HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama Meets With Rachel M...

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:11 PM

Obama Meets With Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, 'Influential Progressives'


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/obama-rachel-maddow-al-sharpton_n_2240011.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009


Obama Meets With Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, 'Influential Progressives'

Posted: 12/04/2012 5:44 pm EST Updated: 12/04/2012 6:03 pm EST


WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama met with Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton and other "influential progressives" on Tuesday as part of his campaign to sell the public on the need to extend the Bush middle-class tax cuts.

White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest confirmed the meeting took place. It wasn't listed on Obama's schedule.

"This afternoon at the White House, the President met with influential progressives to talk about the importance of preventing a tax increase on middle class families, strengthening our economy and adopting a balanced approach to deficit reduction," Earnest said in a statement Tuesday.

Earnest wouldn't give details on who was in the meeting or how long it lasted, but HuffPost spotted several attendees on their way in just after 3 p.m., including MSNBC's Maddow, Sharpton and Lawrence O'Donnell. Ed Schultz, also from MSNBC, tweeted a photo just outside of the West Wing. Arianna Huffington, president and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post Media Group, was also in the meeting.

Obama has held similar gatherings in the past. He organized a meeting with liberal columnists in January 2009, had an off-the-record chat with progressive media types in October 2009 and held a lunch with progressive pundits in June 2010 to discuss the Gulf oil spill, among other topics.

Ironically, the president said in a Bloomberg TV interview earlier Tuesday that he doesn't pay much attention to what people say on cable news. During the interview, he was asked about Republican attacks on U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice -- many of which have been on cable news programs -- and whether he feels boxed into a corner about potentially nominating her as secretary of state.

"You know, I don't really spend a lot of time on, you know, what folks say on cable news programs," Obama replied.

31 replies, 4039 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 31 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama Meets With Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, 'Influential Progressives' (Original post)
babylonsister Dec 2012 OP
think Dec 2012 #1
babylonsister Dec 2012 #3
lonestarnot Dec 2012 #8
roguevalley Dec 2012 #16
Raine Dec 2012 #2
dae Dec 2012 #4
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #5
underthematrix Dec 2012 #6
Bohunk68 Dec 2012 #7
babylonsister Dec 2012 #9
Cha Dec 2012 #12
xtraxritical Dec 2012 #19
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #25
ShadesOfBlue Dec 2012 #13
Cha Dec 2012 #10
mucifer Dec 2012 #11
ShadesOfBlue Dec 2012 #14
mucifer Dec 2012 #15
Lucinda Dec 2012 #26
Barack_America Dec 2012 #17
texshelters Dec 2012 #18
Tutonic Dec 2012 #20
bvar22 Dec 2012 #21
Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #23
bvar22 Dec 2012 #24
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #27
Matariki Dec 2012 #28
Bandit Dec 2012 #29
bvar22 Dec 2012 #31
EmeraldCityGrl Dec 2012 #22
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 #30

Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:24 PM

1. Can't wait to watch Rachel tonight!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:52 PM

3. Ed Schultz might bring it up also. Or not. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:49 PM

8. Still waiting for the shit to show! Fast Eddie still on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:12 PM

16. finally. we are networking from the top to the topper. :D

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:29 PM

2. WOW! Good for Obama and hurray for the ones who got to meet with him. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:24 PM

4. Wish he would listen to Paul Krugman. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:28 PM

5. maddow & sharpton. oh my. well, there's the conscience of progressives indeed.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:33 PM

6. I love the President

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:46 PM

7. He met with them.

Yup. OK. Am I supposed to jump up and down over that? Let's wait and see if anything results from this first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:56 PM

9. Who the hell asked you to jump up and down?

A story was posted; deal with it. Don't respond if it annoys you. And I don't know that you'll see a 'result'. Seems to me he wanted to explain his position so it could be shared, even though it already is.
Don't get your knickers in a wad, 'k?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:03 PM

12. Exactly. PBO is trying to cover all the bases of ways there can be NO tax increase

on the Middle Class. Like the article said..he's reached out before.

"This afternoon at the White House, the President met with influential progressives to talk about the importance of preventing a tax increase on middle class families, strengthening our economy and adopting a balanced approach to deficit reduction," Earnest said in a statement Tuesday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:06 PM

19. Apparently when you're "annoyed" it's alright to respond in a mosty negative way.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:08 PM

25. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:21 PM

13. You know....

no results are expected to come out of this. That's not what these get-togethers are all about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:57 PM

10. The ironic part in the article is perfectly clear to me..

When PBO says he doesn't pay much attention to what goes on in cable news he obviously means the brainwashed Propaganda faction.

He really doesn't have time for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:01 PM

11. I remember in '08 Rachel Maddow was his first interview after the inauguration

and her TV show was brand new.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mucifer (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:24 PM

14. Ummm..

Rachel would disagree. She even pointed it out on her on show that his first interview was with Al-Jazeera.

Now he did meet privately with rachel and other progressives one night around that time. He also had a private sit-down with a group of conservative journalists too (for all the good that did).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ShadesOfBlue (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:34 PM

15. I guess my memory failed me. oops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ShadesOfBlue (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:11 PM

26. No, it was Al Arabiya, not Al Jazerra.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:19 PM

17. Hell of a lot of brain power in that room. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:24 PM

18. Why now, why did he ignore

progressives before? Let's hope it's not too late. PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:51 PM

20. Is Arianna progressive now?????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:05 PM

21. This makes me VERY nervous.

I'm not in favor of ANY President having "private" meetings with influential members of the Media.
I expect The Media to remain independent, and in a position to observe, report, and editorialize
without the appearance or suspicion of collusion or cooperation.

By meeting with a President in "private", these Media Celebrities have tainted their credentials,
and discounted their own editorial opinions.
Their duties as a Journalist DEMAND that they maintain an independent posture, even an adversarial posture, with those In Power.
There was a time, not so long ago, when this coziness with the Media would have been frowned upon by all.

MESSAGE DISCIPLINE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-scahill/rahm-emanuels-think-tanke_b_185203.html



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:40 PM

23. Yes, they should have shunned him and cherry-picked things to attack like Cenk at Current...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:02 PM

24. You force me to assume that you know nothing...

...about the ethics of Journalism,
or the responsibilities of the Journalist in a democracy.

I can understand,
because the people who call themselves Journalists today
seem to have forgotten too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:15 PM

27. You mean now Rachel and others are now really true Progressives...who knew?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:30 PM

28. I had the same reaction

along the opposite reaction of it making me happy. It's nice to have watched Rachael Maddow's career grow to the point where she's invited to the White House and it's great to have a President that cares enough what progressive pundits might say.

BUT - I also was imagining what I'd think if a Republican President had a private meeting with Fox pundits and I, along with nearly everyone on DU, would be very upset. Which makes me keenly aware that what you're saying is the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:35 PM

29. Every single one of the journalist mentioned are upfront about being Liberals..

They do not pretend to be neutral or non biased. They are Liberals and they report in a Liberal manner.. Doesn't detract from the truth being broadcast....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #29)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 03:38 PM

31. It is wonderful that we have Liberal Spokespersons in the Media,

...but once a "bias" is admitted or openly displayed, they lose their credentials as a "Journalist".
There is a BIG difference between a Media Celebrity and a "Journalist".
We already have too many Media Celebrities.
Rachel has the courage and aptitude of a 1st Rate "Journalist",
and I hate to see that corrupted.

Do you understand the nature of my uneasiness?
Are you aware of the obligations and responsibilities of a "Journalist" in a democracy?

In a democracy, our Journalists are supposed to be the "Watch Dogs".
They are supposed to be the perpetual opponent of those In Power (Democrat/Republican/Independent/whatever.)
When the "watch dogs" are meeting in private and accepting favors (access & fame) from those they are "supposed" to be "watching" and holding accountable, then we have a problem.

It doesn't matter WHO is in power.

I have already written a letter to Rachel expressing my disappointment, and will mail it as soon as I can verify this report.
The ethical and proper response as a "Journalist" would be to:

*politely decline the invitation to a "private" meeting,

*emphasize that the proper venue for ANY contact is a public Press Conference, a public Press Release, or a Media Interview,

*make public the invitation to meet "in private",

*make public her response declining the invitation and the reasons WHY,

and to publicly release the names and organizations of those who accepted.


I love Rachel,
but despise what our Media has become,
and now question her willingness to hold the Obama administration accountable when the need arises
(and it will, Democrat or Not).

Our "Journalists" should protect their membership in the 4th Estate,
and NOT play for either team,
OR do things that give them the appearance of playing for either team.
Our democracy depends on that.

Reality has a natural and honest Liberal bias.

Don't pay any attention to me.
I am old, and cursed with a memory.


















Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:34 PM

22. This is fantastic and thanks for posting.

What I like about this is Obama always being careful not to allow
himself to be absorbed by the WA. bubble. Michelle has alot to do
with that as well. She is always right out there with citizens working
on issues that impact peoples day to day lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:58 PM

30. Kind of strange that they kind of kept quiet about their meeting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread