him.

Yeah, ask James Rosen about a press-hostile administration.  Through the Justice Department as well as the FCC, this administration is pursuing its enemies with gusto.  Sure a lot of the press has given him a pass, but it wasn't the friendly press that Adams was going after either.  Nixon and Wilson also went after the press, but with this administration a lot of the press is ignoring the attacks.  And I agree, part of that attack is the labeling process as well as various forms of legal action.

[alicewonders]

Yeah, ask James Rosen about a press-hostile administration.  Through the Justice Department as well as the FCC, this administration is pursuing its enemies with gusto.  Sure a lot of the press has given him a pass, but it wasn't the friendly press that Adams was going after either.  Nixon and Wilson also went after the press, but with this administration a lot of the press is ignoring the attacks.  And I agree, part of that attack is the labeling process as well as various forms of legal action.

And Sharon Attkison (sp?)  from CBS found out what it's like to defy the administration.  Lots of examples of that kind of thing, they're just a bunch of tyrants, thugs, barbarians and charlatans. 

[musiclady]

And Sharon Attkison (sp?)  from CBS found out what it's like to defy the administration.  Lots of examples of that kind of thing, they're just a bunch of tyrants, thugs, barbarians and charlatans.

I think with her book release, Sharyl Attkisson is going to be subject to even harsher reprisals.

[musiclady]

Yeah, ask James Rosen about a press-hostile administration.  Through the Justice Department as well as the FCC, this administration is pursuing its enemies with gusto.  Sure a lot of the press has given him a pass, but it wasn't the friendly press that Adams was going after either.  Nixon and Wilson also went after the press, but with this administration a lot of the press is ignoring the attacks.  And I agree, part of that attack is the labeling process as well as various forms of legal action.

Note also that Eric Holder's recent admission of 'regret' was only in the words he had to use (not his fault), but not in the act of abusing the rights of James Rosen.

This administration makes Nixon's look like a bunch of boy scouts.

(btw, I believe Adams regretted his actions after the fact.  Obama never will.  He'll only regret he didn't do more).

[MACVSOG68]

Note also that Eric Holder's recent admission of 'regret' was only in the words he had to use (not his fault), but not in the act of abusing the rights of James Rosen.

This administration makes Nixon's look like a bunch of boy scouts.

(btw, I believe Adams regretted his actions after the fact.  Obama never will.  He'll only regret he didn't do more).

Adams was similar to Nixon in his obsession with the dangers to his administration, and found enemies everywhere, both external and internal.  He was actually not too far off with some of it, as it started with his own VP.  Funny how those two political enemies grew to become lifelong friends. 

Obama?  As the consummate narcissist, he could never regret anything other than allowing his political enemies to survive.  He has no feelings about anything, and politics is his only god.

[musiclady]

Adams was similar to Nixon in his obsession with the dangers to his administration, and found enemies everywhere, both external and internal.  He was actually not too far off with some of it, as it started with his own VP.  Funny how those two political enemies grew to become lifelong friends. 

Obama?  As the consummate narcissist, he could never regret anything other than allowing his political enemies to survive.  He has no feelings about anything, and politics is his only god.

I find Adams a fascinating historical figure.  I think, like Nixon, he was insecure, leading to a kind of paranoia.  Although, in Adams' case, and the vitriol in the political process of the early Republic, in might have been more justified.  ^-^

And yes, the relationship that developed between Adams and Jefferson was fascinating, and their letters to each other nearly breath-taking, considering the animus between them when they were younger men.

[MACVSOG68]

I find Adams a fascinating historical figure.  I think, like Nixon, he was insecure, leading to a kind of paranoia.  Although, in Adams' case, and the vitriol in the political process of the early Republic, in might have been more justified.  ^-^

And yes, the relationship that developed between Adams and Jefferson was fascinating, and their letters to each other nearly breath-taking, considering the animus between them when they were younger men.

It would have been interesting in these days if the president and vice-president were chosen as then.  Picture Bush and Gore or Reagan and Mondale, lol.

[musiclady]

It would have been interesting in these days if the president and vice-president were chosen as then.  Picture Bush and Gore or Reagan and Mondale, lol.

Actually, I think of that now and again, and chuckle at the prospect.

Although, an Obama-McCain team might have been a tad better on national security than with Biden, eh?   ^-^

[Rivergirl]

Dear Susan,

IT'S THE CONSTITUTION, STUPID.

[MACVSOG68]

Actually, I think of that now and again, and chuckle at the prospect.

Although, an Obama-McCain team might have been a tad better on national security than with Biden, eh?   ^-^

Their private meetings would have made a fly on the wall look for an exit.

[Cyber Liberty]

There is a lot of interesting historical commentary on this thread, in addition to some really good observations on the press.  In my continuing effort to deepen the thought, I bring this:

Dear Susan Page, endorser of Obama through two Presidential elections,

[240B]

This conversation would not be complete without a mention of the recent FEC intrusions.
 
Now that Obama is fairly confident that he has the press cheerleading for him and the rest in strait jackets, he has turned his eye to public discourse at large. That is to say, not only do they want to control the press, they want to contol all speech by anyone concerning politics and especially Democrats and Obama.
 
If they had their way, this very website would be under the control of the FEC. So, if some poster said, "I like Rand Paul.", that would be considered 'political speech' and therefore would be under the jurisdiction of the government and the FEC.
 
I don't know what the ramifications would be. I guess the site may have to pay some 'fine' or something, or the site would be required to have a counter post with someone saying, "I like Hillary." to make it 'fair'.
 
The bottom line is, the current government, like China and North Korea, wants to control not only just the press, they want to control all political speech and all thought concerning the government no matter who says it.
 
Continuing down this road Obama is paving, it will not be long before children and neighbors are required to 'report' anyone who speaks up against the government or against Obama. We are half way there already.

[alicewonders]

There is a lot of interesting historical commentary on this thread, in addition to some really good observations on the press.  In my continuing effort to deepen the thought, I bring this:

Dear Susan Page, endorser of Obama through two Presidential elections,

 

[DCPatriot]

LOL! 

What I was trying to express this morning is that I find it weird that a USA TODAY (a liberal slanted source) news reporter would 'complain' about a dangerous threat to the press...six years into the administration.

Is it because the cracks in the wall around it are spreading?  And that some reporters don't want to be scrutinized as willing participants, but rather cowed media people...the result of a real or perceived fear of reprisal?

IOW...they are starting to see others essentially shouting "I AM SPARTACUS!"....showing some spine and therefore are coming out.   

[Cyber Liberty]

LOL! 

What I was trying to express this morning is that I find it weird that a USA TODAY (a liberal slanted source) news reporter would 'complain' about a dangerous threat to the press...six years into the administration.

Is it because the cracks in the wall around it are spreading?  And that some reporters don't want to be scrutinized as willing participants, but rather cowed media people...the result of a real or perceived fear of reprisal?

IOW...they are starting to see others essentially shouting "I AM SPARTACUS!"....showing some spine and therefore are coming out.   

After Tuesday they'll have no reason to cover Obama's butt, and every reason to start running to the next available Dem.  Pointless if they don't make a stop like this USA piece to pick up some street cred.

[alicewonders]

That's an astute observation DC.  Perhaps they're covering their asses?