News Corpse » Breitbart:

Tag Archives: Breitbart

Jun 08 2013 4 cmnts

Breitbart Execs Furiously Fluffing Fox News And Roger Ailes

Posted by: Mark @ 10:18 am

Breitbart News has suffered a dramatic decline in the “quality” (if you can call it that) of their yellow journalism since the sudden demise of their guiding blight, Andrew Breitbart. They embarrassed themselves by falling for a hoax from the same satirical site they previously blasted the Washington Post for believing. They published a “scoop” claiming that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel took donations from a group that, as it turns out, didn’t exist. Their practice of “vetting” President Obama yielded dud after dud. And their attempt to cinematically canonize their namesake bellyflopped at the box office. The magnitude of their collapse is almost too painful to watch.

Consequently, they seem to have grabbed a life line from Fox News to prevent any further shrinkage. Their web site now features a section where they post headlines from their “partners,” but the only partner listed is Fox News. They have posted adoring homages to Fox personalities like Kirsten Powers who pretend to be liberals while bashing everything to the left of Attila the Hun. And for their sycophancy, they now get regular promotions of their articles on Fox News.

Have you got your copy of “Fox Nation vs. Reality” yet?

But this week revealed the most blatant Fox fluffing yet between the two conservative lie factories. On June 5, Breitbart published an article defending Fox News CEO Roger Ailes from disclosures contained in a new book by reporter Jonathan Alter: The Center Holds: Obama and His Enemies. For some reason it took the the three biggest cheeses at Breitbart News to compose this syrupy ode to Ailes: Stephen Bannon, Executive Chairman; Larry Solov, President; and Alexander Marlow, Managing Editor. And just last week the same three stooges penned a fawning tribute to Ailes titled “The Ailes Manifesto: America Rallies Around Roger Ailes and Fox News.” Of course, America did no such thing, but the Breitbart executive sweets sure exposed their deep infatuation.

This week, Breitbart’s sensationalistic headline called Alter an “MSM Tool in the War Against Roger Ailes and Fox News,” and dismissed him for being employed by a news enterprise owned by a partisan billionaire (Michael Bloomberg). Amazingly, the BreitBrats displayed no sense of irony considering they themselves are busy licking the boots of their own partisan billionaire (Rupert Murdoch).

After several paragraphs of self-righteous and predictable carping over their delusional perception of the media as hopelessly liberal, the BreitBrats think they have nailed Alter with this assertion: “Breitbart News did some checking, and according to authoritative Fox and News Corporation sources, Ailes never talked to Alter for this book.” Well, they didn’t have to check with Fox for that because Alter never claimed to have talked to Ailes for the book. Then, after that criticism that failed to cite any Fox Newser by name, the BreitBrats complained that Alter failed to cite “any inside Fox or News Corp. sources” by name.” Then they followed that up with another quote from “one Fox source.” In fact, the rebuttal to nearly every criticism the BreitBrats made of Alter’s book was based on either an unnamed source, or had no attribution at all. There were thirteen itemized passages from Alter’s book with which Breitbart took exception. They were all summarily dismissed with ambiguous notations like…

“…declared a high-placed figure…”
“…security sources at Fox…”
“…according to a longtime hand at News Corp…”
“…According to our reporting…”
“…Says a News Corp. building source…”
“…according to Fox sources…”
“…Sources tell Fox that…”

So after castigating Alter for deigning to employ unnamed sources, the BreitBrats rely almost entirely on unnamed sources for their rebuttal. But even worse, they tally up the results of their own missive and report that six of Alter’s thirteen allegations were false. That means, of course, that 7 were true or partly true.

Someone may need to inform the BreitBrats that if you’re trying to refute a list of assertions in a critical book, you are not making much headway if a majority of them, by your own reckoning, are true. And that doesn’t even take into account the likelihood that the ones Breitbart tagged as false may still be true, despite their objections. After all, as Alter said in response to an article in Politico where Ailes rebuffed his book, “The question is, do you believe me or Roger Ailes?”

Setting aside for the moment that Ailes is a professional liar, for the BreitBrats the answer to alter’s question is obvious. They believe their corrupt and corpulent sweetheart, Roger Ailes. And they would follow him anywhere, as long as he continues to plug their pitiful blog. Romantic, aint it?

May 20 2013 5 cmnts

General

Fox Nation vs. Reality: Who’s The IRS Targeting Now?

Posted by: Mark @ 6:44 pm

When a dishonest “news” enterprise is so determined to disseminate misleading information to disparage their enemies, they often get careless and wind up hitting themselves with a sort of journalistic friendly fire. That’s what happened as the editors of Fox Nation rushed to republish a petulant little hit piece from Breitbart News.

The article by Matthew Boyle (known for his discredited smears that falsely alleged improprieties by Sen. Bob Menendez), took aim at an attorney who represented the United Church of Christ (UCC) when it was being investigated by the IRS for potential violations of its tax-exempt status. The inquiry was prompted by a speech made by then-candidate Barack Obama in 2008.

The Fox Nationalists plastered a lurid headline atop their posting that said “Chief IRS Counsel Bailed Jeremiah Wright’s Church Out of IRS Probe in 2008.” The only thing wrong with that headline is…well, everything. First of all, the attorney, William Wilkins, did not work for the IRS in any capacity at the time. He was in private practice with a firm that specialized in tax matters. Secondly, his client was the UCC, not Rev. Wright’s Trinity United, which was just an affiliate of the denomination. Thirdly, he had no power to bail anyone out. What he did was represent them in the investigation, which he did in a manner that produced a favorable outcome.

Like News Corpse

On Facebook

This was a thoroughly hollow assault that was contrived by unethical partisans to hurt the President. But how can you blame them? This barrel of lies touched on so many of the phony components of their smear machine, it was just too good to pass up. After all, it had Obama, the IRS, and an old fave, Rev. Wright.

What both the BreitBrats and the Fox Nationalists missed in their haste to bash Obama was the fact that this investigation was another example of the Bush administration deploying the IRS to harass organizations they perceived as unfriendly (i.e. Greenpeace, NAACP, et al). In this case it was a liberal church that invited a Democratic presidential candidate to deliver a speech on faith.

So not only has the right-wing media cabal missed their target by a mile, they inadvertently weakened their case that the IRS is a rogue outfit that exclusively harasses conservatives. Nice work, kiddies.

Apr 09 2013 4 cmnts

General

Hating Breitbart: Now Easier Than Ever

Posted by: Mark @ 6:55 pm

Following in the footsteps of “Atlas Shrugged” and “Sarah Palin Undefeated,” the new documentary “Hating Breitbart,” about the late Andrew Breitbart, made a beeline for the bargain bins at your local video store. It was a dismal flop at the box office despite massive marketing to the Tea Party crowd that producers thought would eat it up.

Hating Breitbart In their desperation the producers have initiated a unique marketing plan that illustrates just how delusional they are in believing that they can salvage their investment and/or integrity. The plan involves persuading their most mentally-deficient followers to buy copies of the DVD for various liberals in what they describe as a “sponsorship” in the vein of those late-night television appeals for starving third-world children. From the Hating Breitbart web site:

“At Hating Breitbart, we believe liberalism is an illness that is best treated with a healthy diet of being exposed to different points of view. We’re offering fans of our movie the chance to “sponsor” an intellectually malnourished member of the mainstream establishment by ordering a copy of the film to be sent to them to help overcome years of indoctrination by the liberal elite.”

Pleasse forghive me. It is mush hard er to type whil laughing hystrically than I thoght. OK, let me try this again.

The BreitBrats think that it’s a good idea to convince people to buy extra copies of their DVD (at 15 bucks a pop) for liberal politicians, journalists, entertainers, etc. The producers must be stuck with a warehouse of these paperweights and believe that their fans are dumb enough to bail them out by buying more. Of course, the intended recipients (i.e. Michael Moore, Rachel Maddow, Nancy Pelosi) are only going to deposit the DVDs in the trash.

Since there is no chance whatsoever that they will waste their time watching this dreck, the only real purpose for this campaign is to separate the flock from more of their cash and to enrich the incompetent producers. Wouldn’t it just be easier to double the price and tell them the proceeds are going to Jesus? But a bigger problem is that these conservative Randians are abandoning the pretense that they actually believe in the primacy of the free market. The people have spoken with their wallets. For God’s sake, let it go.

Apr 05 2013 1 cmnts

General

Breitbart Article Debunks Previous Breitbart Articles On Gun Control Conspiracies

Posted by: Mark @ 2:54 pm

The notoriously dimwitted hacks at Breitbart News practice a form of pseudo-journalism that reeks of ultra-rightist propaganda (or just plain reeks). They rarely bother to fact check their stories as was demonstrated recently when they published a false item about Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel receiving donations from an organization that, it turns out, doesn’t exist. Likewise, they posted a story as “news” that they sourced to site that produces satirical articles. And to make matters worse, they had previously mocked the Washington Post for falling for an article from the same site.

Today, however, the BreitBrats deserve credit for an article that accurately and comprehensively takes apart a collection of conspiracy theories revolving around a perfectly ordinary transaction by the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS has provided a reasonable and verifiable explanation for a purchase order that allows the department to buy ammunition at discounted prices over a five year period:

“Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as ‘strategic sourcing contracts,’ which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.”

Breitbart’s debunking methodically stepped through eight components of the myths that have been circulating in the right-wing media about this paranoid fantasy, and countered it with facts to offset them. What they didn’t disclose is that they were among the most flagrant disseminators of the phony horror stories in the first place.

On at least four prior occasions, the BreitBrats posted apocalyptic warnings of a federal government intent on massacring its own citizens. But in this new piece they begin by saying…

“There are dozens of articles hyping government purchases of ammunition over the last nine months. After spending weeks researching this topic, this is a collection of commonly held myths that are based more on panic than fact.

“With the recent release of a letter from the Department of Homeland Security to Senator Coburn, the numbers we calculated independently seem to corroborate the narrative coming from DHS. The concerns surrounding DHS stockpiling ammunition are nothing but more fear-mongering and largely unwarranted.”

So all of a sudden the frightful government plot that the BreitBrats have been pushing is dismissed with a wave of the hand. How convenient. For good measure, Fox News re-posted the Breitbart debunking, and similarly neglected to note their role in creating the faux panic.

This is rather atypical behavior for right-wing media that generally avoids ever admitting they were wrong. In this case they have shot down their prior implausible claims because they have been shown to be the ravings of lunatics. Then they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge their previous support and just hope that nobody notices the spine-jostling flipping and flopping that has taken place. While it’s good to see them recognize that the fear mongering about tyrannical government agencies plotting genocide is the product of sheer delusion, it would be even better if they confessed that the delusion was of their own making and apologized. And for the record, Sarah Palin has not yet corrected her statements regarding Ammo-Gate.

Apr 02 2013 14 cmnts

General, Media Bias

Breitbart Bear Hugs Fake Democrat Kirsten Powers Of Fox News

Posted by: Mark @ 10:00 am

This weekend the Fox News farce “News Watch” featured its customary panel of four slobbering ultra-rightists and one alleged Democrat. This week’s lefty lamb was Kirsten Powers, who did her job of pretending to be a liberal while denigrating everything liberals stand for.

In a segment about an NPR story on wasteful spending for disability programs, the discussion suddenly veered off course to attack Media Matters with the program’s host, Jon Scott, calling it “that liberal media watchdog group funded by George Soros.” Scott complained that Media Matters had “a problem” with NPR’s report because “it has become fodder for the right wing.”

Right off the bat it should be noted that Jon Scott, whom Fox inexplicably installed as host of a media analysis show, is the Republican Party’s man at Fox News. He was caught red-handed (by Media Matters) reading “news” copy that had been cribbed, word for word, from an RNC press release.

Scott also suffers from a malady that has infected most of Fox News that could be called “Soros Tourettes Syndrome.” Its primary symptom is the uncontrollable shouting out of the name George Soros whenever some organization is mentioned that he might have made a donation to in the past five decades. Given that he is a well known billionaire philanthropist, that’s a pretty long list. In this case. Soros did make a donation to Media Matters exactly one time two years ago, which hardly puts the organization in his pocket. What Scott failed to report was that NPR, whom Scott is alleging was attacked by the Soros-funded Media Matters, also received a hefty donation from Soros. In fact, it was nearly twice what he gave to Media Matters. So Scott seems to think that Soros is attacking one of his front groups with another.

Which brings us to fake Democrat Kirsten Powers. When asked about the NPR affair, she detoured to make this baseless observation: “I just want to say first of all, Media Matters is not a legitimate organization. And they do not exist to be a media watchdog group.” She provided no support whatsoever for her allegation, however, it was enough to attract the adoring gaze of Breitbart’s John Nolte. He posted a short item fawning over Powers for her “honesty” and gushed “I disagree with Powers on almost everything, but she’s good people.”

The assertion that BreitBrat John had substantive disagreements with Powers struck me as peculiar given her overt conservative leanings. So I looked up some previous references to her on the Breitbart web site for evidence of how starkly their opinions differed. This is what I found:

Liberal Kirsten Powers Fights Back Against Obama’s War on Fox News
Kirsten Powers: Obama Nominating Rice As Secretary Of State ‘Would Be His Undoing’
Kirsten Powers: Obama’s ‘You Didn’t Build That” Comments Offended Me Too
Kirsten Powers: What Did Obama Know and When Did He Know It?
Kirsten Powers: ‘Obviously, There’s A Bias Behind’ Cable News Not Covering Catholic Lawsuit Against Obama
Liberal Pundit Powers: Obama Removing Work Requirement From Welfare Huge Issue For Romney
Liberal Columnist: Double Standard In Media’s Attack On Rush

These were just the articles that referenced Powers in the headlines. There were many more plaudits for her on the site within various articles. So all of this admiration and accord raises an obvious question. When Nolte says that he disagrees with Powers on “almost everything,” what the hell is he talking about?

Powers is plainly another right-wing plant in the Fox News garden. She consistently rips the President and other Democrats and rarely offers enthusiastic praise or defense for progressive policy or people. She is only on Fox representing the left because Fox couldn’t get Ann Coulter to do it believably. But Powers is in the same conservative bag as Coulter, even going so far as to outrageously accuse Obama of sympathizing with terrorists. No wonder BreitBrat John is so infatuated.

Mar 30 2013 4 cmnts

General, Religion

The Anti-Constitutional, Christo-cratic Case Against Marriage Equality

Posted by: Mark @ 9:55 am

With the Supreme Court’s deliberations on a pair of marriage equality cases last week, more and more right-wing “Christo-crats” are affirming their faith-based opposition to the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. And increasingly, those affirmations are taking the form of inadvertent admissions that marriage is not within the purview of the state to decide. It is constitutionally impermissible for courts to rule for or against specific religious dogma.

Nevertheless, That is exactly what the martinets of virtue on the right are advocating. For example, former CNN contributor Dana Loesch wrote an editorial that appeared on both RedState and the lie-riddled Fox Nation that sought to refute the notion that marriage equality is a conservative position. She insists that it is not, and that…

“Marriage is a covenant between a man, woman, and God before God on His terms. It is a religious civil liberty, not a right granted by government. [...] In suing over “marriage” itself one is demanding that God change His definition of the union between a man and a woman.”

Loesch does not bother to reveal where in God’s Dictionary the definition of marriage occurs, nor does she reveal where one can pick up a copy of God’s Dictionary. If she is referencing passages in the Bible, then she is conveniently excluding from God’s definition those pious Biblical figures who maintained multiple (sometimes hundreds of) wives. Likewise she leaves out God’s mandate that rapists be forced to marry their victims. But more to the point, she is admitting that marriage is a construct of religion and, therefore, it is unconstitutional for the state to have a hand in it – except, in her view, so far as Christian-approved nuptials are concerned.

That same doctrine was addressed by Breitbart’s John Nolte in a column accusing the media of trying to destroy religion. That’s the same media that just completed endless hours of blanket coverage of the selection of a new Pope; the same media whose Christmas specials preempt everything else on the air. Nolte argues that recognition of the right for same-sex couples to marry would improperly impose on the right to religious freedom for Christians who regard such behavior as sinful. But if the religious freedom of Christians is violated every time something they regard as a sin is allowed under the law, that would make premarital sex unconstitutional [not to mention lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride. By that measure, the Constitution would require the dissolution of Congress] Nolte says that he is in favor of civil unions, but…

“I oppose same-sex marriage because marriage is a sacrament, and there is a big difference between asking one to be tolerant, and demanding one condone.”

Once again we have an evangelical conservative admitting that his opposition is based on spiritual grounds. And once again, that would make it an invalid argument so far as the Constitution is concerned. They simply cannot assert that something is subject to legal prohibition because it conflicts with their religious beliefs. Were that the case, Jews could seek a Supreme Court judgment mandating that all food in America be produced in accordance with the laws of Kosher. What’s more, no one is demanding that any particular behavior be condoned, merely that it not be discriminated against. That’s a distinction that conservatives have trouble comprehending, or perhaps they just enjoy being bigots.

RedState’s Erick Erickson chimed in with an article asserting that “‘Gay Marriage’ and Religious Freedom Are Not Compatible.” He hinges his argument on the Bible passage, Matthew 19:4-6, wherein Christ says…

“…He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Erickson acknowledges that in this passage Christ is answering a question about whether it is permissible to divorce one’s wife. It was not a question about who is allowed to marry. But he dismisses that fact and focuses only on what he interprets as a definition of marriage, rather than as a direct response to a specific question. Likewise, he dismisses the part about divorce being against God’s law. This is an example of the convenient piety of so many sanctimonious religious zealots that permits them to pick and chose which principles they will honor. If Erickson wants to make a federal case of the definition of marriage as expressed by Matthew 19:4-6, then he should be consistent and call for a constitutional prohibition of divorce. Instead he impugns the sincerity of his ideological foes by calling them “a bunch of progressive Christians who have no use for the Bible,” even though he’s the one twisting it to fit his political prejudices.

Like Loesch and Nolte, Erickson is admitting that he sees gay marriage as “a legal encroachment of God’s intent.” Therefore, without realizing it, he is admitting that it is not a valid argument in a nation whose Constitution says that it “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Even Bill O’Reilly has noticed that the anti-marriage equality crowd is obsessed with religious justifications, rather than sound legal arguments. He praises gay advocates for saying that…

“‘We’re Americans. We just want to be treated like everybody else.’ That’s a compelling argument, and to deny that, you have got to have a very strong argument on the other side. The argument on the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible.”

Indeed, Bible thumping is not generally viewed in legal circles as a basis for constitutional findings. Yet, as the issue winds through the maze of judicial debate, the Tea-vangelical’s arguments continue to devolve into nothing but sanctimonious sermonizing. It is evermore apparent that their bigotry has no justification under America’s law, so they fall back on God’s law and attempt to ram their beliefs down the nation’s throat. They clearly have no respect for the Constitution or the freedom it guarantees for religious liberty nor, of course, for the equal protection of the law that forbids the state from discriminating against same-sex couples who seek to marry.

Mar 17 2013 3 cmnts

General, Wankery

Media Matters Enters The Liars Den At CPAC – Gets Ambushed By Breitbart

Posted by: Mark @ 3:47 am

Yesterday a panel at CPAC (which I believe stands for Conniving Propagandists And Crooks) was held following the screening of “Hating Breitbart,” a crockumentary glorifying the late Andrew Breitbart. The topic of the event was “The Uninvited,” a reference to fringe conservatives who are allegedly kept from appearing in the mainstream media. Participating on the panel were several Breitbart-affiliated folks, including the disgraced video mangler, James O’Keefe, and a lone representative of Media Matters, Ari Rabin-Havt.

In the course of the discussion (video below) O’Keefe protested that he felt he was “held to a higher standard than any Pulitzer Prize winner.” Whereupon, BreitBrat editor Larry O’Conner defended O’Keefe by rejecting the notion that just because O’Keefe’s videos were found to have been deceptively edited that “everything O’Keefe does should be considered a fraud.” Actually, that’s precisely what should be done when someone has proven he’s a fraud on multiple occasions.

The discussion eventually veered off into an attack on Media Matters with O’Conner questioning the veracity of their content. When Rabin-Havt began to defend himself, in what seemed to be a transparently staged tossing of the baton, O’Conner recognized Breitbart’s Editor in Chief Joel Pollak in the audience and asked him to weigh in on the subject.

Pollak was visibly upset at what he characterized as a smear directed at him by Media Matters. He cited an article that he claimed accused him of being a birther. Standing in the audience he pointed his finger at Rabin-Havt and arrogantly insisted that “The next word out of your mouth should be ‘Sorry.’” But that was just a small portion of the generalized indictment he made of Media Matters:

Pollak: There’s a Media Matters method, it’s this: You make a statement in the headline that is not proven in the article. The lefties to whom you sell your material, or distribute your material, don’t care about the proof, they care about the headline. So you put in that headline that I’m a birther even though you admit I’m not a birther.

Alright, let’s break this down. First of all, Pollak’s assertion that Media Matters makes unproven statements in their headlines is itself unproven. Media Matters is meticulous about documenting what they publish, and the “lefties” and others who read it care very much that thoroughness. As for the article Pollak referenced, it was posted on Media Matters on March 13, with the title “What The Media Need To Know About CPAC 2013.” Notice that there is nothing in the headline about anyone being birther and that Pollak isn’t in it at all. So much for his thesis that Media Matters composes false headlines and fails to back them up.

Ironically, Pollak’s complaint applies perfectly to his own article on Breitbart News that Media Matters was writing about in the first place. That article’s headline was “The Vetting – Exclusive – Obama’s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: ‘Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii’”

From the wording of that headline it would not be much of a stretch to conclude that the article was advancing birtherism by questioning Obama’s birthplace. Pollak said that he only intended to make a point that Obama, or his representatives, altered his biography when it suited him. However, that was not the inference in his headline. And it could be said of Breitbart what they said of Media Matters – that they “don’t care about the proof, they care about the headline.” What’s more, the first paragraph of the article began by affirming the birtherism in the headline:

“Breitbart News has obtained a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama’s then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, which touts Obama as ‘born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.’”

To be fair, there was a “Note from Senior Management” appended to the top of Pollak’s article that asserted that “Andrew Breitbart was never a ‘Birther,’ and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of ‘Birtherism.’” The fact that that note was necessary is telling in itself. But it’s a rather hollow disclaimer when the headline and the opening paragraph seemingly contradict it. Pollak also wrote that “The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate.” That’s true, but as Rabin-Havt pointed out, he had not called Pollak a birther. He had simply asserted that Pollak and Breitbart were still responsible for advancing the birther theme even if they themselves did not subscribe to it. And they did that by publishing articles with misleading headlines and expecting to absolve themselves of the birther taint by rejecting it several paragraphs later.

This bit of theatrics staged by the BreitBrats fits nicely into their modus operandi. It is the sort of ambush that Breitbart himself would have enjoyed pulling off. And it even starred Breitbart’s budding video propagandist, little Jimmy O’Keefe. But once again, when the facts are revealed in full, their deceit is all too apparent. The Media Matters article did not call Pollak a birther in the headline. Although Breitbart’s article did question Obama’s birthplace in their headline.

So the BreitBrats got together and conspired to ambush Rabin-Havt with a false accusation that he had done what the BreitBrats actually did do. And then they complain when nobody will take them seriously, and they wonder why they are “The Uninvited” and why everyone hates Breitbart.

Mar 11 2013 3 cmnts

General

Breitbart “News” Duped By Same Satirical Site They Blasted WaPo For Believing

Posted by: Mark @ 11:29 am

It is becoming evermore inescapable that Breitbart “News” is run by the dumbest bunch of pseudo-journalists ever to disgrace the profession. Just a couple of weeks after freaking out over an alleged association between then-Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel and the Freinds of Hamas (a terrorist group that, it turns out, does not exist), the BreitBrats are at it again.

Media Matters caught Breitbart editor-at-large, Larry O’Connor, posting an article (now deleted) that claimed that Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman had filed for bankruptcy. It was a juicy story for a conservative rag that would like nothing better than to discredit one of the shining lights of progressive media – a columnist for the New York Times no less.

Unfortunately for O’Conner, the story was utterly false. In fact, it was the work of The Daily Currant, a satirical web site. The thought of doing any actual reporting never entered into the minds of the BreitBrats or they would have quickly discerned that the article was a comical fake.

What makes this even more embarrassing is that just last month O’Conner’s fellow BreitBrat, John Nolte, went to great lengths to slam the Washington Post for having fallen for an article from the same site. Nolte’s pompous critique made some points that apply perfectly to O’Conner. He lambasted the WaPo author saying that…

Nolte: If [Suzy] Parker had a shred of self-awareness, integrity, and dignity, she would have changed the headline to “Too Good To Check,” and under it posted an essay about how shallow, smug, bitterly angry partisanship can blind you to common sense.

What part of that doesn’t reflect precisely the predicament in which O’Conner now finds himself? And why did the Breitbart site simply delete the phony article rather than adding a correction (which WaPo did) and an essay about angry partisanship and common sense. It should also be noted that the erroneous item on WaPo’s site was posted by a guest blogger not employed by WaPo, while the Breitbart screw up was by an editor.

The magnitude of hypocrisy here is off the scales. Breitbart never took responsibility for the phony Hamas story. They also never reported at all that their one-time Golden boy, James O’Keefe, had settled litigation against him for $100,000 in a case where he smeared an ACORN employee. And now they quietly sweep their brazen incompetence under the rug despite having made such a fuss about a similar recent situation.

Nevertheless, Breitbart’s site is still highly regarded in conservative circles, including Fox News, who frequently republish their tripe. It simply cannot be said enough that this is how right-wingers have become the most ignorant and misinformed people in America.

Mar 08 2013 0 cmnts

General

James O’Keefe Agrees To Pay $100,000 To Former ACORN Employee [Update w/O'Keefe Statement]

Posted by: Mark @ 11:41 am

James O'Keefe Having already been convicted of criminal activity in Louisiana, recidivist law-breaker James O’Keefe is now shelling out a hundred grand to one of his victims in the notorious ACORN affair.

ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera was surreptitiously videotaped (for which criminal charges are still pending) and falsely portrayed as offering assistance to O’Keefe’s phony endeavor to transport underage girls from El Salvador for the purpose of prostitution. Unbeknownst to O’Keefe, Vera had notified the police after his encounter with O’Keefe. But O’Keefe posted his fraudulent and heavily edited videotapes anyway with the help of Andrew Breitbart. It will be interesting to see how Breitbart News covers this breaking story – if they do so at all.

This is yet another vindication for ACORN, which has never been found to be guilty of any wrongdoing throughout the trumped up scandal that led to its demise. And it is further evidence that O’Keefe is a disreputable scumbag with no respect for journalism and no personal integrity. This civil litigation defeat is well-deserved and it ensures that the money O’Keefe swindles from his ignorant donors will be put to better use.

[Update] O’Keefe has posted a statement on his settlement agreement that typically denies responsibility and blames others. He calls the $100,000 “the cost of exposing the truth,” and insists that he “will not be deterred from investigating and exposing corruption.” Of course, that statement conflicts with the one he agreed to in court documents wherein he said that he “regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family.” How can he be genuinely remorseful while saying that the “ridiculous lawsuit” consists of “meritless accusations?” What’s more, it is absurd to characterize a $100,000 payout as a nuisance suit. Two or three grand maybe, but a hundred large is real money that only the guilty fork over.

Clearly O’Keefe is an unprincipled and deceitful weasel whose word is worthless. And his equally disreputable cohorts at Breitbart and Fox have not even bothered to report the news of this settlement 24 hours later.

Feb 20 2013 15 cmnts

General

Breitbart Refuses To Apologize For Hagel Story Proven To Be False

Posted by: Mark @ 1:22 pm

In a typical display of arrogant obstinance, Breitbart News is refusing to acknowledge or take responsibility for a false story that was apparently based on a joke.

BreitBrat Ben Shapiro posted an item of February 7, asserting that the White House was “Duck[ing] Questions On Friends of Hamas” with regard to Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense. Shapiro wrote that his investigation had turned up several sources claiming that Hagel had received donations from the terrorist sympathizers with the unlikely name.

However, it turns out, as it often does with the BreitBrats, that there was no truth to the rumor. In fact, it wasn’t even a rumor, it was a joke. When investigated by real reporters it was learned that Friends of Hamas does not even exist. But upon being revealed as a hack who never bothered to look into the claims of his alleged sources, BreitBrat Ben is now stiffening his back and defending his journalistic incompetence.

Shapiro is attempting to divert attention from his bumbling reportage by attacking the reporters who actually did what reporters are supposed to do. Meanwhile, his phony story is bubbling up the conservative food chain and has even made it to Fox’s Lou Dobbs program. So far, none of these disseminators of the debunked story about the fake group have issued corrections. But that’s to be expected from “news” enterprises that have such a devoted aversion to the truth.

Feb 04 2013 4 cmnts

General, Wankery

Brilliant Breitbart Investigation Exposes: The Plot To Eat LUNCH!

Posted by: Mark @ 7:47 pm

Breitbart News appears to be angling to overtake The Onion as the funniest Internet site. Unfortunately for them, they aren’t doing it on purpose.

The geniuses at Breitbart News blasted out a shocking expose today that threatens to blow the lid off of Obama’s Justice Department. After an investigation that included the filing of numerous Freedom of Information Act requests concerning “questionable behavior by agency personnel” and their relationship with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Breitbart’s crack team of reporters (or is that team of reporters on crack?) published the shocking results of their investigation.

The DOJ had invited Morris Dees, founder of the SPLC, to speak at a Diversity Training Event. Dees was a particularly appropriate choice to address the group because of the SPLC’s long record of fighting bigots and hate groups and advocating for, and teaching, racial tolerance. The SPLC has also worked with both federal and local police agencies to identify racist individuals and groups who engage in criminal activities.

What Breitbart found, via their pals at the right-wing legal group, Judicial Watch, was a batch of emails that revealed … well, see for yourself (cut and paste from Breitbart News):

May 3, 2012 email – “We would like to tape the [Morris Dees] remarks and, at the same time, out Morris real time on the DOJ system can watch from their desks. Is that okay with Morris?”
June 27, 2012 – “Let me know Morris’ air schedule so I can pick him up at airport and plan an evening for us if he stays over.”
July 11, 2012 – “I will be at National in my [REDACTED] in which he has ridden before … I can arrange dinner. If he has a preference in DC where he wants to eat … tell him to let me know his druthers.”
July 16, 2012 – “The AAG’s office want to take Morris out to lunch before the 1:30 pm July 31 remarks … I’d pick Morris up at his hotel at 11:30 am if that worked for him.”
July 23, 2012 - “I will pick you [Morris Dees] up at the airport July 30. Would you go out to dinner with my wife and me and our two teenage daughters that first night? The girls need some inspiration from a master of inspiration.”

That’s it. Really! The DOJ communicated with a guest speaker to arrange airport transportation and meals. And for this Breitbart seems to think that prison, or perhaps waterboarding, would be warranted.

This article, written by former “Moonie” Washington Times reporter Kerry Picket, castigated the SPLC as an “attack group” and complained about them allegedly “labeling organizations with conservative views on social issues as ‘hate groups.’” However, it is hardly the SPLC’s fault that many so conservative groups are so often found to be bleating overt hate-speech. The SPLC carefully documents every allegation they make and they are respected by the nation’s foremost experts on organized bigotry.

This is another example of the BreitBrats simply targeting an ideological opponent and, lacking any evidence of actual wrongdoing, manufactures an imaginary outrage with which to regale their easily misled audience. But when the pickings are so slim that they are reduced to fanning a scandal comprised of dining reservations, you just have to laugh. It doesn’t get much more pathetic than this.

Jan 28 2013 8 cmnts

General

Fox News Deliberately Low-Balled Sarah Palin According To Reliable Sources (CNN)

Posted by: Mark @ 3:01 am

Much has been made of the news that Tea Party queen Sarah Palin and Fox News, the cable network that served as the PR agency for the Tea Party, have parted ways. The reporting generally implied that Palin had turned down Fox’s offer to renew her contract. That is, in all likelihood, exactly what happened.

However, contract negotiations are more complex than that. And now we have reporting from CNN’s Howard Kurtz that fleshes out some of the ambiguities of the original stories. On his program Reliable Sources, Kurtz expanded on the matter by saying…

“My reporting shows that Fox News did offer Sarah Palin a new contract, but it is what I would call a low-ball offer, significantly less, a fraction of the million dollars a year she had been paid.”

In other words, Fox deliberately made an offer that they knew Palin would reject because they had no interest in retaining her beyond her current contract. As speculated previously here at News Corpse, Fox probably “offered her a moose burger and parking validation to re-up – and even that would have been more than she’s worth.” After all, why would Fox continue to overpay someone about whom Fox CEO Roger Ailes reportedly said he thinks is an idiot?

Palin’s star has been fading fast. Fox News only posted a modified AP story about the separation on their web site. Fox Nation, known for its rabid partisanship and rank dishonesty, didn’t report on it all. As evidence of Palin’s rapidly declining value, her first post-Fox stop was at the Internet’s home of doctored videos and right-wing propaganda, Breitbart News. There she answered a couple of vacant questions from BreitBrat Stephen Bannon, the sycophantic producer of the fawning Palin crockumentary, “The Undefeated” (the most ironically named box office bomb ever, considering it chronicles one of modern history’s most frequently defeated political failures).

In response to Bannon’s query about what she planned to do next, Palin had no answer other than vagaries about her desire to quit “preaching to the choir.” She spoke of “sharing more broadly the message of the beauty of freedom” to a larger audience. She didn’t give any indication of where she would find an audience receptive to her wingnuttery that she thinks is larger than Fox News from which she was just ousted. The narrow appeal of her conservative extremism is unlikely to find much acceptance beyond the tiny choir that is currently singing from her warped hymnal.

Then Bannon asked her where she thinks the country stands today and she launched into a dirty laundry list of every worn out criticism the right has lobbed at Obama for four years. She spoke of deficits and unemployment – problems that resulted from George Bush’s mismanagement of the economy and have improved under Obama. Of course, she also included fabricated controversies about ObamaCare, Benghazi, and gun control, that are a staple of the right’s outrage machine.

Palin told BreitBrat Bannon that “Conservatism didn’t lose.” She blames the 2012 GOP debacle entirely on Mitt Romney, despite the fact that he ran as a “severely conservative” candidate embracing every position held dear to the Republican far-right fringe. And she declares that “we haven’t begun to fight! But we delight in those who underestimate us.” In that regard she must be filled to the brim with delight, because it would hard to have a lower estimation of the woman who thinks a “gotcha” question is “What magazines do you read.”

On the basis of that level of insightful commentary, it’s no wonder that Fox chose to insult Palin with a pittance of her prior pay, and free her to tarnish the reputation of some other news enterprise (i.e. Breitbart). Apparently somebody at Fox has concluded that their reputation has already been tarnished enough.

Jan 16 2013 10 cmnts

General, Wankery

Breitbart Takes An Early Lead In The ‘Stupidest Article Of The Year’ Contest: On Gun-Related Deaths

Posted by: Mark @ 11:04 am

The year is only about two weeks old but a strong entry has already been made to capture the “Stupidest Article Of The Year” award. And to no one’s surprise, a perennial favorite in the competition to achieve Olympian idiocy has leaped to front of the pack.

Breitbart News has few rivals when it comes to jaw-dropping dimwittedness. And they have once again proven their mettle with an article sporting the headline “Less Than One Percent Of Deaths In 2011 Were Gun-Related.” Here’s an excerpt:

“The media regularly twists gun numbers to make gun-related deaths appear predominant over every other type of death in this country. However, a rational examination of how small the percentage of gun-related deaths are when compared to the overall number of deaths in any given year helps one to see through the hype.”

The blockheads at Breitbart are actually trying to deceptively distort the argument by comparing the number of deaths by guns to the total number of all deaths, including old age, disease, accidents, and auto-erotic asphyxiation (that last one was thrown in as a frame of reference for the Breitbrats who probably have personal experience with it).

Over two and a half million people died in 2011 for all combined reasons. It is utterly irrelevant to compare that number to just the deaths caused by guns and conclude that such deaths are therefore not a problem. A proper analysis would be to compare gun-related deaths to other types of similar fatalities. But by the perverse logic employed by the Breitbrats tuberculosis, AIDS, asthma, influenza, Parkinson’s disease, leukemia, and prostate or ovarian cancers are also not a problem. According to the Centers for Disease Control they all have death rates that are less than or equivalent to gun-related deaths. So rest easy America.

If all of that weren’t bad enough, the Breitbrats can’t even get their statistics straight. Their article claims that “in 2011, the total number of gun-related deaths was 8,583.” However, the actual number is 32,163 – a discrepancy of a mere 375 percent. That’s the sort of buffoonery that will make Breitbart a challenge to defeat as the year in stupid progresses. So congratulations to them on their world-class ignorance, and to the other contenders (i.e. Fox News, Daily Caller, WorldNetDaily, Newsbusters, et al), Don’t give up, the year is still young.

Jan 14 2013 3 cmnts

General, Wankery

He’s Baaack! James O’Keefe’s Latest Exercise In Lame: The Gun Free Episode

Posted by: Mark @ 4:48 am

See the update to this story here.

James O'Keefe Remember this guy: James O’Keefe, a self-styled citizen journalist whose shenanigans have been financed by the likes of Andrew Breitbart. O’Keefe is best known for producing videos that have been deliberately edited to smear his victims and deceive his audience.

Among his most notorious adventures were: His attacks on ACORN, an organization that was later proven to have done nothing unlawful; His attempt to seduce a CNN reporter aboard his “Love Boat” that blew up in his face when his accomplice exposed him; His unlawful trespassing into a Senator’s office disguised as a telephone repairman, which resulted in his conviction for that criminal activity; His effort to demonstrate the existence of voter fraud wherein the only evidence of any fraud was that he engaged in himself; His misrepresentation of NPR officials that was so bad that Glenn Beck’s web site debunked and denounced him; And let’s not forget his alleged drugging and harassment of a female colleague who claims to have been held against her will at a barn in his New Jersey home.

Now choirboy O’Keefe is teasing his latest deception, a project he promises will make journalists angry. Of course, actual journalists have always been angered by charlatans who disgrace their profession. O’Keefe’s current publisher, the conspiracy web rag WorldNetDaily (has Breitbart ditched him?), has more details:

O’Keefe’s crew asked journalists working for CNN, MSNBC and others whether they would put a sign in their lawn that says “Citizens Against Senseless Violence. THIS HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE!”

“No journalist wanted the sign,” he says. “Many journalists had armed guards.”

“We also showed up at Eric Holder’s house,” O’Keefe added. “Authorities came to protect him.”

What O’Keefe is trying to prove is completely unfathomable. It makes no sense that a public person like a journalist would ever consider advertising private information like their home address or security arrangements. Journalists often work under circumstances that put themselves at great risk. There is no rational scenario in which their private life is analogous to that of ordinary citizens. Consequently, the revelation that a journalist would decline the absurd offer to post such a sign should be of no surprise to anyone with a functioning brain.

The obvious intent of O’Keefe is to fabricate a situation in which he can attempt to embarrass the target of his childish scheme. It has nothing to do with journalism, and everything to do with the politics of gun worship. What’s more, it completely misrepresents the concept of gun-free zones, which are not efforts to brag about the absence of firearms, but are intended to alert law-abiding citizens that such weapons are not permitted and that bringing them into the designated area would subject them to criminal prosecution.

The gun worshiping crowd is fond of whining that regulations are ineffective because criminals would simply ignore them. However that would also apply to any law, including rape and murder. So their argument is that no laws prohibiting anything should ever be enacted. Clearly that would be insane. Laws do deter people from engaging in the behavior they are intended to inhibit. And for those who are not deterred, laws provide a mechanism to punish the offender. No one has ever suggested that the mere presence of a law would eliminate crime, but any sane person knows that laws are an essential part of the justice system and that they have a legitimate purpose and a demonstrable effect.

O’Keefe has promised that his videos of journalists declining to accommodate his prank will be released soon. If history is any guide they will be severely mangled in the editing room to give the most disparaging possible impression of the subject. But the good news is that, at this point, his reputation has been so shattered that he has been relegated to aligning himself with the bozos at WorldNetDaily, as if Breitbart wasn’t already low enough. Thus, fewer people will be exposed to his dishonest and puerile antics, and this charade will dissolve away without much notice. Because if there’s one thing the world needs less of, it’s O’Keefe’s smug mug heralding more deceitful excursions into pseudo-journalism.

Sep 07 2012 NO cmnts

General, Wankery

Not So Breitbart: Left Media in Full Civil War Over Fact Checkers?

Posted by: Mark @ 10:14 am

The BreitBrats are at it again. They continue to embarrass themselves with hypocritical articles that lack substance or reason. However, they do provide an abundant source of unintentional humor.

The latest episode features a column by the Editor-At-Large for Breitbart News, Ben Shapiro, with the outrageously hyperbolic title “Left Media in Full Civil War Over Fact Checkers.” The entirety of his outrage is based on the criticism of a single article by the Associated Press that purports to fact-check Bill Clinton’s speech at the Democratic National Convention.

The AP’s article deserved the criticism it received. It’s analysis was strikingly biased and avoided the most elementary criteria for judging the factual basis of its subject. For instance, the AP highlighted a portion of Clinton’s speech where he correctly quoted a Romney aide saying that “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers.”

The quote was accurate, in context, and documented. The AP’s response…

THE FACTS: Clinton, who famously finger-wagged a denial on national television about his sexual relationship with intern Monica Lewinsky and was subsequently impeached in the House on a perjury charge, has had his own uncomfortable moments over telling the truth.

What the hell did that have to with Clinton’s remark? What bearing did it have on whether or not Clinton’s statement was factual? Obviously, none at all. And it was the criticism of this article by the AP that brought BreitBrat Ben to the boiling point, accusing the left of engaging in a “civil war” with nothing more than this one article as evidence. Ironically, Breitbart News has been conducting their own war against fact checkers, whom they regard as a “liberal” media plot. And I have evidence. Here are a few recent columns from the BreitBrats:

AP Publishes Laughably Unserious Fact-Check Of Clinton’s Speech
When Not Outright Lying, Fact-Checkers Make Fools of Themselves
Media Launches Preemptive ‘Fact-Check’ Strike on Romney Speech
Era of Media Fact Checkers Intimidating Republicans Is Over
WaPo’s Glenn Kessler Has Fact-Checking Tantrum Over ‘You Didn’t Build That’
Romney to Media Fact-Checkers: Drop Dead

Note that the first article above lambastes the very same AP fact-check that Shapiro is now bashing liberals for criticizing. Breitbart’s Editor John Nolte is apparently among the liberals who are at war. Except that Nolte’s war is with his own dementia. He actually believes that the AP published an “intentionally ridiculous” fact-check in order to help President Obama:

“From where I sit, the corrupt AP intentionally manufactured a ridiculous fact check so they could be on record fact-checking Clinton while at the same time doing zero harm to him and by extension Barack Obama.”

That’s in keeping with his previous paranoid delusions about fact-checkers being a liberal plot. Nolte and Shapiro are so obsessed with their assault on truth-telling that it has clouded their ability to even remember what they wrote a week or two ago. Even worse, in Shapiro’s article asserting that liberals are at war with fact-checkers, he unleashes a litany of attacks against them himself. So he can’t even recall his delusions from one paragraph to the next.

Last month I posted an article with the headline “Is Breitbart News Really A Parody Site Attempting To Make Conservatives Look Stupid?” That question sounds less and less rhetorical every day.

Aug 30 2012 8 cmnts

Election, General, Wankery

Breitbart Conspiracy Theory: Fact-Checkers Are A Liberal Plot

Posted by: Mark @ 4:36 pm

A new front has been established in the political war zone that reveals the unique character of the American conservative movement. Not satisfied with bashing everything about the media (despite the fact that their own Fox News is a huge part of it), the wackoids on the right have declared war against … Fact-checkers!

This may seem wildly deranged, but upon reflection it makes perfect sense. If your entire movement is built on a foundation of lies, then fact-checkers are your mortal enemy. This became clear a few days ago when a Mitt Romney adviser publicly declared that “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”

That comment was hailed by John Nolte, editor of Breitbart News, as evidence that Romney’s campaign had decided to tell fact-checkers to “Drop Dead!” It’s astonishing that a political operative would admit something so absurdly anti-fact and to frame his remarks in the context of factuality being a dictatorship. He plainly believes that being forced to adhere to only statements that are true is too large a burden for the Romney campaign. Of course, that has been apparent for the past several years to anyone who has observed Romney in action.

Now the mental deficients at Breitbart News are piling on with more articles blasting fact-checkers as if it were a dishonorable profession on a par with crack dealers. BreitBrat Nolte veritably glows with excitement as he declares that the “Era of Media Fact Checkers Intimidating Republicans Is Over.” Where he gets that from is a mystery, but then he doesn’t require any facts to support his assertions so he can say whatever the hell he wants – which he often does, such as when he advocated the murder of a child actress’ mother.

The source of Nolte’s glee came from reports following Paul Ryan’s fib-filled speech at the Republican National Kvetch-a-Sketch. Ryan was found to have slipped off of the truth tracks on numerous occasions that were well documented by a broad and diverse cross-section of the press, including Fox News. Nolte’s paranoid, conspiratorial dementia drove him to assert that the flurry of fact-checking that found fault with Ryan’s speech was…

“…undoubtedly pre-planned and organized between Team Obama and his Media Palace Guards. [...] My guess is that Obama and the media set up this plan weeks ago.”

Of course they did. And Ryan must have been in on it as well because he dutifully spewed the lies that the media had pre-planned to expose in their fact-checking. The scheme would have failed without Ryan’s cooperation. Apparently, in Nolte’s diseased brain, Ryan is a double agent working to sabotage Romney’s campaign. And the plot was only uncovered because, as Nolte revealed, “Breitbart is everywhere.” Somehow the zombie spirit of Andrew Breitbart is still haunting the material world and communicating with Nolte to expose liberal media shenanigans. Scary, isn’t it?

In another article, Nolte bashed a columnist for the Washington Post, Glenn Kessler, for daring to venture into what sane political analysts call “speculation.” Nolte seems to think that when an opinion columnist attempts to anticipate events in the political world, which is what opinion columnists are paid to do, he has broken some sort of commandment. Nolte goes even further, accusing Kessler of extortion (while engaging in some childish insults):

“This feckless, impotent little fact-checker is bullying Romney; putting him on notice and threatening him. Kessler’s firing a warning show (sic) across Romney’s bow.”

Nolte virtually froths with revulsion over Kessler having the audacity to presume that Romney’s speech will contain some of the ideas Romney has been talking about on the campaign trail for several months. He may have a point. With Romney’s proclivity for flip-flopping on almost every position he takes, it may be risky to expect that he’ll be consistent in his speech tonight. So once again, Romney would have to be complicit in his own downfall in order for this plot to succeed. It’s downright insidious.

After celebrating the demise of fact-checking, Nolte feverishly condemns the practice of anticipating a future event in politics. But that doesn’t stop him from making his own wholly unsupported prediction:

“Day after day, before our very eyes, we are witnessing the media Kamikazee their integrity against the truth for a guy who’s going to lose.”

So Nolte thinks that Kessler is feckless and impotent for correctly noting the themes of Romney’s campaign and suggesting that they might be included in his big speech. But Nolte has no problem with stating as a fact that Obama is going to lose an election that is still two months away, despite the fact that the electoral college map is swinging heavily in his favor. However, that’s no problem for Nolte since he has already cast off facts as annoyances that are only important to liberals. How convenient.

Aug 20 2012 1 cmnts

General

Is Breitbart News Really A Parody Site Attempting To Make Conservatives Look Stupid?

Posted by: Mark @ 5:53 pm

The question in the headline above may seem whimsical, but at some point it needs to be taken seriously. When the Breitbart news posts a series of articles about President Obama’s press availability, like the ones they posted recently, it seems almost impossible to conclude that they aren’t there strictly for comedy.

A couple of days ago, the BreitBrats posted an article complaining that Obama hasn’t done enough press conferences. This is not the first time that the President has faced such complaints. A couple of years ago the conservative media, led by Fox News, voiced similar sentiments. However, that was only after they finished complaining that Obama was doing too many press appearances and was “overexposed.” Now, after another brief lull in press gatherings, they are at it again.

The headline of the BreitBrat piece was “Obama Dodging Issues, Tough Questions From Journalists.” Fair enough. The President should be accountable to the people and the media are their representatives. I am a big believer in public servants offering themselves up to press inquiries regularly.

So today, that is exactly what President Obama did. He made a surprise appearance in the White House Briefing Room and took questions from the cream of the presidential press corps. So of course the BreitBrats responded with gratitude for the President accommodating the demands of the people and submitting himself for questioning. Their headline today was “Obama Caves To Media, Hijacks Press Briefing.”

Actually, that doesn’t seem very gracious. After demanding that the President be more forthcoming, the BreitBrats insult him for doing so. What’s more, BreitBrat Ben Shapiro makes a delusional criticism of Obama for “dropping by on a weekend.” Someone should inform Shapiro that Monday is not generally considered to be part of the weekend.

In a separate article, Shapiro accused the President of telling “lie after lie” during the press event. But he only gave a single example of anything Obama said in the press conference that Shapiro considered to be untruthful. It concerned the President’s statement that “Nobody accused Mr. Romney of being a felon.” Obama was responding to a question about comments made by Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter. She said a few weeks ago that…

“Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments.”

Of course, that is not an accusation of being a felon. Simply saying that if someone were to commit a felony they would be a felon is not even remotely the same as saying outright that someone is a felon. I could, for instance, say that if I were to commit a felony I would be a felon. See? I did not just call myself a felon. But that simple distinction was too much for BreitBrat Ben and his only example of an alleged lie dissolves into vapor.

Additionally, BreitBrat John Nolte chirped in with his own hilarity. He is apparently very disturbed that the President made a reference to Mitt Romney not releasing his tax returns. So he stretched credulity beyond recognition by associating Obama’s comments with a comedy routine by Jon Stewart. A few weeks ago, Stewart blasted Harry Reid for using the imagined shamed of Romney’s dead father to criticize Romney for his resistance to making his taxes available to the American people.

Nolte thinks that Obama’s reference to the tax issue in general was identical to Reid’s invocation of the elder Romney’s shame. It’s not. While it could be argued that Reid stepped over the line by imputing an emotional reaction by Romney’s father that Reid couldn’t possibly have known, Obama did nothing of the sort. It is perfectly acceptable to make note of the fact that Romney’s dad released twelve years of tax returns when he ran for president. Nolte seems to be implying that any mention of an actual fact about prior presidential candidates and their tax returns is off limits. That is just plain crazy.

All of this nonsense occurred within hours of Obama’s press conference – a conference that the right, including the BreitBrats, had been clamoring for. And when they got what they wanted, they spent the afternoon making up incoherent critiques rather than giving the President credit for listening to his critics and appearing before the press as they had requested.

The sort of right-wing extremists that inhabit Breitbart’s domain make a mockery of the conservative media. They castigate the President for not doing something, then lambaste him for eventually doing it. They have a built in lose-lose proposition that really does nothing but dissolve any credibility they might otherwise have strung together. That’s why I’m becoming more and more convinced that they are a secret offshoot of The Onion. That would explain so much. And otherwise, they are just making fools of themselves for no good reason.

Aug 09 2012 NO cmnts

Election, General

The Sad State Of Politics: Hall Of Fame Hypocrisy From Allen West

Posted by: Mark @ 2:56 pm

A new ad was released today by a Super PAC supporting Patrick Murphy of Florida. Murphy is running to challenge Wackadoodle Allen West for Florida’s 16th congressional seat. The ad features West in boxing gloves figuratively bashing the people his policies bash literally every day.

After being contacted by Breitbart News, West made a comment condemning the ad as “reprehensible” and complained that “It plays on stereotypes and fear to divide Americans.” Amongst his objections was that the ad portrayed him punching a senior citizen. West went out of his way to note that the women was white. Funny how these conservatives reject any allegations of racism as unwarranted displays of victimization, unless they are the ones making the allegations. West on to say…

This ad reflects the sad state of politics in our Republic with those who seek to destroy a person’s character to cover for their lack of intellectual ability and integrity.

Allen West Wow. That’s coming from the guy who accused half the Democrats in Washington of being communists; the guy who said that Goebbels would be proud of the Democratic Party; the guy who has repeatedly referenced Nazis to describe his opponents; the guy who was reprimanded, fined, and nearly discharged dishonorably for engaging in torture.

The Breitbrats also made a point of criticizing the Super PAC that released the anti-West ad. they noted with disdain the possibility of collusion with the Murphy campaign. That’s something the Romney campaign has also taken up with regard to an ad released by a pro-Obama Super PAC. It would be nice if these disingenuous blowhards would actually step up and oppose these Super PACs rather than just whine when one aims at their pet politicians. But since the right has consistently defended these PACs, they have no moral grounds for complaining about them when they are the target.

Aug 06 2012 3 cmnts

General

Fox Nation vs. Reality: Obama Selling Amnesty?

Posted by: Mark @ 4:39 pm

The issue of immigration is one that the Fox Nationalists relish in demogoguing. They publish numerous stories that are openly racist, as has been thoroughly documented. Here’s just such a story that was designed to inflame prejudice with its utterly dishonest skewing of the facts:

The headline composed by the mental deficients at Fox Nation is wholly untrue. Not only is amnesty not a part of the administration’s program, nothing in it is for sale.

In truth. President Obama directed the Department of Homeland Security to exercise prosecutorial discretion so that innocent children who were brought to this country by undocumented parents are not unduly punished while a more comprehensive solution is negotiated with Congress. The program does not provide amnesty. The fee to apply for this program is intended to offset costs, but can be waived on a case by case basis for applicants unable to pay.

None of those facts stopped Fox from deliberately misrepresenting the matter in way that leads their dimwitted audience to presume that the administration is peddling citizenship to foreigners who come here to steal our jobs. It appears that Fox picked up the story from the juveniles at Breitbart News where John Nolte published an article that implied that Obama’s goal is to mint new voters. Never mind that the immigrants partaking of this program will not have voting rights because they will not be citizens.

Nolte also made a point of adding a note at the end of his column complaining that the author of the article he referenced at ABC News didn’t use the derogatory adjective “illegal” to refer to the program’s potential participants. Apparently Nolte gets upset when people are not sufficiently racist for him.

Aug 04 2012 7 cmnts

Election, General

Fox News And Right-Wing Media Lie About Military Access To Voting

Posted by: Mark @ 11:57 am

Yesterday Fox News featured a story about the availability of early voting in the state of Ohio. As can be expected, Fox utterly mangled the truth in order to portray Democrats in a negative light.

The issue at hand was Ohio’s law that permits members of the military to engage in early voting up until the Monday prior to the election, while all other Ohioans have a deadline of the previous Friday. Democrats objected to this situation as it discriminates against certain voters and is almost certainly a violation of the Constitution’s “equal protection” clause. They filed suit in order to extend the early voting privilege to all citizens.

To be clear, the goal of the suit was to allow every Ohio citizen to vote early up to the Monday prior to election, not to restrict the military by taking away those three extra days. It’s a position consistent with Democratic efforts to make voting as easy as possible. Republicans, on the other hand, have been conducting a War on Voting that includes curtailing early voting, placing new regulations on registration gathering, and voter ID laws that are proven to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters in order to prevent fraud that they can’t even show exists.

Nevertheless, the conservative media jumped on this story, sensing an opportunity to misrepresent the facts and smear Democrats. Breitbart News began with a wholly dishonest article that proclaimed…

“it’s unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn’t make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us.”

Of course, it is the Democrats who are trying to make it as easy as possible for everyone to vote. And the notion that the military (or anyone) has more right to vote than anyone else sounds like something from an autocratic dictatorship that would place powerful elites above ordinary citizens.

Fox News picked up the story from Breitbart and discussed it with a partisan panel who regurgitated the false premise that Democrats were seeking to take something away from our military. The segment began with anchor Shannon Bream saying…

“If President Obama gets his way, the special voting rights of some of America’s finest will be eliminated. The campaign is suing to keep members of the military from having extra time to cast their ballots in one key battleground state.”

Wrong again. They are suing to give everyone extra time. During the discussion Charles Krauthammer even injected the assertion that soldiers need more time because the demands of their duties in war zones like Afghanistan prevent them from going to the polls. Krauthammer is supposed to be the intellectual on Fox News, but that comment is just plain stupid. Surely he must know that early voting is only available to people who are actually in the state. There are no polling places in Afghanistan, early or otherwise. Soldiers who are out of the country vote by absentee ballot and this issue doesn’t affect them in any way.

Having climbed up the Right-Wing Noise Machine food chain, Mitt Romney chimed in with his contribution to exacerbating this phony outrage:

“Any effort to impede the right of our military members, overseas or here domestically in voting, would be an extraordinary violation of the trust we should have for those who serve so valiantly.”

He’s absolutely right. That’s why it’s absurd to be making a federal case of this since what he is implying has not occurred. Romney has simply joined the ranks of those who will shamelessly exploit fabricated controversies to advance his own self-interests. And he’s not alone. Perhaps the most painfully embarrassing example of this sort of exploitation is Florida wackadoodle congressman Allen West. Here is what West posted on his Facebook page about this matter:

“As a retired Army officer I am appalled at the Obama administration’s actions to bring a lawsuit against the State of Ohio for the early voting privileges it extends to our Men and Women serving in uniform. To have the Commander in Chief make our US Servicemen and Women the target of a political attack to benefit his reelection actions is reprehensible. The voting privilege extended to these Warriors who represent the best among us should not be a part of the collective vision of this inept President who is more concerned about his reelection than sequestration. As a Combat Veteran, for this President to unleash his campaign cronies against our Military is unconscionable…..how dare this President compare the service, sacrifice, and commitment of those who Guard our liberties not as special and seek to compare them to everyone else. Barack Obama is undeserving of the title Commander-in-Chief.”

Oh my. How dare the President compare soldiers to everyone else. It’s almost as if the President has respect for both the military and for all the citizens of this country – the teachers, factory workers, architects, firefighters, entrepreneurs, cab drivers, homemakers, etc. West is aghast that members of the military are not canonized and the rest of the American people subjugated to their superiority. Ironically, West is the last person to argue for the superiority of the military seeing as he was reprimanded, fined, and nearly discharged dishonorably for engaging in torture. He was a disgrace to his uniform and has no moral standing to question the President’s role as Commander-in-Chief.

The position of Democrats in this matter is consistent with their goal to make voting easier for every citizen. To the extent that members of the military may face difficulties in getting to the polls, the same is true for nurses, policemen, and workers struggling to hold down two or more jobs to make ends meet. And the three extra days just happen to include the weekend that makes the added convenience so significant for working people.

If the polls are to be kept open until the Monday prior to election day, why not let every voter use them? That’s the question that Republicans, and the the right-wing media, cannot answer without sinking into craven hypocrisy. What exactly do they think is so horrifying about letting everyone vote?

The answer is that they assume that more military voters will swing right (an assumption they may regret), and that the working people who would benefit from the additional time are Democratic voters. So the equation is simple: Republicans want to stack the deck for the GOP and suppress their opponents. That’s where the real voter fraud is in America.

[Update:] Romney camp can’t substantiate their lie. Politico reports that: Romney’s spokesman, Ryan Williams, in an interview Saturday could point to no place in Obama’s lawsuit that seeks to restrict the rights of military voters.