Fox News Senior Snark-alyst Greg Gutfeld Liberal-Shames Robert Downey, Jr

Psychiatrists may have to come up with a name for the acute psychosis displayed by the lunatics at Fox News who compulsively struggle to turn every news item into an attack on liberals. It doesn’t matter how completely unrelated it is, Fox will spin it into a juvenile insult aimed at whatever lefty (or perceived lefty) they have handy.

Today’s example of this mental illness comes to us from Greg Gutfeld, who devoted his segment on The Five (video below) to an entirely imaginary scenario springing from an incident involving actor Robert Downey, Jr. During a round of promotional interviews for his upcoming movie “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” Downey abruptly walked out after the interviewer repeatedly diverted from the topic of the film promotion to delve into the ancient history of Downey’s troubled past.

Fox News Gutfeld

This episode of Pathological Liberalmania Disorder (PLD) produced a torrent of seizures in Gutfeld that resulted in an uncontrollable period of incoherent articulation. It lasted for several minutes on the air as Gutfeld blamed liberals for Downey’s perfectly rational behavior.

Gutfeld: The questioning veered toward an embarrassing scandal that could threaten Downey’s career. It turns out a few years ago Downey said he wasn’t a liberal. I know. Deep breaths everyone. See, in the world of entertainment saying that you’re not a liberal is like admitting that you molest goats or don’t own a Prius. The host saw what he thought was controversy and went to pick the scab.

The classic symptoms of PLD are present here with Gutfeld imagining that Downey’s career was at risk for something that never actually harmed him or any other actor. The conservative politics of Charlton Heston, Bruce Willis, Clint Eastwood, and many others (see the Friends of Abe), never interfered with their work. But the severity of Gutfeld’s disease was even more apparent as he characterized the reasons for Downey’s reaction. First, here is what took place in the interview:

Interviewer: It was after your incarceration. You said that you can’t go from a $2,000 a night hotel suite to a penitentiary, and understand it, and come out a liberal. I just wonder what you meant by that.

Downey answered that question a bit hesitantly as he wondered what it had to do with the Avengers. But he gave a complete answer saying that he couldn’t really define “liberal” and that his views are always evolving. Then…

Interviewer: You’ve talked in other interviews again about your relationship with your father and the role of all of that. You know, the dark period you went through, taking drugs and drinking, all of that. And I just wondered whether you think you’re free of all of that?

That was when Downey calmly got up and made his way to the door. He was smiling the whole time and even made a little joke as he left the room. However, Gutfeld’s radically distorted perception of this event manifested in this hysterical rant:

Gutfeld: Now most of the reports make it sound like this was about a guy asking about drugs. But it wasn’t. Not at all. The reporter was nailing Downey for not being a total lib.

Gutfeld goes on much longer than that with what he seems to think are witty broadsides at hapless liberals. Clearly he has ventured far from reality. The small portion of the interviewer’s questions that involved Downey’s past comments about liberalism were hardly “nailing” him for anything. The question literally asked “what you meant by that?” That’s a pretty noodley nail. And, in any event, Downey responded to that question. But how Gutfeld can say that the interviewer wasn’t asking about drugs, “not at all,” is mind-boggling. That is specifically what he asked about, and it wasn’t until he did that Downey chose to leave.

This illustrates the disorder that many conservatives suffer from when trying to comprehend liberals, a difficult task for the limited right-wing brain. They have a desperate need to either blame them for things that are plainly unrelated, or to allege that they are attempting to distract from some other imaginary failure. It happened elsewhere this week when Rush Limbaugh suggested that President Obama revealed that a drone attack earlier this year killed an American and an Italian hostage in Pakistan. Limbaugh claimed that it was a ruse to divert the press from the recent book about Hillary Clinton (which was debunked before it was even released).

So what we have here is Gutfeld frantically trying to turn the affair into an attack on liberals, an interpretation that can only exist in a severely diseased mind. These symptoms were also seen in Glenn Beck, who made the very same delusional observations that Gutfeld made about the Downey interview. This suggests that the disease may be contagious, or at least subject to a form of mass hypnosis. The latter theory would be consistent with the Fox News pathology that uses hypnosis via cable TV to manipulate their notoriously dimwitted viewers. And unfortunately, there isn’t a cure for either one of these maladies yet, other than doses of factual information and injections of logic. Sadly, the supply of these treatments is dangerously low in the media world.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Fox News Is Preparing A Special Report On An Already Debunked Hillary Clinton Book

If you aren’t doing anything this coming Friday, and you have an hour to devote to becoming more ignorant, Fox News is airing special report based on a book that makes wholly unsubstantiated allegations against Hillary Clinton.

Fox News

The book “Clinton Cash” has been getting a great deal of promotion from Fox News and other right-wing media outlets, although it won’t be released for another couple of weeks. The author, Peter Schweizer, is one of the most widely discredited writers working today. His past is replete with criticisms from across the political spectrum and his books have been ridiculed for sloppy investigations and sources who don’t exist.

Schweizer is now the president of the Government Accountability Institute, an organization that is bankrolled by the Koch brothers and was founded by the head of Breitbart News. The GAI has previously embarrassed itself by publishing studies that brazenly misrepresented (or invented) the facts related to their bogus reporting. News Corpse covered one such incident involving an alleged foreign fundraising scandal that supposedly “rocked” the Obama reelection campaign. However, the study didn’t cite a single example of a foreign donation and the authors admitted to Fox’s Steve Doocy that there is no such evidence. Likewise, another GAI study claimed that Obama took more vacation days than average private sector workers. Once again, the study totally distorted the data that actually showed that Obama took far fewer days off.

Now Schweizer has a new book that has been been promoted as a devastating blow to Clinton’s campaign. Rand Paul teased the media by saying that he has “been briefed by Peter Schweizer on this book, and the facts are going to be alarming.” Sean Hannity unleashed a frantic rant saying that “These newest allegations…have the potential in the end to derail this presidential campaign.” These are just two examples of a flood of headlines and hyperbole that say much the thing, that Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations will be over just as soon as the book hits the shelves.

There is only one problem with their prognostications of doom. The book is a fraud that proves nothing. The early reports from people who have actually read it indicate that the author fails to connect any of the dots that the wingnut media is hyping. And according to ThinkProgress, who got a copy of the book, even Schweizer admits that he has no proof of anything untoward:

“Schweizer explains he cannot prove the allegations, leaving that up to investigative journalists and possibly law enforcement. ‘Short of someone involved coming forward to give sworn testimony, we don’t know what might or might not have been said in private conversations, the exact nature of the transition, or why people in power make the decision they do,’ he writes. Later, he concludes, ‘We cannot ultimately know what goes on in their minds and ultimately provide the links between the money they took and the benefits that subsequently accrued to themselves, their friends, and their associates.'”

In other words, he’s got nothing but wild accusations and speculation. But it gets even worse. ThinkProgress also found a segment in the book where Schweizer cites a press release as back-up for his charges. Unfortunately for Schweizer, the press release was revealed to be fake back in 2013, a fact that he had plenty of time to discover and avoid putting forth as corroborating evidence.

This is typical of the sloppiness that has dogged his career. The rebuttals to the book on the basis of his dishonesty and lack of professional ethics have already begun to worry his defenders at Fox News. They are resorting to propping him up by asserting that attacks on his credibility are rooted in partisanship, rather than the abundant evidence of his hackery. Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner rushed to his aid saying that “You talk about tearing Schweizer down because he was formerly with Republicans. What about George Stephanopoulos?”

Isn’t it cute how Faulkner tries to slip in the suggestion that Schweizer was “formerly” with Republicans, as if he is no longer a committed right-wing activist, as evidenced by his leading the Koch-funded GAI? But more to the point, what does Stephanopoulos have to do with this? He hasn’t written a book filled with lies aimed at smearing a Republican presidential candidate. No doubt Clinton backers are just as partisan as any other politicos, but the problem with Schweizer isn’t his party affiliation, it’s his credibility and integrity.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Which brings us back to the special on tap for Friday. Fox News will broadcast an hour long program titled “The Tangled Clinton Web” that is anchored by Bret Baier and based on Schweizer’s book. However, the book has already been revealed to be a fraud whose author admits that he doesn’t have the goods on Clinton and whose book is rife with errors and uses hoax press releases as proof. And there are still a couple of days before the special airs for more revelations to be uncovered.

This Fox News special is tainted before it has even aired. Will they include any of the info that has come out about the book in their broadcast? Will they try at all to be fair and balanced? Not likely, given the track record for Fox. And even though they’ve got plenty of lead time to include the truth, Fox has demonstrated that truth is not a part of their criteria for reporting what they mistakenly call news.

So F*cking What? Hillary Clinton Is Rich And It Drives Republicans Nuts

Anyone who thought that Hillary Clinton’s road to the White House was going to be littered with trash from the GOP’s Benghazi obsession or frenzied raving about ghost emails may be disappointed to learn that there appears to be a new scandalette brewing on the right flank. The campaign by Republicans and conservative media to denigrate Clinton seems to be coalescing around a single bit of pre-fab fluff that reveals the flimsy foundation of their strategy.

Clinton Cash

The issue that the right is settling on is Clinton’s net worth and whether her personal wealth conflicts with her campaign theme of being a “champion for the middle-class.” The GOP attack claims that Clinton is a hypocrite for advocating support for everyday Americans when she herself is a member of the one-percent.

Think about that for a minute. This is the same Republican Party that has been the billionaires best friend, pushing through favorable tax schemes, eliminating regulations, and always pressing for an unfettered free-market approach to economic policy. It’s the same Republican Party that praises entrepreneurship and the dignity of compiling vast amounts of personal wealth. However, when it comes to Clinton, there is suddenly an implication by the right that getting rich is bad and if you do so you cannot speak up for hard working citizens who are not as fortunate.

There is no way to respond to that other than by saying “What the fuck are you talking about?” There have many examples of wealthy public servants who genuinely fought for the welfare of the poor and middle classes. The Roosevelts and the Kennedys come to mind without much of a mental struggle. Billionaire investor Warren Buffet has a “rule” named for him that illustrates the unfairness of his tax rate being lower than that of his secretary. There is even a group of “Patriotic Millionaires” who are lobbying for higher taxes on the rich (i.e. themselves).

Hillary Clinton doesn’t have to be a bag lady to fight for policies that aid the poor. She doesn’t have to be a Wal-Mart stock clerk to favor raising the minimum wage. She doesn’t have to contract pancreatic cancer to support a health insurance program that makes access to medical care available and affordable.

While the Clintons may be financially blessed today, they were not always so lucky. They both have middle-class roots and they worked their way through college. They never owned their own home until after they left the White House. They may have too many (way too many) associations with Wall Street now, but that was not always the case (and Clinton is moving more toward the Warren Wing of the party every day). So the suggestion that they are unable to relate to common Americans is simply a fabrication.

The problem with the right-wing assault on Clinton is that they simply don’t understand what the issue of income inequality means. They blindly lash out at Clinton for being rich when that isn’t the problem. Nobody cared that Mitt Romney was rich back in 2012. Romney’s problem was that he advocated policies that benefited the rich at the expense of everyone else. He wanted to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. He wanted to cut Social Security and other benefits programs. He opposed raising the minimum wage and attacked the unions that fight on behalf of workers. And he famously dismissed the 47% of the nation that he concluded would never support his candidacy, so to hell with them. If Romney were rich, but also compassionate toward those who are not, his wealth would not have been an issue in the campaign.

The Romney problem is one that permeates the entire Republican Party. There are distinct differences between what I called the Koch Republicans and the Soros Democrats:

“For one thing, the Republican rich can usually be found bankrolling people and projects that benefit them personally or professionally. Thus the Kochs’ fixation on opposing unions and denying climate change is closely aligned with their exploitative and polluting business interests. Well-off Dems, on the other hand, commonly finance more philanthropic endeavors (civil rights, environment, aid to the poor) that aim to improve the quality of life without necessarily enriching themselves.

“It is also notable that conservatives advocate for less regulation of money in politics, creating an environment where the rich get ever more power to bend society to their will. Liberals, conversely, spend more of their cash on trying to remove money from politics. As an example, it was conservatives, including the Kochs, who pushed for Citizens United so that they could fund their self-serving projects without restrictions or even identification. But Jonathan Soros, the son of the right’s favorite wealthy liberal punching bag, George Soros, created the Friends of Democracy PAC, a SuperPAC aimed at ending the influence of SuperPACs.”

Similarly, Clinton has already taken a position in favor of a constitutional amendment reversing the abhorrent Citizen’s United ruling by the plutocracy backers on the Supreme Court. She supports unions and progressive taxation and immigration reform and other policies that inure to the benefit of those who are not already awash in the benefits of our capitalistic society. Consequently, her personal wealth cannot be fairly used as a cudgel to bash her as a hypocrite.

Virtually every candidate for president is either a millionaire or otherwise very well off financially. So the only advocates for the middle and lower classes will, by necessity, be comfortable economically. What makes the difference is how they choose to use their position to make the benefits of the American economy accessible to all. Democrats seek broad-based gains that benefit everyone. Republicans seek to feather their own nests and those of their rich pals. That may be part of the reason that history shows that the American economy performs better under Democratic administrations than Republican.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Every Republican candidate currently being speculated upon as candidates for president in 2016 favor the same failed, trickle-down theories of the past. What this nation needs is a champion for the middle-class. Clinton says she wants to be that. At least she’s saying the right things. We’ll have to wait and see if she comes through. And the wingnut politicians and pundits who are embarrassing themselves by proving that they don’t understand these simple concepts need to shut the fuck up.

Nekid ‘Patriot’ Hailed By Fox News For Stealing Flag And Suppressing Free Speech

In yet another twisted example of patriotism as defined by Fox News, the All-American channel is singing the praises of a disgraced Air Force veteran who sought to deny protesters their constitutional rights.

Michelle Manhart was once a drill sergeant in the Air Force, which she believes gives her the right to decide who can engage in a public demonstration and how they should behave. She exercised that right at Valdosta State University in Georgia where a group of students were using an American flag in a manner considered disrespectful by Manhart. The flag was on the ground and some of the protesters were walking on it. So Manhart took it upon herself to confront the protesters and assume possession of the flag.

Fox News Manhart

This was an unambiguous case of theft. The flag did not belong to her and she refused to return it upon request. She actually argued on video (below) that the flag “belongs to the entire United States.” The absurdity of that is self-evident. In fact, it violates every principle of private property that conservatives are usually pretending to cherish.

In addition, Manhart was interfering with the rights of the students to express themselves. Their free speech rights, including the treatment of the flag, are protected by the Constitution and have been upheld by the Supreme Court. No matter what your position on flag desecration, the Constitution takes priority. As so often is the case with right-wingers, the hypocrisy of Manhart’s stance is entirely missed by herself and the wingnut media that supports her. Manhart told Fox News that…

“When it comes to the flag, it’s our iconic symbol. It stands for everything that we are. It stands for the freedom to allow those individuals to do what they want to protest or have an organization. So how are you even gonna justify ruining or walking upon something that’s given you the right to do what you’re doing?”

In other words, according to Manhart, the protesters do not have the freedom to do those things that the flag supposedly represents the freedom to do. So enjoy your freedom so long as you don’t actually use it. And if you do try to use it, expect to be stopped by some other citizen who disagrees with you.

Eventually, campus police had to forcibly take the flag from Manhart who refused to follow their order to release it and return it to its proper owners. This outraged Manhart, who whined to Fox News that…

“I have seen that flag on caskets returning home. It was just the thought of those demonstrators standing on someone’s casket. I was so internally frustrated.”

Perhaps she would have been able to gather some sympathy for that argument if not for her own past of disgraceful military conduct. Manhart, it turns out, was discharged from the Air Force after posing for Playboy both in her uniform and out of it. The Air Force advised her that such behavior was a violation of the standards of the service. She was demoted and shortly after left the military to pursue an acting career. Did she consider the poor souls in those caskets when she exploited her body and uniform in a publication that objectifies women?

And if that weren’t bad enough, Manhart also appeared in the nude on other occasions, including in an anti-fur ad for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). I’d give her credit for having compassion for animals, but it might rub some of her right-wing fans the wrong way. But the real problem as regards hypocrisy is that she blatantly desecrated the flag in those photos and others by allowing it to touch the ground, and using it as drapery/clothing.

Despite Manhart’s history of less than honorable service and disrespect for the flag, Fox News and other right-wing media have taken up her cause. The usual suspects including the Daily Caller, Glenn Beck’s TheBlaze, Newsmax, and of course Fox Nation, all published stories exalting the Nekid Patriot. The Pope of Fox News, Todd Starnes, hyperbolically declared that “Valdosta State University loves flag burners more so than flag wavers.” However, besides the fact that no one here burned any flags, the university actually loves free speech and obeying the law more so than thieves and censorship.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Fox Nation Flag DesecrationObviously Manhart has a selective sense of outrage with regard to respect for the flag. And on that matter, Manhart is not alone. With relative frequency Fox News has blasted what they called flag desecration by protesters with whom they disagreed. However, they ignore similarly disrespectful behavior when it is done by their rightist heroes. Sarah Palin, Ted Nugent, and George Bush have all been caught in public desecrating the flag. Yet Fox News hails such behavior as patriotism when the perpetrators are conservative icons.


Senate GOP Tweet: Lincoln Was Assassinated. America Is Forever Indebted

Anyone who has used social media for twenty minutes has seen unfortunate miscommunications that can result in unintended embarrassment or worse. Sometimes they are caused by typos, sometimes by poorly thought out ideas, and sometimes by unmanaged anger. It remains to be seen what caused this disturbing comment by the official Twitter account of the Senate Republicans:

“150 years ago today the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. America is forever indebted.”

Lincoln Assassinated

Was this simply a cringe-worthy mistake? Did the author of this tweet intend to say that Lincoln’s assassination was something that deserved the gratitude of the American people?

The worst kind of rhetorical mistake someone can make is one that reinforces the most negative impressions that are already present. The Republican Party has long struggled with charges of racism, and for good reason. They have opposed many of the landmark reforms to civil rights laws. They advocate policies on social welfare, taxes, voting, employment, housing, etc., that are invariably detrimental to minorities and other victims of discrimination. They defend outright demonstrations of prejudice by law enforcement and private citizens. They have been caught fraternizing with unsavory characters associated with known hate groups. In many cases they have been discovered to be members of those groups themselves.

Speeches and signs at Tea Party rallies have too often expressed blatantly racist sentiments. Too many Republicans have articulated messages that coincide with segregationists, secessionists, and the neo-confederacy that Lincoln fought to eliminate. It is difficult ignore these instances of GOP support for, or tolerance of, such distasteful opinions. The primary media outlet for the right, Fox News, is rampant with expressions of racism from both on-air personalities and viewers.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

And that is what makes this tweet so troubling. While there is a good chance that it was merely a case of extremely bad grammar, it also represents the true feelings of many people on the far right, many of whom hold positions of influence in politics or the press. It also doesn’t help that the tweet features a statue of Lincoln that has its own controversy. They could have used the famous Lincoln Memorial in the National Mall, but instead chose the Freedman’s Memorial in Lincoln Park that depicts a supplicant black man in a loin cloth and chains kneeling at Lincoln’s feet. That is hardly an image that projects emancipation.

So does this tweet mean that the Senate Republicans are racists? Not by itself. But it does express, whether intended or otherwise, a way of thinking that has dogged the GOP for decades. And even after the posting of this tweet produced hundreds of responses calling attention to the ugly, but obvious, interpretation, it remains online without clarification or apology. That is a message in itself.

Sarah Palin Accuses Hillary Clinton Of Stealing Her Mystery Bus Tour Idea

In the days that have transpired since Hillary Clinton made her official announcement that she is running for president, the media has fallen all over itself trying to get some sort of scoop. Since Clinton opted not to invite the press along on a road trip, they have resorted to frantically trying to chase her down like a pack of paparazzi. It has been an embarrassing series of not particularly newsworthy events culminating in a wholly unremarkable appearance at an Ohio Chipotle franchise that even the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart saw fit to ridicule.

Many conservative commentators pounced on Clinton’s decision to focus on conversations with small groups of voters rather than making a splashy, staged speech before hundreds of predictably cheering supporters (as did Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio). They derided the strategy of taking a van ride across the country as an attempt to dodge the press. For example, Elisabeth Hasselbeck of Fox News complained that “It’s hard to be transparent in that secret-mobile driving around.” There was a general consensus among the rightist pundit posse that Clinton was either afraid or up to no good.

Funny, that isn’t the way they felt about Sarah Palin’s bus tour in 2011 that deliberately kept a secret itinerary to confound the lamestream media. It isn’t how Palin felt about it either. In fact, she is now bragging that the whole concept was her idea. and that Clinton has ripped it off.

Clinton/Palin Bus Tour

This isn’t the first time that Palin was cited as the creator of the political bus tour. When Obama planned a bus campaign trip in 2011, Fox News published an article on their Fox Nation website claiming that he was copying Palin. However, in a bit of epic absurdity, the photo that Fox included was one that showed Obama on a campaign bus three years before Palin got aboard one. That’s right, their own photo, with a dated poster in the bus window, proved they were lying.

So now Palin has posted on her Facebook page for the first time in two weeks. In that time she has neglected to comment on all of the political activity in her party with three presidential candidates declaring. She hasn’t mentioned the U.S./Iran nuclear agreement. She’s made no comment on the police killings of more unarmed African-Americans. She’s had nothing to say about Indiana’s pro-discrimination law. But now she has come out of seclusion to take credit for Clinton’s road trip. Priorities.

In her Facebook message, Palin included a video (below) that showed how the press was confounded by her little bus-capade. She also made a point of misrepresenting her own travels. She claimed it was a national excursion with “reminders of what makes our nation exceptional and free!”

Palin: From way up North in the natural resource-rich state of Alaska down to the inspirational, loud and patriotic Rolling Thunder Rally in DC to a calm clambake on a cool New Hampshire night.

The truth is that Palin’s trip began in Washington, D.C., not Alaska. It lasted for all of six days and never made off of the East coast. When asked why it ended so prematurely, Palin lied again, saying that she had been called back to Alaska for jury duty. That, of course, was not true. She ended up going to Iowa for the premiere of a documentary film about her, “The Undefeated.” The whole bus trip was a fraud that was designed to make people (especially the press) think that she was a potential candidate for the GOP nomination for president in 2012. The reality is that it was set up to keep her name in the news as she promoted the movie that ultimately bombed at the box office.

To make matters worse, she wasn’t even on the bus. She traveled by jet between stops and met the bus at each destination. And as for the appearance at the Rolling Thunder rally, she was not a welcome guest. See this video for a more accurate representation of her attempt to crash the annual charity event for her own selfish benefit.

This is the life of a grifter. Sarah Palin’s whole career is aimed at splashing herself with glory while filling her bank accounts with the cash of rubes. Lucky for her there is an oversupply of them in the Republican/Tea Party that is anxious to throw their money at dimwitted figureheads.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Will Glenn Beck Keep His Promise To Resign From The NRA? (Yeah, Right)

Last month Glenn Beck flew into one of his patented frenzies over some imagined conspiratorial threat that only he could see. This one involved his belief that Grover Norquist, the ultra-conservative anti-tax crusader, was secretly a Muslim who was plotting to destroy America through his seat on the board of directors of the National Rifle Association (NRA). Beck’s proof that Norquist was an activist Islamic radical was that he had a Muslim wife and a beard. In Beck’s mind, that clinches it.

Glenn Beck - Grover Norquist

On his radio program last month, Beck interviewed renowned Islamophobe and conspiracy kook, Frank Gaffney, who affirmed Beck’s wildest fears about Norquist. Consequently, Beck expressed his intent to resign his lifetime membership in the NRA if Norquist was reelected to the board at their conference last weekend. Well, guess what? Norquist did win another term on the board, along with hate monger Ted Nugent and other wingnut ammosexuals.

So the question now is, will Glenn Beck keep his word? Not that his word has ever meant anything in the past. After all, he once promised that his “Restoring Honor” event in 2010 would be a “turning point for America.” The next year he promised that his event “Restoring Courage” in Israel would be “a global shockwave. It will ripple across the earth.” The following year President Obama was reelected in a landslide. In 2013 Beck promised to reveal what he said would be “the most important story in history” in a Friday tease. However, on Monday he completely forgot about this historic story. And finally, Beck once promised that he was preparing to release a document in his possession that would “take down pretty much the whole power structure.” And once again, he failed to deliver.

We can pretty much write off the promises of Beck just as we have with those of Rush Limbaugh (who promised to move to Costa Rica if ObamaCare became law); or Ted Nugent (who promised to be dead or in jail in a year if Obama was reelected); or Sean Hannity (who promised to be waterboarded for charity to prove it’s not torture); or Donald Trump (who promised to publish a report by the investigators he allegedly sent to Hawaii to prove Obama wasn’t born there). Another promise we can set aside is the one that the NRA made to Beck to “get to the bottom of this once and for all” by conducting a thorough ethics investigation into Norquist. To date there has been no release of the results of that investigation.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Former President George H.W. Bush kept his promise to resign his lifetime membership in the NRA after Wayne LaPierre called federal law enforcement agents “jack-booted government thugs.” But don’t hold your breath waiting for Beck to show that sort of commitment to his word. He is an unrepentant liar with no regard for honor or courage or truth. He only cares about how he can manipulate and deceive his glassy-eyed disciples to his advantage financially and as their de facto savior.

The NRA’s Anti-Clinton Conference Opens With Apocalyptic Warnings Of Inevitable Doom

If anyone was mislead by the National Rifle Association’s name to assume that their annual conference would have something to do with firearms and their use for protection or sports, that was cleared up in the first day of the event by the organization’s executive vice president and chief fear monger, Wayne LaPierre. He and pretty much every other speaker spent more time demonizing Hillary Clinton than exercising their gun fetishes. In a foreboding speech crammed with frightful rhetoric about how much danger every American is in on a virtually constant basis, LaPierre built up to a crescendo that climaxed with this harrowing thought:

“Hillary Rodham Clinton will bring a permanent darkness of deceit and despair forced upon the American people to endure.”

NRA Kids

Note that LaPierre is not merely warning of ordinary darkness, deceit, and despair, but a “permanent” state of this nightmarish horror. That’s conceding an enormous amount of power to Clinton, who LaPierre must regard as rivaling the Almighty in terms of her ability to thrust the world into a dystopian gloom. Never mind that he said the same thing about President Obama before each of his election victories, and yet, by most accounts, the sun still shines and experiences of joy have not been ripped from the human race. He went on to swear a sacred oath to his fellow NRA-theists, saying…

“I vow on this day the NRA will stand shoulder to shoulder with you and good, honest decent Americans and we will stand and fight with everything we’ve got and in 2016, by God, we will elect the next great president of the United States of America and it will not be Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

That statement would appear to violate the rules governing the NRA’s tax status as a 501(c)(4) organization that permits some involvement in politics as long as it is not a substantial amount of its activities. His promise to “fight with everything we’ve got” sounds pretty substantial.

LaPierre was followed by other speakers who similarly downplayed any discussion of guns, instead aiming their vitriol at Clinton. They included Republican presidential hopefuls Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and Ted Cruz, who asked the audience if they were “ready for Hillary,” to which they resoundingly answered “No.” I’m inclined to agree with them. They’re not the least bit ready.

But perhaps the most strikingly foolish comment was from brain-dead brain surgeon Ben Carson who said that Americans need more guns so they can personally fight off the terrorists flooding across the Southern border (of his mind). For the record, the number of terrorists apprehended in the U.S. who came into the country illegally from the South, or any other entry point, is zero. And the likelihood of some redneck facing off in a shootout with with an ISIS fighter, and prevailing, is pretty near zero as well. Carson added that guns are also necessary for people to “defend themselves against an overly aggressive government that wanted to exact tyranny in this country.” So he is now advocating shooting federal agents, soldiers, and police officers (aka first responders), in a war where the government has tanks, weaponized drones, and cruise missiles.

These are the priorities and allegiances of America’s ammosexuals. They couldn’t care less about the children murdered at Sandy Hook, or the innocents at a Colorado movie theater, or the students at a Virginia university, or the thousands of other preventable gun deaths that occur annually in this country. They are gripped by irrational fears and manipulated by the NRA which hides its true mission: To promote the sales of firearms and the other commercial interests of weapons manufacturers. Even Kids can understand these simple truths, as beautifully demonstrated in this video:

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Fox News CEO Admits That The Network Is Not In The News Business

Objective viewers have long ago concluded that Fox News is not, and never has been, a legitimate news network. They began as a project by right-wing propagandist Rupert Murdoch and Republican media strategist Roger Ailes to spread disinformation and promote GOP politicians. And for the past 17 years they have carried out that mission with a roster of rabidly partisan hosts broadcasting provable lies.

Now, with the publication of the “Hollywood Reporter’s 35 Most Powerful People in New York Media 2015,” Roger Ailes, the Fox News chairman and CEO, has confessed that his network, despite its name, is not actually in the news business. Belittling his cable news competitors CNN and MSNBC, he gave the Reporter a statement revealing his true professional aspirations:

“In fact, Ailes, 74, no longer views those networks as rivals. ‘We’re competing with TNT and USA and ESPN,’ he says.”

So according to Ailes, he regards channels that are plainly entertainment and sports as his competition, not other news outlets. That is not really all that surprising if you have examined the Fox programming model with any depth. News Corpse has previously analyzed how Fox incorporates methods that are generally reserved for entertainment programs. As recently as last month we published a description of the hyper-dramatization Fox injects into their presentation:

“Fox News has redefined television journalism by fundamentally transforming it from an information medium to an entertainment medium. They dress up their pseudo-news segments in the same melodramatic packaging that entertainment outlets use: conflict, scandal, mystery, and hyper-charged emotions including hero worship and fear. Fox employs flashy graphics and attention-grabbing audio whooshes and gongs to decorate their reports that are presented as ‘ALERTS’ regardless of the news value. And always there is sex. Fox’s roster of hosts has more former beauty pageant contestants that journalists. And they aren’t shy about putting their ‘talent’ in revealing clothes and camera angles. In fact, Fox CEO Roger Ailes demands it. As for news, Fox’s concentration on tabloid thrill-fiction like Benghazi and Obama’s birth certificate is the news equivalent of porn.”

Ironically, Fox News was labeled as an entertainment channel way back in 2007 by TV Guide, a magazine that was owned at the time by Rupert Murdoch. There was a reason that Murdoch might have deliberately categorized his own “news” channel as entertainment. It mainly centers around the fact that entertainment programming always outperforms news programming. [More on this theory here]

TV Guide Fox News

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Also of note in Ailes’ statement to the Hollywood Reporter is his appreciation for a certain program on MSNBC:

“I flip to MSNBC occasionally to make sure their blind pig didn’t find an acorn. But they never have once. I tell you who I do like at MSNBC — I like Joe and Mika.”

Setting aside his childish insults, the fact that Ailes likes Morning Joe is reason enough to cancel the program. After all, Ailes also likes pathological liar Bill O’Reilly, bombastic librul-hater Sean Hannity, rightist tool Neil Cavuto, news floozy Megyn Kelly, clown boy Steve Doocy, and I don’t even have sufficient adjectives for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin. If I were Joe Scarborough I’d be thinking “With friends like Ailes, who needs enemas?”

Fox News Resurrects Disgraced Pundit Dick Morris To Forecast Clinton’s Demise

Following President Obama’s reelection victory over Mitt Romney in 2012, the Fox News contributor who missed the call by the widest margin was the notorious Dick Morris. In a remarkably wild prediction, Morris was adamant that Romney would not only beat Obama, but would win by a landslide. When that prediction proved to be as absurd as predicting that Sarah Palin would be invited to join Mensa, Fox News declined to renew Morris’ contract, otherwise known as firing him.

Fox News Dick Morris

This Easter weekend, when rising from the dead was on every good Fox viewer’s mind, Morris himself emerged from the tomb of former Foxies to tell host Jeanine Pirro exactly what her audience was yearning to hear.

Morris: If [Hillary Clinton] goes down over this [email] scandal, which I think she will, it’ll cause enormous losses in 2016. Not just the presidency but mammoth losses in Congress.

So according to Morris, Clinton will not make it past the Democratic primary, and if she does, she will suffer a humiliating loss and take the whole party down with her. In fact, in response to a question from Pirro, Morris was unable to speculate on any advice he might give her to get of the “mess” she’s in because it’s “way beyond” that and it is now a “disaster.”

Apparently Morris is unaware that Clinton is beating every Republican she’s matched against in most polling. But the fact that Morris is stupendously oblivious to reality isn’t really what makes this significant. After all, Morris is the same pundit who wrote the book “Condi vs. Hillary,” which contained his astute prediction for the 2008 presidential race in the title. That didn’t exactly pan out for him, did it? From the introduction to the book:

{T]here is no doubt that Hillary Clinton is on a virtually uncontested trajectory to win the Democratic nomination and, very likely, the 2008 presidential election. She has no serious opposition in her party […]

The stakes are high. In 2008, no ordinary white male Republican candidate will do. Forget Bill Frist, George Allen, and George Pataki. Hillary would easily beat any of them. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain? Either of them could probably win, but neither will ever be nominated by the Republican Party.

So Morris got the Democratic nominee wrong, despite his conviction that there was “no doubt.” He also got the Republican nominee wrong. And the Republican who Morris said could not be nominated, but would win if he were, was nominated but actually lost. Is there any way he could have been more wrong?

What’s truly troubling about this new boneheaded commentary from Morris is that he’s back on Fox News to deliver it. Fox is so desperate for frothing, rabid Clinton hating that they have dug up the corpse of Dick Morris to make his famously idiotic prognostications that have no hope of ever coming to pass. That tells us something about the direction that Fox is moving in as the 2016 campaign season begins to heat up.

They are going full-bore into manic, psycho, loony, hysteria mode. So be prepared for a display of batshittery that surpasses anything that we’ve seen before from the Romney campaign or even Sarah Palin. The wingnut parade is going to be marching even farther out on the ledge than ever before. And Fox News will be covering it all with the flashing graphics, clanging gongs, and blathering airheads that have become their trademark.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.