Re: Make no mistake, what pisses off Obama more than anything is Becks accuracy. Obama can't come out and address specifically what Glen Beck says, because it's always true, and it's always something he would like to stop the press from putting out.
Omega, not sure if you noticed, but Obama hasn't directed any of his criticism towards Glen Beck in particular. Specifically, Obama's criticisms have been directed against media outlets who brand themselves as a news source, but instead put out more editorial than they do news.
News is supposed to be impartial, and supposed to be backed up with facts. Now, I'm not going to be so extreme as to claim that Fox News has zero news, or that they do nothing to back themselves up. That would simply be untrue. However, they do add commentary to much of what they report, and any time a person opens their mouth to say what they *think*, it's not a fact - it's just an opinion.
The 1st amendment gives anyone the right to give their opinions in a public setting, but I kind of have a problem when an organization claims that they are a trusted source of *news*, and use that as a cover to state their own *opinions*. It gives people the perception that everything they see on that network is a fact, when much of it is not fact.
That's why the Whitehouse has made statements saying that Obama would debate with Fox News, but only in the way a person would debate the opposition. It's a criticism, but it's not censorship, because no one has suggested that Fox News stop reporting. It's their 1st Amendment right, but so is it the right of Obama or anyone from his staff to give their own opinions, and be critical.
For what it's worth, I agree with you that there is a lot of gamesmanship and partisanship from both the left and the right, but at least liberal networks like MSNBC do not attempt to label themselves as news. They correctly call themselves political commentary. And also for what it's worth, just because I like to listen to liberal commentators like Oberman or Maddow, I don't agree with everything they say, or even the manner in which they lead their guests to a conclusion based on the way they phrase their questions.
It would be a double standard for me to say that Oberman is a better source for information than Beck, but my opinion is that no one is right 100% of the time, and even though you may feel that you relate to what a person says most of the time, it doesn't mean that it's a substitute for real news.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
