Month: March 2012

The Fox News Channel: Still #1 With Racists

Posted by on March 14, 2012 at 10:53 pm. 17 Comments :

This doesn’t need much embellishment. A story on the Fox News web site about an archaeological discovery in China elicited what we now recognize as typical responses from the Fox News community.

Fox News Racists

The list of brazenly racist comments above was abridged to remove the many duplicates. Apparently the Fox News racists have very limited imaginations and most of them kept posting the same stupid “jokes” repeatedly. In the spirit of the hatred they espouse, I would just like to say that the IQ of the “stone-age” man in the picture is probably two or three times that of the average Fox viewer.

Racism has a home on American television, and that home is Fox News. You might think that they would be embarrassed by this, but it occurs with such frequency that it is clear that they are aiming for this audience.

Fox News Is Very Upset About Flag Desecration – Sometimes

Posted by on March 14, 2012 at 3:54 pm. 2 Comments :

[Update 9/20/2012: The hypocrites at Fox News have done it again. This time they are incensed about a campaign poster that has an Obama logo on it]

The Patriopathic zealots at Fox News are mightily disturbed by an American flag that was modified to place a picture of an American president where the field of stars is normally seen. They published a story about this outrage at the top of their web site this morning, complete with a snarky comment about China. The only problem with that is that their outrage, as usual, is selectively distributed. Fox News is firmly against flag desecration unless it is committed by the Tea Party or other conservative defilers.

Fox News Flag Flap

Technically, it is considered desecration anytime a flag is altered. The Obama flag, therefore, is an inappropriate modification. But the same is true for the Tea Party flag. In fact, the same is true for flag fashion (such as the flag bikinis frequently featured on Fox) and signatures on the flag (which Bush and Palin have done at their rallies). So I wonder when Fox News will feature a headline article about these disgraceful America-haters:

Flag Desecrators

As for China, millions of American flags are manufactured there. According to the Flag Manufacturers Association of America, 83% of the American flags imported into the U.S. come from China.

Rush Limbaugh: Digging Sarah Palin Up From The Grave

Posted by on March 14, 2012 at 11:01 am. 2 Comments :

In a desperate play for attention, Rush Limbaugh has taken to defending Fox News analyst Sarah Palin, who was recently the subject of a Democratic fundraising video. However, the form of Limbaugh’s defense may be not be particularly complimentary.

Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh: Barack Obama is running a re-elect ad against Sarah Palin who is not running. So it’s time now for them to have a new demon. In this case, they’ve got to go back to the graveyard, dig Sarah Palin back up.

The graveyard? I wonder how Palin’s Facebook ghost writers will respond to this insult. Limbaugh is echoing the same sentiment that Fox News expressed yesterday on their Fox Nation web site when they complained that “Four years later, President Obama is still running against Sarah Palin.” The general consensus among these conservatives is that Palin is a has-been who is not worthy of attention, despite her current employment by Fox News and her hints that she would accept the GOP nomination for president at a brokered convention.

Limbaugh continued his remarks regarding Palin to assert that there is conspiracy to demean the woman he regards as irrelevant:

“And it’s bouncing off of the HBO movie, Game Change. Which is all part of the plan. It’s all part of a brilliantly conceived plan that they hope will be a flawlessly executed plan. Now they’ve got the movie based on the book, Game Change. And it makes Palin and all these Republicans look like idiots. The heroes in that movie are the people who are portrayed as knowing Palin was the wrong choice, and admitting that Palin’s stupid.”

For the record, the characterization of Palin in the book and movie, Game Change, has been affirmed by the Republican campaign strategists for McCain/Palin and her own handlers. If there is a conspiracy it is being orchestrated from the right, not the White House.

The real problem that Limbaugh is dealing with is his own irrelevancy. In the past couple of weeks he has lost more than a hundred advertisers due to his boorish misogyny. His show is running with cheap local ads, free public service announcements, and even dead air. Nevertheless, Limbaugh and his supporters are steadfast in their insistence that none of this has hurt Limbaugh or his show. Fox Nation posted an article claiming, without any evidence whatsoever, that he has “Has the Biggest Audience He’s Had in Years.” But we’ve heard that kind of denial before:

Rick Santorum: It Should Be Illegal To Read Off A Teleprompter

Posted by on March 13, 2012 at 11:48 am. 5 Comments :

Rick Santorum, March 12, 2012:

I always believed that when you run for president of the United States, it should be illegal to read off a teleprompter. Because all you’re doing is reading someone else’s words to people.

When you’re running for president people should know, not what someone’s writing for you after they’ve had pollsters and speechwriters test, focus group it, and all this kind of stuff, but you’re voting for someone who is going to be the leader of our government. Not of our country, but of our government. And it’s important for you to understand who that person is in their own words, see them, look them in the eye. Have a chance, as I’ve done, get around and talk to people. Get a chance to see what’s there and hear what’s on my heart and in my mind. Have a chance to answer questions as several of you did.

That’s what it’s supposed to be about. You’re choosing a leader. A leader isn’t just about what’s written on a piece of paper, or on a website, or what 30 second TV ad they can run. You’re trying to get a judgement of who that person is.

Rick Santorum's Teleprompters

Michael Gerson, Chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush, on speechwriting:

“It is a process in which a leader refines his own thoughts, invites suggestions by trusted advisers and welcomes the contributions of literary craft to political communication. […] It is actually a form of pride — in a politician or anyone else — to believe that every thought produced by the firing of one’s neurons is immediately fit for public consumption.”

The idiotic statement by Rick Santorum above is one of the best arguments for Teleprompters you will ever hear. Setting aside his embarrassing self-contradiction, the statement is full of stupid grammatical errors and ludicrous elocution (the leader of the government, not the country?). Based on his demonstrated inarticulateness, I certainly hope that Santorum refrains from using a Teleprompter for the rest of the campaign, but I would bet Mitt Romney’s $10,000 that he won’t.

Fox Nation’s War on Women: Sarah Palin vs. Jane Fonda

Posted by on March 12, 2012 at 12:44 pm. 8 Comments :

I am now firmly convinced that the Fox Nation web site is edited by a high school intern. When you consider the absurdly hyperbolic verbs that animate their headlines (i.e. “Cheney’s Daughter Annihilates MSNBC Anchor”), and their infantile pet names for people they don’t like (i.e. “Pig” Maher), the only conclusion is that either they have recruited from a remedial program at a local high school or Fox has implemented an IQ cap of 95 for all employees (so as not to exceed Fox celebrity Sean Hannity).

Today the Fox Nationalists are featuring a story about a video produced by President Obama’s reelection campaign committee. The video (below) addresses comments made last week by Sarah Palin that accuse the President of wanting to take the country back to the days before the civil war.

Palin: “What Barack Obama seems to want to do is go back to before those days when we were in different classes based on income, based on color of skin.”

As usual, Palin’s comment makes perfect sense if you are suffering from schizophrenic hallucinations while in the midst of an alien abduction. Otherwise, you probably can’t help but laugh at the notion that America’s first black president wants to return to the days when he would have been shackled in chains and traded in slave markets.

The item posted on Fox Nation was accompanied by text that declared with astonishment that, “Four years later, President Obama is still running against Sarah Palin.” What makes this particularly amusing is that a little further down the page, Fox Nation’s juvenile and incompetent editor also posted this item: Hanoi Jane Says Fire Nazi Limbaugh. The article referenced in the title was an editorial Jane Fonda co-wrote with Gloria Steinem and Robin Morgan. The article never called Limbaugh a Nazi, although it did criticize Limbaugh for using such rhetoric against his opponents.

“Limbaugh doesn’t just call people names. He promotes language that deliberately dehumanizes his targets. Like the sophisticated propagandist Josef Goebbels, he creates rhetorical frames — and the bigger the lie, the more effective — inciting listeners to view people they disagree with as sub-humans. His longtime favorite term for women, ‘femi-Nazi,’ doesn’t even raise eyebrows anymore”

So according to the Fox Nationalists there is something profoundly odd about responding to Sarah Palin because she was a candidate for vice-president four whole years ago, but making a big fuss about Jane Fonda’s adventures in Vietnam forty years ago (for which she later expressed genuine regret) is perfectly reasonable. The absurdity of that distinction is obvious. But it should also be noted that Fonda is a celebrity who makes movies and occasionally comments on public affairs, while Palin is currently a Fox News political analyst and still a potential candidate for office (she recently said that she would be open to being drafted as the Republican presidential nominee at the GOP convention).

And yet, the pimply-faced editor of Fox Nation thinks that engaging with Palin is a throwback to a bygone era and one of its most inconsequential and meaningless characters. He seems to regard Palin as a has-been who deserves to be ignored. He may just have a point.

Rupert Murdoch’s Birthday Wish To His Staff: STFU You Wankers!

Posted by on March 11, 2012 at 3:54 am. 1 Comments :

Rupert Murdoch

Congratulations are in order for Mr. Rupert Murdoch, the Chairman and CEO of News Corp, who turns 81 today. However, as he surveys the empire that he built he must be bitterly disappointed with the tunnel-blind miscreants he employs. Their obsessive, knee-jerk hostility to all things liberal has clouded their judgment in ways that harm the very interests they are being paid to serve. The result is a rash of friendly fire from within the ranks of Murdoch’s menagerie.

The first casualty is a victim in the Limbaugh-induced war of indecency. Intent on spreading blame to everyone but Limbaugh, Fox News has embarked on a crusade against any liberal (or perceived liberal) who may have said something controversial. It commenced with a Fox favorite for vilification, Bill Maher, but has now extended to comedian Louis CK. Fox News host Greta Van Susteren was so incensed that Louis CK was tapped to provide the comic relief at the annual Radio and Television Correspondents Association dinner that she publicly protested, called him a pig, and declared that she was initiating a boycott of the event. Subsequently, Louis CK dropped the gig. This is an unwelcome birthday gift for Rupert because the comedian also happens to be the star of “Louis” on his FX cable channel.

Next up is the battle between Fox News contributors. Tucker Carlson, one of said contributors, wrote an editorial on his DailyCaller blog that attempted to illustrate a hypocrisy in the media coverage of the Limbaugh controversy. Unfortunately, Carlson chose to include in his example the former LAPD officer Mark Furhman, who is best known for his use of racial epithets that was disclosed during the OJ Simpson trial. Carlson mocked Furhman as a pariah who is probably out of work, and deservedly so because “Nobody wants to be seen with a bigot.” The problem is that Furhman is actually employed by the same Fox News that employs Carlson. So not only is Carlson seen with Furhman, they are colleagues. All one big happy family of bigots. That can’t be making Rupert’s birthday any more joyful.

This is just the sort of thing that can occur when people are so blinded by their prejudices that they lose all sight of anything but their determination to harm their perceived enemies. The ultimate example of this mental defect occurred when Glenn Beck called Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal a terrorist. Alwaleed is the second largest shareholder of News Corp stock outside of the Murdoch family, and a close friend and business partner of Murdoch.

So anyway, happy birthday, Rupert. And good luck with that loathsome collection of reprobates you call a news team.

The Free Market Speaks: 98 Advertisers Ditch Rush Limbaugh – And More

Posted by on March 10, 2012 at 2:02 pm. 10 Comments :

The fallout from Rush Limbaugh’s attacks on Sandra Fluke is growing exponentially. Reports to date have shown that advertisers are responding to the public revulsion of a political heavyweight battering a private citizen who was exercising her right to free speech. The latest accounting of bailing advertisers was reported by Radio-Info via an internal memo they acquired from Limbaugh’s syndicator:

“Premiere Networks is circulating a list of 98 advertisers who want to avoid ‘environments likely to stir negative sentiments.’ The list includes carmakers (Ford, GM, Toyota), insurance companies (Allstate, Geico, Prudential, State Farm) and restaurants (McDonald’s, Subway).”

However, the memo made news of a different sort when it addressed specifics regarding which programs represent the negative environments to which it alluded. The memo continues:

“To all Traffic Managers: The information below applies to your Premiere Radio Networks commercial inventory. More than 350 different advertisers sponsor the programs and services provided to your station on a barter basis. Like advertisers that purchase commercials on your radio station from your sales staff, our sponsors communicate specific rotations, daypart preferences and advertising environments they prefer… They’ve specifically asked that you schedule their commercials in dayparts or programs free of content that you know are deemed to be offensive or controversial (for example, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Tom Leykis, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity).”

What this means is that the advertiser exodus will not be limited to just Limbaugh. Equally offensive radio bloviators like Beck and Hannity and Savage are going to see their ad placements, and revenue, decline.

In anticipation of the professional apologists and distracters, I would like to note that nobody’s First Amendment rights are being violated here. The government is not mandating any restriction of speech. Advertisers are freely deciding what is in the best interests of their businesses.

Conservatives are supposed to support free markets. Well, here’s their chance. If Limbaugh et al want their advertisers back, all they have to do is refrain from their overt incivility and slander. They don’t have to change their political beliefs or prejudices. And if that’s too much to ask, they can take their programs to venues that will support them without a dependence on commercial markets that must answer to their customers.


And for those who think that there is a moral equivalence between Limbaugh and Bill Maher, I would like to note that Maher is a comedian. He has a history of harsh satire directed at people across the political spectrum, including President Obama. That said, I personally don’t approve of racism or misogyny, even as a joke. But I do recognize the difference between a comedian and a political operative. Limbaugh has been an avowed advocate for Republicans and conservatism for decades. Maher has been an equal opportunity basher and satirist. While I would like to see the political discourse in this country become more civil and substantive, I would not impose those same standards for civility on people like Maher or George Carlin or Dennis Miller. Or for that matter John Rich or the Dixie Chicks. The arts have a unique role in expressing a broad range of opinion from a personal, creative perspective. Artists are expected to inspire, challenge, and even shock from time to time. Politicians and pundits are expected to inform, persuade and, hopefully unite.

It is also important to recognize that Maher’s offenses were always directed at public figures who had the resources and media access to defend themselves (i.e. Sarah Palin), while Limbaugh takes aim at people without such advantages. Where could Sandra Fluke ever reach 20 million people a day the way Limbaugh does? On MSNBC?

The beating that Limbaugh is taking at the hands of his advertisers is entirely deserved. And if conservatives want to cancel their subscriptions to HBO to protest Maher, then by all means go for it. If the final result is a more elevated discussion of the issues that impact us all as citizens, then it will have been worth it.

Why The F@&K Does Anyone Pay Attention To Breitbart’s Ghost?

Posted by on March 9, 2012 at 9:00 pm. 3 Comments :

Despite his untimely passing, Andrew Breitbart still seems to command attention from the mainstream media hacks who think that what he did was journalism. His ghost has the uncanny ability to summon up fables and pass them on to naive reporters desperate for a hot story.

The much heralded release of Breitbart’s supposedly explosive video that he promised would unmask the racially radical philosophy that President Barack Obama has been trying to conceal for twenty years came out this week. And there hasn’t been a more anticlimactic unveiling since Geraldo Rivera opened Al Capone’s safe. But worse than just the sad spectacle of a failed exposé, the whole production number orchestrated by the Breitbartians (the inept crew that Breitbart left behind) fell apart amidst a tsunami of hype and lies. The list of unmet assertions is long and pathetic:

Claim #1) The videos would “vet” the President in a way he had not been vetted before. The result would dash his reelection hopes.
The Truth: The video was a harmless look back at a youthful and poised Obama advocating for more diversity on the Harvard faculty. If anything it makes Obama look better.

Claim #2) The Breitbartians accused Buzzfeed of “selectively editing” the video they released ahead of Breitbart’s big scoop.
The Truth: When the Breitbartians released their “uncut” version it had about two seconds at the end that showed Obama hugging the professor he had just introduced. Not exactly the makings of a scandal.

Claim #3) Prof. Derrick Bell was an extremist whose relationship with Obama was evidence of Obama’s radical roots. The Breitbartians repeatedly called him “the Jeremiah Wright of academia” in an attempt to paint a false and derogatory picture of Bell.
The Truth: Bell was a respected and admired legal professor and scholar whose work is still revered and taught at law schools around the country.

And the two most recent claims:

Claim #4) There was a conspiratorial effort to prevent the video from ever being released. The Breitbartians alleged that remarks made by Harvard professor Charles Ogletree were an admission of such.
The Truth: Ogletree was obviously joking when he said that “we hid this during the 2008 campaign.” He and his audience were laughing at the statement. Ogletree spoke with the Boston Herald today and affirmed this.

Claim #5) Derrick Bell had made two visits to the White House in 2010. I’m not sure why there would be anything wrong with a law professor visiting his former student at his new job in the White House, but nevertheless, the allegation was put forth as some sort of suspicious activity.
The Truth: It was a different Derrick Bell who was visiting the White House on a routine tour. Seriously, don’t these righties ever try to verify anything?

When you look back at all of the absurd concoctions that have been floated on the Breitbart network of web sites, you really have to ask yourself, why does anyone continue to pay attention to these people? Their record of mistakes, misrepresentations, and outright dishonesty should exempt them from being taken seriously by any other media outlet. How about we start to hold the media accountable for their poor judgment?

I would, however, like to thank the Breitbartians for having brought attention to the inspiring video of a young, activist Obama in his college days. I think that’s worth another look:

Rush Limbaugh Goes There: Calls The President “Boy”

Posted by on March 9, 2012 at 5:49 pm. 13 Comments :

I guess it had to come to this. The undisguised racism of many pundits on the far right has at least avoided the most vile expressions of their hate when anyone outside of their private circles was listening. Today the hate came bubbling to the surface as Rush Limbaugh said this while mocking the way he thinks liberals view Republicans:

“You notice how everything Republicans do is venal? Everything is calculated for political advantage? Everything is done to try to harm our little boy president, Barack Obama?”

There it is – out in the open. Although this is nothing new for Limbaugh. For three years now he has been referring to Obama as a “man-child.” And what is a “man-child” but a boy. It was his way of calling the President boy without bearing the consequences of being more literal. His listeners knew what he was saying.

This sort of disrespect runs deep through the right-wing media. Fox Nation posted this graphic last year along with a story about Obama:

Fox Nation

And even worse, they deliberately mangled the results of a poll in order to run a story with this headline: Obama Has A Big Problem With White Women. Could they have come up with a more racially charged banner with which to introduce a story on a public opinion poll? This framing deliberately recalls the worst of a hate-filled era characterized by irrational fears of marauding black predators stalking innocent and vulnerable Caucasian virgins. I’m just a little surprised that Fox didn’t go with this headline: “Obama Polling: Where Da White Women At?”

Perhaps this is an intentional ploy on Limbaugh’s part. He has been taking considerable heat lately for having insulted Sandra Fluke, a law student who did nothing more than speak her mind on a matter of importance to her and all women. Limbaugh has lost dozens of advertisers. His show airs in some markets with only free PSAs (public service announcements) or even dead air. This may be his way of trying to divert attention from that controversy to something he thinks will be less volatile. Good luck with that, Rush.

Fox News Hypes Last Year’s Sarah Palin Documentary As “New”

Posted by on March 9, 2012 at 9:17 am. 1 Comments :

This weekend HBO is premiering its much anticipated adaptation of the book “Game Change,” the story of Sarah Palin’s selection to be John McCain’s running mate in 2008. The film stars Julianne Moore, Ed Harris, and Woody Harrelson, and has received glowing reviews from critics, although Palin defenders have trashed it despite never having seen it.

In a clumsy attempt at counter-programming, the Reelz cable channel has scheduled an airing of last year’s box office bomb, “The Undefeated” on the same day. The Undefeated is the painfully sycophantic Palin crocumentary that couldn’t make it through three weeks in movie theaters last year. In its opening weekend it made less than 1/10th of what “An Inconvenient Truth” made, despite plying on twice as many screens. In less than a month it was headed for the discount video bins at Wal-Mart.

UndefeatedOn Fox & Friends this morning, Steve Bannon, the producer of the Palin flop, was interviewed about its upcoming airing on cable. Bannon was introduced by Eric Bolling who dishonestly told Fox viewers that, “This is a follow up, right? This is the real Sarah Palin story.” Of course it isn’t a follow up; it isn’t new; and it isn’t real.

It is no wonder that the Foxies have to pretend that this is something new. They can hardly pitch it as the same old garbage that moviegoers so markedly rejected almost a year ago. And the box office failure occurred despite a massive effort by Fox News to promote it. But do they have to be so brazenly dishonest? At Fox Nation they continued the hype campaign with this headline: “New Documentary Takes Intimate Look at Sarah Palin.” Not only does that misrepresent the film as new, it makes it sound a little pornographic. I guess they think that’s the only way they can trick people into watching it.