Fox Nation Review Of Obama Ad Riddled With Falsehoods

The Obama campaign just released its first advertisement of this election season. It focused on his record of ethics and energy independence, specifically addressing the phony allegations from “secretive oil billionaires” (the Koch brothers?).

It did not take long for Fox News to start its attack on the ad by posting two articles this morning on Fox Nation that lamely attempt to refute it. The first article sported the headline: “Obama’s First Ad Riddled With Falsehoods.”

Fox Nation

Here’s the funny part. When you click on the article it takes you to a page that does not cite a single example of a falsehood from the ad. In fact, it even links to a Brookings Institution report that affirms what the ad says about “clean economy” jobs.

The closest the Fox Nationalists get to a falsehood is the claim that PolitiFact rated Obama’s campaign promise to toughen ethics rules a “promised kept.” That’s actually true and the ad cited a January 29 posting as proof. However, PolitiFact revisited the issue two months later and reversed their decision because the administration had granted some waivers to the rules in order to seat a few appointees who did not comply completely with the new rules. But the claim in the ad was still correct as referenced.

The next item Fox raised had something to do with Solyndra. But all they wrote was that it was a company that went bankrupt. They don’t address in any respect what that has to do with anything in the Obama ad being untrue. It seems they just like to keep saying it.

Then came the Brookings Institution piece. Obama’s ad notes that the clean energy industry supports 2.7 million jobs. Brookings confirms that. Fox doesn’t dispute it. So where is the falsehood?

The second Fox Nation article linked to a column in the Washington Post that gave Obama four “Pinocchios” due to the same PolitiFact discrepancy noted above. It also provided a link to the PolitiFact page tracking Obama’s promises. The most striking thing about that is that out of 25 promises listed, only 6 were designated as broken. And even that number is suspect because some concerned matters that were out of the President’s control. For instance, they rated Obama’s promise to repeal the Bush tax cuts as “broken,’ despite the fact that it was the Republicans in congress who feverishly obstructed Obama’s efforts, and continue to do so. I think that a broken promise is when someone goes back on their word to do something. That is not the case here and it could even be said that the President kept the promise because he got the Republicans to agree to let the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year.

If Fox is going to accuse Obama’s campaign ad of being “riddled with falsehoods” it would be nice if they tried just a little to back up the claim. But that isn’t how Fox works. Since they are not encumbered with being actual journalists, they can just make stuff up and trust that their dimwitted audience won’t bother to do any research on their own. It’s not an honest way to do business, but it’s easy and it helps to spread the disinformation that is the reason for Fox’s existence.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Rupert Murdoch Calls Blogosphere Terrorists For Opposing SOPA

It’s good to know that the Chairman of the parent company of Fox News isn’t a histrionic panic-monger who wallows in absurd hyperbole.

No, it is perfectly reasonable for Rupert Murdoch to call members of the Internet community terrorists just because he disagrees with their position in opposition to the censorious, power-grabbing legislation speciously known as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

Rupert Murdoch Tweet

Murdoch seems to think that “terrorism” is synonymous with “democracy,” because that’s all that the opponents of SOPA were engaging in when they sought to solicit support from their representatives. Furthermore, Murdoch, who became a U.S. citizen by an act of congress so that he could buy the Fox Television network, still does not understand our Constitution that guarantees the right to redress grievances with our government. Murdoch regards such activity as terrorism.

Ironically, since 2003 Murdoch has spent about $45 million “terrorizing” … I mean lobbying congress to get them to bow to his will. Apparently he thinks it’s alright for a billionaire to shower mountains of cash on congress, but if citizens try to inform their representatives about what they want, they might as well have joined Al Qaeda.

It’s also ironic that the man who is in charge of the global “news” corporation that hacked the phones of thousands of people, including a murdered school girl, has the gall to use such repulsive language against respectable citizens. But it isn’t surprising. Murdoch’s CEO of Fox News, Roger Ailes called everyone at NPR Nazis. And Murdoch’s news empire was the biggest cheerleader for invading Iraq when there was no justification. That resulted in the loss of more than 4,000 American lives and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians.

So who is the real terrorist?


Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Case Of The Tea Party Smoke Bomber

If there is still anyone who wonders where Fox News gets the information it publishes, let there be no mistake – They make it up. Take, for instance, this article featured on Fox Nation with the headline, “Occupier (Not a Tea Partier) Throws Smoke Bomb Over White House Fence.”

Fox Nation vs. Reality

The Fox Nationalists linked to an article on their own FoxNews.com about the protest in Washington by Occupy Congress. Nowhere in the article was there any evidence that the smoke bomb was thrown by an Occupy protester. There are no witnesses, no suspects, no statements from the authorities – nothing that implicates a protester.

Nevertheless, Fox makes a declarative statement of fact that the smoke bomb was thrown by an “Occupier.” They also make a similar statement that the smoke bomb was not thrown by a Tea Partier, an assertion for which they also have zero evidence. And we already know that Tea Partiers have conspired to create disruptions at progressive events and blame the progressives. Here are just two verified examples:

Patrick Howley, an assistant editor for the uber-conservative American Spectator magazine, admitted to infiltrating OccupyDC for the purpose of undermining it. He then attempted to lead a group of protesters into storming the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. The protesters, being much smarter than Howley, did not play along. Howley stormed the museum alone and was pepper-sprayed by security.

Mark Williams, former spokesman for Tea Party Express, told his radio listeners that he was planning to sabotage union rallies with the intention of making them look “greedy and goonish.” And he beseeched his listeners to do the same. Williams was the one-time spokesperson for the Tea Party Express, but was dismissed for publishing a virulently racist article on his blog.

Given their history of attempts to implicate Occupiers for crimes they did not commit, it is entirely possible that a Tea Party, or other right-wing activist, was responsible for the smoke bomb. But I’m not leveling any charges because there is no evidence one way or the other. That, however, doesn’t stop Fox from inventing news stories that advance their agenda. Fox News has always been more interested in disseminating propaganda than in upholding ethical standards of journalism.


When Fox News Anchor Megyn Kelly Is Right, She’s Right

You have to give Megyn Kelly some credit. Today she conducted a scintillating debate about the cover of Newsweek magazine that featured President Obama and the headline, “Why Are Obama’s Critics So Dumb?”

Kelly’s razor sharp intellect immediately focused in on the most relevant question that arose from that controversial title. It didn’t have anything to do with the substance of the article. Why would that be of interest to anyone watching Fox News? Kelly quickly dismissed the fact that the author, Andrew Sullivan, was criticizing Obama’s critics from both the left and the right, although only the right seemed to take any offense They apparently know themselves so well that if somebody yells “Hey stupid.” in a crowded Walmart, only the right-wingers will turn and say “What?”

The core point of interest that Kelly recognized had to do with the credentials of Sullivan and his place on the cover of a news magazine. Without hesitation she directed this probing inquiry to her guest news analysts:

“Don’t you think that most people when they go to the store and they see Newsweek there they assume it’s like a real journalist who’s actually going to report the news in an objective way?”

Exactly! And don’t you also think that when most people turn on a television network with the word “news” in its name that they assume a real journalist is actually going to be anchoring the program? If you do then you’ve obviously never watched Fox News.

In addition to Kelly’s rank hypocrisy, the very fact that she was discussing this issue with a couple of pundits that had no inside knowledge of either the Newsweek article or the process by which the cover or headline was selected, illustrated the shallowness of Fox’s reporting standards. Sullivan happened to see the segment and issued a challenge to Fox News: If you want to trash my work, have me on to defend it. Any time, Megyn. Any time. What are you afraid of?

As a final dagger in the heart of ethical journalism, during the segment Fox displayed the Newsweek cover in a graphic. But for some reason they chose to blur out Andrew Sullivan’s name.

Fox News Newsweek Cover

Why they would do this when they were using his name in the discussion is puzzling. But I wouldn’t spend too much time trying to unravel that mystery when we still haven’t figured out why Fox thinks that Megyn Kelly is a journalist who can question the credentials of other journalists.

[Update] Megyn Kelly’s Fox sister, Gretchen Carlson, joined the parade on Fox whining about the Newsweek story. Carlson, in a fit of self-delusion, challenged her guest, Jerry Springer, on the subject of bias in the media. Springer responded that it was disingenuous for Fox to be decrying bias on Newsweek’s part:

“We’re here on Fox News. Every single day, in fairness, you guys, every single day bash President Obama. […] Every single morning you are slamming Obama. You know you are.”

Carlson wasn’t going to take that lying down. She quickly retorted that…

“Jerry, you obviously don’t watch our show because you do not understand that there’s a reason – I’ll speak for myself. I sit in the middle as the independent on the panel – and quite frankly we present both sides of the story and we leave it up to our viewers to decide where they fall.”

If Carlson is sitting in the middle because she is the independent, then who on the Fox & Friends panel is she implying is the liberal? Steve Doocy? Her claim is so absurd it approaches surreal performance art.


Fox News On Mitt Romney’s Tax Returns: Who Cares?

The Fox News morning program, Fox & Friends, has a unique quality that differentiates it from the rest of the Fox News schedule. In addition to the lies, propaganda, and GOP PR that fills the network’s fare, Fox & Friends features a trio of hosts who are called anchors only because of how much they weigh down the network’s IQ.

On today’s episode, the three squawking heads entered into a discussion of Mitt Romney and the question of whether he would, or should, release his tax returns as just about every other candidate has done in modern times. [Video below] It went a little something like this:

Brian Kilmeade: One thing about Mitt Romney: He’s rich! And most people know it. And I guess that’s one of the reasons that he does not want to release his tax returns, because there seems to be a war on success in this country.

Gretchen Carlson: And I want to know from the viewers: Do you care about this topic? Tax returns?

Eric Bolling: Who cares if he made a lot of money. Frankly, we should all be thrilled he made a lot of money. He’s a capitalist. Don’t we want that?

Indeed, Mitt Romney is rich and most people know it. But that is not the reason that he doesn’t want to release his tax returns, and it’s not the reason that voters want him to. The practice of releasing tax returns was begun in order to establish whether the candidate is complying with the law and not receiving special treatment due to his connections in business or politics. It is also done to disclose any impropriety or relationship to special interests that might pose a conflict for a public servant.

Fox News is exploiting the controversy surrounding Romney to invent another so-called war on something they consider sacred (i.e. Christmas, junk food, religion, light bulbs, etc.) In this case it’s success. The segment was chock full of the usual complaints about “villainizing the wealthy,” job creators,” and “class warfare.” But the ultimate goal was to trivialize those who call for accountability on the part of our representatives, and to give people like Romney (or R*Money, as his Highlife Homies call him) cover to suppress any information that they want to hide from voters.

I’ve seen a lot of tactics used by right-wingers to obfuscate and evade true transparency, but this is a new low. People have a right to know whether their leaders are honest and trustworthy. I have to wonder whether Fox’s Tea Party viewers, who purport to be fed up with government deceit, would actually approve of this effort to free candidates from the responsibility of demonstrating their fitness to serve in this simple manner.

Does Romney have something to hide? Is he embarrassed by how little he paid in taxes due to loopholes that the rest of us don’t get? Does he have investments in enterprises that might affect his judgment or independence? These are important questions, but equally important is why is Fox News running interference for Romney and any other politician who might have skeletons he wants to keep in the closet until after the election?


GOP Mocks Rachel Maddow In Support Of The Keystone XL Pipeline

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) just released a video that they are directing to constituents in 48 congressional districts represented by Democrats. The video is a satire of an MSNBC promo for the Rachel Maddow Show. Here is Maddow’s video:

And here is the NRCC version:

Not surprisingly, the NRCC has chosen to mislead their audience on several points.

First, there is nothing analogous between the construction of the Hoover Dam and the Keystone XL Pipeline. Hoover was a public works project that was built, and is currently run, by the government for the benefit of the American people. Keystone is a project of private, for-profit enterprise, that benefits wealthy individuals and corporations.

Secondly, the point Maddow was making about Hoover is that it was an historic achievement of ingenuity and resolve that exemplified the heights of human accomplishment that can be realized when a nation unites to pursue a noble goal. Keystone, on the other hand, is a garden-variety oil pipeline that exemplifies the greed of corporations that place profit over the safety and well being of people and their environment.

This is another example of the GOP siding with Big Business over average Americans. The NRCC falsely claims that the Keystone project will create 130,000 jobs and produce energy security. The truth is that it will only create a few thousand temporary jobs and much of the refined oil will be exported to other countries.

The press release for the NRCC’s video accuses the targeted representative of siding with “wealthy anti-energy activist donors.” It does not identify who the donors are or how they became wealthy via anti-energy activism, which is not generally considered a particularly profitable vocation. It also does not mention that House Speaker John Boehner has received a million dollars from fossil fuel enterprises and has investments in at least seven companies that stand to profit from Keystone.

However, what’s really funny about this satire is that it fails utterly in its goal. Why would the GOP produce a video satirizing a promo for a program on MSNBC? Their constituents are notoriously glued to Fox News and talk radio. Consequently, hardly any of them will have ever seen the Maddow video that the NRCC is mocking. That diminishes the comedic value pretty much entirely.

While Fox News will likely give it some free air time (it’s already posted on Fox Nation), they will just be preaching to the choir, which won’t help them to persuade the public at large that the pipeline is a good idea. But in the process they have tacitly conceded the point that Maddow was making with regard to the value of ambitious public works projects. They are telling their audience that commitments to large infrastructure ventures are beneficial and deserving of support.

So the result is that the Republicans have produced a satirical video that isn’t funny and affirms the investment philosophy of the Democrats. Thank you, NRCC.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Has The Tea Party Gone Cold?

An article today in The Hill has collected some evidence of the fading influence of the Tea Party. The author, Josh Lederman, leads off the column with the declarative statement that “The Tea Party is falling to pieces.” He then goes on to enumerate the reasons for that assessment, including:

  • It’s hard to imagine a GOP presidential candidate Tea Partiers could dislike more than Mitt Romney.
  • Support for the Tea Party is ebbing across the country, according to a November 2011 study by the Pew Research Center.
  • Headed by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), members of the House in 2010 formed a Tea Party caucus [that] has sat largely dormant.
  • The Republican establishment […] has discovered just how difficult it is to govern when a major part of its base places its allegiance elsewhere.
  • There were more than 83,000 mentions of the Tea Party in the news media in 2010; that number dropped to 32,000 in 2011 (Also 970,000 Tea Party mentions in social media in 2011, compared to 8.5 million for Occupy Wall Street).
  • In congressional races [the Tea Party is] struggling against establishment Republicans in 2012 primary races.

While all of that is true, I have just one little squabble with Lederman: There is no such thing as the Tea Party and there never has been!

There are no Tea Party candidates; no Tea Party voters; no Tea Party committees; no Tea Party nominating conventions. Nothing. Every poll taken on the subject reveals that nearly all of those who associate themselves with the alleged Tea Party are Republicans. Every candidate that the Tea Party has supported is a Republican. And only Republicans ever bother to solicit Tea Party support. The Tea Party is merely a fringe faction of disgruntled Republicans elevated by GOP lobbyists and conservative media. It is telling that the Tea Party spokesperson quoted in the article was Sal Russo of the Tea Party Express (TPE). Russo runs the GOP PR firm that created TPE and once told New York Magazine that “There would not have been a tea party without Fox.”

Other than that small omission, the Hill’s article was great.


Rupert Murdoch Tweets Up A Storm For SOPA

New Twitter user, Rupert Murdoch, has been busily cramming his support for the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) into 140 characters. His advocacy for SOPA is a thinly disguised scheme to squeeze out more profits for his company at the expense of free speech and a vibrant, innovative Internet environment. His latest use of social media to advance his personal interests began with a Tweet aimed at President Obama:

Murdoch Tweet

Now Murdoch is attacking “Silicon Valley paymasters” as thieves. Whatever happened to the valiant, capitalist, entrepreneurs who represented the high principles of free market patriotism? All that goes away if you challenge Murdoch’s control over any aspect of his perceived empire. And Google has long been an enemy of Murdoch’s. His next Tweet targets Google directly for advertising and lobbying:

Murdoch Tweet

This is an ironic complaint since it is pretty much the News Corp business model. Murdoch’s Fox Nation is almost entirely comprised of “stolen” content. He aggregates news stories from other sources, slaps his logo on them, and sells his advertising. As for lobbying, Since 2003 News Corp has spent about $45 million dollars on lobbying – twice what Google has spent. Murdoch’s frenzy to out spend, and out maneuver, Google must be having an effect on his mental state, because this next Tweet descends into incoherence:

Murdoch Tweet

Well, who isn’t angry at Optus (the second largest telecommunications company in Australia)? Like most telecom entities it is just another giant corporate … oh … Hang on there. Apparently Murdoch meant POTUS (President of the United States). But that doesn’t make any sense because the only people angry with Obama over SOPA are the opponents of the bill. Maybe backing censors and opponents of free speech is another of the frequent miscalculations by Murdoch. He would be well advised to defer to Obama who recently addressed this issue saying:

“We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet.”

But if Murdoch wants to continue supporting SOPA and Tweeting his lame, self-serving thoughts on the matter, the Internet community will welcome his participation in a free and open dialog, even though he wouldn’t return the favor.


Religious Extremists Are Indoctrinating Our Children

Over the weekend there was a horrifying display of propaganda broadcast into the homes of unsuspecting football fans. It was disguised as an advertisement and brazenly exploited young children in pursuit of an evil plot to brainwash America with the demonic dogma of a foreign, middle-eastern religious cult. Just watch it…

Ghastly, isn’t it? It was broadcast during the NFL Playoff game between the Denver Broncos and the New England Patriots. It must have so angered God that he declined to bless Broncos QuarterPastor Tim Tebow with another divine victory. And take a look at the response from the righteous folks at Fox Nation:

Fox Nation Comments

Oh…Wait a minute. Those were actually comments posted in response to a video produced by MoveOn.org in support of the Contract for the American Dream. Here is that video that inspired the Fox Nationalists to slander the MoveOn kids as Nazis.

Personally, I think all these kids are just too darned cute to be real and must be in a pact with Satan. Nevertheless, surely it must be just as bad when a religious organization employs kids to market their spiritual philosophy as it is when another organization does so to advance social and economic justice. No doubt the Fox Nationalists will shortly post an article decrying a “New Low: Focus on the Family Indoctrinating Children,” just as they did when MoveOn released their video.

Fox Nation Indoctrinating Children


Will The Fox News/GOP Debate Remember Martin Luther King Today In South Carolina?

Today America is celebrating the birthday of Martin Luther King. It is a fitting tribute to one of the nation’s most revered advocates of freedom and justice for all.

Today is also the day that Fox News has chosen to broadcast a Republican presidential primary debate from the state of South Carolina. The obvious question arises as to whether either the Fox moderators or the candidates will take the opportunity to recognize what this day represents.

Will any of them note that South Carolina was the last state to recognize the day as a national holiday? Prior to May 2, 2000, state employees could choose between celebrating Martin Luther King Day or one of three Confederate holidays.

Will any of them note that the The U.S. Justice Department is currently challenging South Carolina’s voter ID law as being in violation of the 1965 voting rights act, which outlawed discriminatory practices that prevented blacks from voting?

Will any of them note that the Confederate flag still flies over the South Carolina state capital?

These are all matters that Dr. King would have considered significant. If Fox wants to schedule a GOP political event on a day of remembrance for a national hero, they ought to take steps to express respect for the meaning this day holds for all Americans. And that means addressing the still unresolved issues of race that plague our country, particularly in places like South Carolina. Failure to do so would be an egregious insult and an affirmation of the reputation for racial insensitivity for which both Fox News and the GOP are well known.