Zero Issues Amnesty Decree ……. Networks Hide From Lowinfo Citizens


Well, Townhall has this, but, they also kinda got it wrong …..

Wow: Four Networks to Pass on Obama’s Historic Amnesty Address

That is to say, they won’t cover it live. The Hill reports:

Three major networks will not air President Obama’s prime-time address Thursday outlining his executive actions on immigration.

Officials with ABC, CBS and Fox confirmed to The Hill that Obama’s 8 p.m. speech from the White House will not be carried on their networks. CNN reported that NBC would not be carrying the address either. Cable news networks are expected to carry the address, as is the Spanish-language networks Univision and Telemundo.

Why? In part because the White House did not give them advanced notice, and in part because the major news networks are in the business of making money:

A source at one of the major networks told The Hill that the White House did not officially request prime-time coverage on the networks Thursday, a big night for ratings given popular shows on several networks, including ABC’s “Shondaland” schedule of shows created by producer Shonda Rhimes.

As a business decision, this seems like a no-brainer. Ratings will be much higher carrying “popular shows” than another groan-inducing and “prime time” presidential address. And furthermore, since at least two Spanish-language networks will pick up President Obama’s remarks, this isn’t a total disaster.

“Given their allies in all the right places,” Hot Air’s Noah Rothman recently observed, “it’s hard to imagine that the White House is exactly inconsolable over their snub by the broadcast networks.”

Indeed. If viewers who regularly watch these networks tune in (as they almost certainly will), the news of the president’s executive amnesty will reach its intended audience. Of course, this isn’t an ideal situation, but nor is it a terrible one, either.

The fact is, the networks aren’t carrying it because they’re pro-amnesty.  Yes, even Fox is pro-amnesty.  Just ask Rupert Murdoch

It’s being televised live, in Spanish, but, not to the English speaking part of the nation. 

Nor is it a business decision.  This action holds the interest of millions upon millions of Americans.  The decision not to televise it live is a political decision, not a business decision.  It’s very difficult to believe the networks, all of whom are hemorrhaging money, (except Fox) would suddenly decide to lay their politics aside in order to make some money.  Does anyone honestly believe NBC would do so?  Get real.    

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Zero Issues Amnesty Decree ……. Networks Hide From Lowinfo Citizens

  1. Latitude says:

    You know something….I will never understand liberals

    • DirkH says:

      Think of them as big angry babies with baseball bats and knifes.

      • DirkH says:

        On Saturday in Hannover, after a 3000 strong HoGeSA (Hooligans against Salafists) Demo, 30 to 40 black clad leftists hunted down 4 HoGeSa participants who were walking back to their car and beat and stabbed them. No dead but two critically injured. That incident was also the manhunt video I posted.

        After days the far-left-of-MSNBC Hamburg state broadcaster NDR has now decided to throw the mob under the bus, implicating the no true Scotsman fallacy, calling them “violent mob” instead of “righteous antifascists” or something.

        You know how it works, if one member of a right wing demo throws a firecracker all people at the demo are called Nazis bent on a coup d’etat; if 40 leftists try to kill 4 people, they’re some “violent mob”.

        Well I’m assuming they’re leftists – I don’t know how many of them were undercover cops.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Dirk! “Well I’m assuming they’re leftists – I don’t know how many of them were undercover cops.”

          In a younger and more innocent version of myself, I would not have believed how common it is for The Powers That Be to initiate false-flag attacks. Reading way too many history books fixed that for me…

          Given time, all major power structures, no matter how pure their motives when first created, devolve into parasitic bureaucracies which feed off the people who are supposedly being protected. Naturally, people sense this, and become angry at the parasites — or at least they will, unless their anger is more strongly focused on some outside third party. Hence the ongoing need for the Powers That Be to create ever newer enemies for us to turn our “two minute hate” against. No bureaucracy gets bigger funding for saying “we have solved the alcohol-drug-global-warming-terrorist-illegal-alien-rape-culture-lebensraum-poverty problem once and for all!”

          No Obama says that the problem of illegal aliens is so out of control that he must use extraordinary Presidential powers to bandage things together. “The immigration system is broken!” he says.

          No, of course the immigration system is not broken. The laws are in place, the funding is allocated — the only thing that is broken is that the President himself (and his Republican and Democrat predecessors as well) have knowingly and conscientiously refused to do their executive duty and enforce the laws. Instead they have actively prevented solutions and made sure that the laws were continuously violated. How is this any different than having undercover cops start a riot? Why have the last four Presidents not been impeached for refusing to secure the US borders?

          I think we all have our ideas why…

          I predict that before this is over, we will see not five million illegal aliens “legitimized”, but something much more like twenty million. Any bets?

  2. Are they hiding from the low-info crowd, or are they hiding from those who would take offense at the willingness to provide ruffles and flourishes for the issuance of a dictatorial decree?


  3. omanuel says:

    The network news is not interested in telling the public that Obama and his friends are the modern-day version of the Wizard of Oz:

    The 2009 Climategate emails and five years of dishonest official responses helped me decipher and complete a research assignment received in 1960 from a nuclear geo-chemist who secretly took possession of Japan’s atomic bomb plans [1] during unreported CHAOS & FEAR of nuclear annihilation in AUG – SEPT 1945 [2].

    “Discover reality from inside a social matrix controlled by FEAR of reality.”

    Today a British politician, Roger Helmer, found another piece of the puzzle:

    Now I am convinced that the survival of humanity depends on our success in escaping the fear-based matrix of reality that frightened world leaders created sixty-nine years (2014 – 1945 = 69 yrs) ago to save the world from nuclear annihilation! [2]

    Nations were united in OCT 1945 to hide this reality [3] from the public from the public.

    1. BBC News, “Atomic plans returned to Japan,” News Front Page, World Edition (3 Aug 2002)

    2. “Aston’s Promise & Warning (1922); CHAOS and FEAR (Aug-Sept 1945)”.

    3. “Solar energy,” Advances in Astronomy (submitted 1 Sept 2014)

  4. Latitude says:

    unintended consequences…..

    If all of these illegals are made legal…won’t they have to be paid minimum wage from now on?

    …and won’t most of them be out of a job tomorrow?

    • cdquarles says:

      Well, they will have to be paid at least minimum wage. I doubt, though, that most of them will be out of a job tomorrow. I could be wrong.

      • squid2112 says:

        Hmm, as an employer I think I would be saying to myself “well, I have to pay min. wage for (A) A Mexican that can’t speak English, or (B) An American that CAN Speak English … What do you suppose I am going to do?

        Also, since there is less of a monetary difference now, I would suspect that there may be some employers that will indeed become a bit more patriotic and hire actual citizens over these newly created “Illegal workers”, after all, the people affected by our Emperor in Chief, will in fact still NOT be citizens.

        I think this could very well backfire on Obola big time… we shall see…

        • cdquarles says:

          Devil’s advocate :). What about the Mexican who can speak English and the ‘American’ who can’t?

          I do agree with you that this could (should!) backfire on Zero; but so should a heck of a lot of other things that didn’t, so far.

        • The real question is for those who illegally employ foreigners. They already employ illegal workers, and in some cases they pay much more than minimum. But no matter how much they pay, they pay less than they would if they were to confine themselves to the lawful job seekers. (That’s why they go with illegal workers! Not because of lack of supply, but lack of supply at the price they would like to pay! So it’s not a question of survival or need on their part, but they feel, as do the illegal folks and the O-bots, that ‘it’s no-one else’s _______business!’)

          So now we have a new vast group of folks who are immune from deportation, but still don’t have work visas. Are they now somehow going to want more money, because of this? I suppose if they join a union, that’s possible. And many of them probably will. But in places where unions are not well entrenched and/or of limited power, it shouldn’t make any difference in the short term.

          Where it does make a difference is Obama now gets to demonstrate that Congress lacks the necessary votes to undo what he’s done. And once that’s demonstrated, he will strut around and crow that this proves what he’s been saying about the TEA party and other conservatives being a paper tiger. This is about emboldening and strengthening his base, and openly enlisting the help of Republican “moderates” to do so. Ultimately, this is a step in the direction of open borders, but it also helps cement Republican support for open borders …so it’s also another step in the creation of a one-party Leninist state.

          Leninists have always believed that capitalist countries should be forced wherever possible to open their borders, while the faithful Leninist countries should have strict controls … because that is the strategy by which Leninism diminishes the power of its enemies, and strengthens its own followers.


        • DirkH says:

          Every time I hear someone blame Leninism I think of the fact that Trotzki and Lenin were moved to St Petersburg and financed by the same guys that brought you the Federal reserve.

        • DirkH says:

          And remember, when JP MOrgan died he had only 80 million USD. He was also only working for someone.

        • We’ve discussed this before, they are and were Leninists, I told you this, and you had no response to it. You fell silent.

          You have your belief that they aren’t and weren’t, but haven’t managed to articulate a rational reason for it. This belief flies in the face of all of the evidence, even the facts you just cited!

          I predict you will change the subject again in 3, 2, 1….

        • DirkH says:

          Facts are facts whether you like them or not. You can’t refute a word I say, so why should I care. Go around and tell everyone of the Leninist boogeyman. Sure he was a mass murderer, what’s new. I guess he read his Edward Bernays, regarding his ideology.

        • DirkH says:

          So let’s call it Leninism. Why not. So when will you Americans stop your Leninism, that you are living under at least since Woodrow Wilson created the Fed.

        • What else did he implement, besides mass murder?

        • 45 minutes have passed. Did something come up, or do you not like the question?

        • DirkH says:

          Hi Richard. I was busy. Oh, you want a short rundown of Lenin’s life and times? Inflicted a civil war on Russia, later resorted to the NEP, a partial reversal to capitalism to avoid a wholesale collapse, then died.

        • DirkH says:

          Between civil war and NEP, he collectivized the farms and had the Kulaks killed.

        • I said besides mass murder. Nonetheless, interesting to see your usual “blind spot” on display. I suppose that the mentioning of:

          Fiat currency
          Nationalizing manufacturing
          Nationalizing housing
          Pioneering nationalized health care
          Deliberately and drastically reducing consumption of energy and other resources
          Acting to destroy the small business community
          Nationalizing the Russian Orthodox church so he could appoint the church Patriarch
          Banning other forms of Christian worship
          Mandating formal worship of the state and its leaders
          Making militant atheism the state religion
          Moving to eliminate opposing political parties and movements

          were all just “oversights”. Just a coincidence that these things, all but one of which (the one about the Russian Orthodox church) Obama has done, escaped your attention?

        • (In the case of fiat currency, participated in / exacerbated)

        • DirkH says:

          Oh come on, it’s all standard Plato Republic Statism. Most of it fits FDR as well. Maybe look into Cecil Rhodes and the roundtable groups founded by Milner after Rhodes’ death and the role of Colonel House to track down the sources of this; and, who funded Rhodes, and who his teacher was. Putin? Stalin? I forget. Ruskin. I know it was one of these -in guys.

        • DirkH says:

          “Just a coincidence that these things, all but one of which (the one about the Russian Orthodox church) Obama has done, escaped your attention?”

          And, is that some kind of weird paranoid implication that that crazy German might eventually be defending Obama? “There is no such thing as coincidences” (Robert De Niro)

          On the deepest level I find it simply depressing that a pathological liar like Obama gets to become president – no matter whether I want the current US empire to perish or not. As to whether I want it to perish – there’s nothing too good about it anyway, so why not.

        • So it seems you think that American leaders cannot be Leninists simply because Lenin himself was not a Leninist.

          Well, if one insists that the Soviet Union did not accept and promote something called “Leninism” then I don’t see how there’s a basis to agree on anything. There is something called reality.

          “Crazy” is a term I don’t like to apply to people because it is ill-defined. I’m not judging your state of mind. In many ways you seem rational. I would merely say that you have a blind spot about Communism for some reason. I don’t know why, and it doesn’t really matter. It just is what it is.

          As for defeating American imperialism, I’d remind you that many Americans are not exactly enthusiastic about it either. But the real question is why America is being forced down, by whom, and what power will replace it. You seem to love steering the conversation toward the idea of America deserving to have its wings clipped, but you systematically avoid those other questions. And they are the more important ones, for everyone.


        • DirkH says:

          Richard T. Fowler says:
          November 21, 2014 at 7:28 pm
          ““Crazy” is a term I don’t like to apply to people because it is ill-defined. I’m not judging your state of mind. In many ways you seem rational.”

          Did it ever occur to you that you might misunderstand other people. You were talking about Leninism. Lenin was just an ordinary thug given the opprtunity to implement Marxism. Given the opportunity by his backers, that is.

          Now maybe Marxism itself was created as a tool too; or maybe Marx (and Engels) were independent nutters, whose ideology was found and recognized as useful for the control of Russia later. Difficult to say. There’s a thing called the Society Of Honorable Men, of which some say it was a front for the backers.

          I’m less interested in the thugs like Lenin and Trotzki, and more interested in the backers. As I have tried to point out time and time again the backers of Lenin are also the backers and controllers of for instance Woodrow Wilson (via Colonel House).

          So similarities between Lenin and Obama are not at all surprising. They have the same backers; still working by the same blueprint. German state the same as well, but I won’t bore you with details from here, it’s so similar to the US that it would bore you stiff.

          ” I would merely say that you have a blind spot about Communism for some reason. I don’t know why, and it doesn’t really matter. It just is what it is.”

          Well it’s because you don’t know me. I’m an expert on communism but I don’t want to bore people.

        • There’s nothing boring about studying and discussing the tools and methods of our attempted destruction.

          At one point you said that warnings of advancing Leninism were a “boogeyman”. Now you say,

          As I have tried to point out time and time again the backers of Lenin are also the backers and controllers of for instance Woodrow Wilson (via Colonel House).

          So similarities between Lenin and Obama are not at all surprising. They have the same backers; still working by the same blueprint. German state the same as well, but I won’t bore you with details from here, it’s so similar to the US that it would bore you stiff.

          This is exactly what I’ve been writing. Are you now spreading a “boogeyman”? Or was I right all along? And if the latter, why does it have to be forced out of you with great effort? If the former, why won’t you acknowledge the shift in your position, and why did you attack me for repeatedly stating it?

        • DirkH says:

          Had you said Marxism or communism I would have taken you seriously. I think you use the term Leninism to create the impression that the Russians invented it; and create an association to Putin.

        • No, I don’t, and your a priori conclusion, which you’re using to accuse me of lying, is outrageous. I don’t even believe that the Russians invented it! And nothing I’ve written suggests that they did!

          Clearly, you are a fan of Putin, his party, and his government. Clearly, I am not. Apparently that’s the reason why you persist with your attacks. I write about the facts of the global anti-Christ conspiracy, which is Communist, Leninist, and Marxist, but most particularly (out of the three), Leninist. If you don’t like that last term, it’s too bad because I know of no other that more precisely describes the existing agenda. Some people talk about “statism”, but this concept is much less precise and leaves out boatloads of important detail about the people who are doing this, their intentions, and their preferred philosophy. Most generally, they are Satanists. More specifically, they are Leninists. If there’s a better term for the specific approach they’re taking to world government, I don’t know of it.

          Like I said, there’s something called reality, which is what I study and try to understand. Some people try to invent alternate realities because they’re not comfortable with describing the real one. I don’t do this. If that bothers you, that’s too bad.

        • DirkH says:

          Richard T. Fowler says:
          November 22, 2014 at 1:31 pm
          “No, I don’t, and your a priori conclusion, which you’re using to accuse me of lying, is outrageous.”

          I accused you of lying? Where?
          Didn’t read the rest of your comment. Where did I accuse you of lying? Please quote.
          I don’t even know why you’re attacking me. Are you lacking communists to attack? I’ll help. Hop over to DailyKos, you’ll find enough there.

        • Dirk, you’ve been picking a fight with me for a while. A fight I didn’t seek with you, and don’t want, and which is quite ridiculous. I’d prefer if you’d just quit it.

        • Jim Masterson says:

          No wonder RTF likes Phil–they both accuse the other guy of lying, but can never point out exactly what the lie is about.


        • DirkH says:

          Richard T. Fowler says:
          November 22, 2014 at 1:39 pm
          “Dirk, you’ve been picking a fight with me for a while. A fight I didn’t seek with you, and don’t want, and which is quite ridiculous. I’d prefer if you’d just quit it.”

          If that’s your impression.

  5. rg says:

    Sorry, all this talk is making me sick! Going back to my hole and quit listening to Lib/Dem/Rep.
    Not worth my time.. It’s like watching a crappy reality show…. I’m tapping out.

    • suyts says:

      rg, I hope you don’t. It’s not Lib/Dem/Rep ….. it’s right or wrong. Being on the side of “right” is easy, as long as one knows what is right. Advocating being right is easy, as well. Knowing right ….. well, that’s hard. It requires thought, input, and feedback. You’re one of the souls who provide all three.

  6. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Any illegal immigrants who believe anything Obama says have rocks in their heads. The Republicans have control of the House and the Senate from January. It is a long bow to draw to ignore the will of the electorate.

    All it takes is a Republican President and America could have…Australia’s illegal immigration policy.

    For the Democrats that would be a world of hurt…heh.

    If I were an illegal immigrant I’d be keeping my head down until the dust settled whatever the outcome.

  7. leftinflagstaff says:

    Did he get to the part about which law I get to break? You know, me, the legal American US citizen, and the sole purpose of his existence. Surely he won’t discriminate against me.

    • Jason Calley says:

      I am confused as well. Didn’t he say that there will be no amnesty for illegal aliens who have committed felonies? Isn’t coming into the US illegally a felony?

      Maybe the President will do a rape amnesty next… I mean, so many rapists are living a furtive life on the run, hiding from the law. All they wanted was a little happiness in their lives, just a small bit of what luckier people have access to. I mean, let’s face it — we all have ancestors who had sex, and rapists are just having sex outside the boundaries of law! And laws, just like borders, are only arbitrary decisions made by dead white men. Besides, I am sure that rapists are only raping women that other Americans won’t have sex with. They only rape under the table because they are afraid of the consequences if they rape in the open. Where is our compassion for the poor rapists, consigned to a life in the shadows?

      • I heard him say “criminals”, no amnesty for those who “are criminals”. He said this right after describing ‘gang activity’ as being an example of what he’s talking about. Clearly, he doesn’t consider crossing the border to be a true crime, which implies that he thinks statutes which define it as a crime are a violation of some supposed human right to free movement across the globe. He actually cited biblical Scripture in defense of this idea, trying to suggest that the Old Testament Hebrews were constrained by law from controlling migration of foreigners into and out of their land. This of course is presposterous, since the exact opposite is true of the Hebraic law. He seems to think that simply saying it makes it so. He has a lot of company in that regard.


      • DirkH says:

        German state broadcaster ARD just jad a tolerance week. Of course, they pushed the homosexualiation and Islamisation agenda -as usual oblivious to the internal contradictions-; but, late in an evening, they promoted tolerance for convicted pedophiles as well. Had one poor pedophile released from jail who got chased from a village after villagers found out about his past and didn’t want their kids to be anywhere near a guy like that. Parents are weird in that regard.

        It looks very much like the Illuminazi agenda is to create civil war everywhere.

  8. Latitude says:

    I’m going to assume liberals will be just as ok with this when we have a republican president……

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey Latitude! I know that you are speaking tongue in cheek… but I am reminded of a minor epiphany I had almost10 years ago. At the time, there were a lot of people concerned about the essentially open borders of the US, and a private group of US citizens tried to assist in border security.
      President Bush and the press did all they could to demonize their actions. Two of my friends, both retired military and self-described conservatives, told me in no uncertain terms that they supported the President on this because it was “impossible to control the borders! There aren’t enough soldiers in the country to stop people from coming across the border!”

      Yes, I am serious, yes, that is REALLY what they told me, and yes, they really were retired military. All I can do, even now, is just remind myself that a lot of people — even people that we think are rational patriots! — are just “useful idiots” who will root for their team or their hero, regardless of right or wrong.

      (I will certainly concede that the “Progressives” have a much, much higher percentage of useful idiots than the Tea Party — but every movement has some.)

  9. kim2ooo says:

    Fox news did cover it live…. all 15 + minutes. [ O’Reilly ]

    The spin from the WH is amazing.

    “This is no different than what Ronald Reagan or Bush did”

    NIGHT and DAY!

    Both – added to existing Congressional Law… not – striking down existing Congressional Law.

    “prosecutorial discretion”………… Holder was already doing this.

    This is nothing more than a Valerie Jarrett – Aleksey trap for the new Congress… it will be used, if Republicans fall for it,… in the 2016 elections.

    I expect Obama to add to these Executives … Food Stamps – SNAP benefits… Health… etc.

  10. squid2112 says:

    I can’t help but to think that a primary reason why the MSM (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc..) haven’t covered the story and didn’t broadcast the live speeches, was to insulate their “low-info” audience from the crimes that have just been perpetrated upon them by their president. For it is exactly those low-info people that will ultimately be most harmed by these actions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s