Bill O’Reilly’s Dementia: Caught On Tape

Posted by on May 12, 2008 at 11:00 am. 4 Comments :

O'Reilly Fear FactorI may have been a little too hard on Bill O’Reilly in my past assertions of his crumbling mental state:

“…all that will be left for us is to watch with a sickly curiosity because he is beyond us now. He has reached that destination about which he cautioned us a thousand times while pointing menacingly. He has finally and irreversibly entered a Zone that is thoroughly devoid of Spin – or, for that matter, reason or sanity.”


Apparently this is not a developing problem. Apparently he has been insane all along:

[YouTube pulled the first version of this video due to “a copyright claim by CBS.” Now there are 40+ versions of it on YouTube. In case they all get pulled, you can still view this must-see video at Gawker]

Bill “Don’t Block the Shot“ O’Reilly is a TV studio massacre waiting to happen. Fox should issue Kevlar vests to all Factor employees. The irony is that, after making millions off of his dementia, O’Reilly would go out providing Fox with exactly the sort of blood-stained tabloid story they feed on.

See also The Collected Verses for more O’Reilly insanity.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Bush Spiritual Adviser Endorsed Obama

Posted by on May 11, 2008 at 9:17 pm. 3 Comments :

The media obsession with pastors to politicians has an exciting new vein to mine.

Rev. Caldwell

The picture above shows Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, frequently identified as President Bush’s spiritual adviser. He presided over the wedding of Jenna Bush on Sunday. And ….. he has publicly announced his endorsement of Barack Obama for President of the United States, citing his “character, confidence and courage.”

Will the press that has been relentlessly pounding Obama for his association with the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright (whom Obama has repudiated) be as eager to report that Bush’s pastor (who officiated at both of his inaugurations) prefers Obama to Bush’s aspiring successor, John McCain? Will they saturate the airwaves with this news? Will they even ask Bush or McCain a single question about it?

God knows.


Republicans Vote Against Mother’s Day

Posted by on May 11, 2008 at 1:49 pm. NO Comments :

As a tribute to the contribution mothers make to our lives, the House of Representatives sought to pass a resolution to honor America’s moms on the 100th anniversary of Mother’s Day. The resolution said simply that the House…

“…celebrates the role of mothers in the United States and supports the goals and ideals of Mother’s Day.”

The resolution passed on a voice vote of 412 to 0. Then Kansas Republican Todd Tiahrt rose to request a recorded vote wherein he and 177 other Republicans, including Minority Leader John Boehner, decided to cast their vote against mothers. Boehner said:

“Oh, we just wanted to make sure that everyone was on record in support of Mother’s Day.”

By voting against it? Even Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), the bill’s original sponsor, voted against it.

Despite this cynical and childish ploy on the part of House Republicans to stall House business, the resolution passed. Happy Mother’s Day.


Fox News Fires Woman For Negligent Honesty

Posted by on May 9, 2008 at 3:10 pm. 12 Comments :

TVNewser is reporting that a Fox News employee was fired for telling John McCain that she voted for him and that he was going to win. Jennifer Locke was a production assistant on assignment for Fox News to cover the Time 100 Gala when she confessed her admiration for McCain. McCain reportedly replied:

“You’re not supposed to reveal that.”

Quite right, Senator. She was not supposed to reveal that. It’s a good thing you were there to scold her for letting the cat out of the bag. Your Fox handlers will reward you for that with more fawning coverage. Everyone knows that it’s perfectly alright for Locke to think that way, so long as she keeps it to herself. All Fox personnel should be aware that any disclosure of political bias is a violation of company policy and is punishable by termination. Particularly if you are an anonymous PA with no real clout. Of course, if you are a chief political consultant (Carl Cameron) or a Washington managing editor (Brit Hume) you are exempt.

Locke’s views would seem to have little relevance while working the entertainment beat, but she still needed to made into an example. It’s not as if her employers were unaware of her views. In 2004 she was the subject of an Associated Press article (published in the Washington Post) wherein she related her experiences as a lonely Republican at the American University of Paris:

“Locke surfaced in an informal sampling of AUP students at a broadcast journalism course. When an AP reporter asked students who favored Bush, her hand shot up.

Most students accused Bush of spurring terrorism and alienating America’s old allies, but Locke, an international affairs major whose ambition is to be an anchor on Fox News, stuck to her guns.”

What a sadly poignant tale. This young woman, who dreamed of stardom at Fox News, was on her way to realizing her dreams, but was summarily dismissed for articulating the sort of opinion that likely got her hired in the first place.

If only she had followed the lead of wise elders like Karl Rove, who appears regularly on Fox News without ever disclosing his role as an adviser to the McCain campaign. Or she could have looked to role models like the Pentagon Pundits (SPINCOM), who appeared on TV news programs (mostly Fox) clandestinely spewing pro-war disinformation.

The trick is to keep your prejudices safely behind a curtain of obfuscation. You can season your reporting with all the partisanship you want as long as you never admit that you’re doing it. You can enter into relationships that are clearly journalistic conflicts of interest as long you deny such relationships exist. Had Locke known better than to publicly reveal her biases she would still be able to pursue her career at Fox and advance to positions where she could happily slant her reporting. As it is, she will just have to chalk it up to experience and take her learned lessons with her to the next propaganda outfit down the road.


Junk News Gets FCC Seal Of Approval

Posted by on May 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm. 17 Comments :

Junk NewsTelevision news has taken criticism from every direction imaginable. It is accused of being too far left, or too far right, or too shallow, or too consumed with profit, etc.

Now the Federal Communications Commission has settled the argument. Television news is too newsy. The FCC’s latest satire-defying ruling has declared that the gossip-mongers at TMZ, and the God-casters at Pat Robertson’s 700 Club, are “bona fide” news providers. In arriving at that ruling, the Commissioners had to conclude that there would be no overt political partisanship in the news content from these parties.

The significance of this ruling is that the broadcast licensees of these programs will not have to comply with political equal-time requirements. In the case of TMZ, the licensees are the stations in the Fox Television Station group owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. The 700 Club, of course, is openly partisan and is controlled and hosted by a former Republican candidate for president. So obviously the FCC found that there was no risk of political favoritism from these notorious right-wing entities.

Perhaps the most embarrassing revelation in this story is that the FCC justified the ruling by citing Entertainment Tonight as a precedent. Apparently the standard for newscaster bona fides is that they cover:

“…some area of current events, in a manner similar to more traditional newscasts.”

More traditional newscasts like Entertainment Tonight? This is the modern media measure for newsworthiness. And this why the legacy news networks have all taken to emulating ET. It is why Lindsay Lohan leads the evening news broadcast even when soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq. It is why Rev. Wright dominates the news cycle even when the economy falters and thousands of Americans are losing their homes to foreclosure.

It may seem ludicrous that the FCC would grant newscaster status to TMZ and the 700 Club, but the real joke is that, by contemporary standards, they deserve it.


Elitistism And The Presidency: A Handbook For Victory

Posted by on May 5, 2008 at 2:33 pm. 10 Comments :

It’s taken over 200 years, but American politics is finally evolving into a mature process that reflects the inherent nature of her people. This experiment in Democracy has taken innumerable turns and tumbles over the years, most often relying on the dominant presence of an elite ruling class to steady the ship of state. Despite the egalitarian ring of our founding principles, a nation “of the people, by the people, for the people,” still seemed more obeisant to the privileged. But no more.

A new breed of populism has spread like a rash across the land. Its mission is to dismantle the doctrine of elitism and advance the rule of the common man and/or woman. This crusade promises to forever alter the complexion of American government and deserves a closer examination.

First and foremost, anyone who purports to be a leader in this environment, must be an avid consumer of beer. This is important to establish one’s credentials as a down to earth representative of commonality and humility. It is also necessary so that voters have a way of indicating their preference for drinking companions.
Education is a key component in this new paradigm. It is absolutely critical that you not have too much of it. And never, ever use the word paradigm. Once the American people get the impression that you know more than they do about issues like economics or foreign policy, you’re disqualified from service. Achievement and expertise only spotlight how different you are from ordinary Americans.
A show of strength will give any candidate a boost. You must not be timid about threatening enemies, advocating torture, or bombing busy population centers of third world countries. And once having taken a position, it is political suicide to change it, regardless of changing circumstances. Americans demand stubborn certitude from their barely educated leaders.
A vocal commitment to family values is mandatory. Not an actual commitment, mind you. Just a vocal one. Speaking frequently of the sanctity of marriage, no matter how many times you have violated it, will shield you from any detrimental impact. Conversely, life-long faithfulness holds no advantage unless accompanied by a virulent denunciation of same-sex marriage.
It is easy to be distracted by trivialities when engaged in a competitive campaign. But you must not let the appeal of junk food politics knock you off course. Stay focused on the issues that matter most to the people and you will always prevail. Those issues include flag lapel pins, ex-pastors, and quail hunting.
Two words: Go bowling. [Note: Take a few practice frames first]
Two more words: Don’t windsurf.
Immigration has taken a prominent role in public policy. No issue inflames the emotions of citizens like who gets to be a citizen. The Statue of Liberty notwithstanding, America is an exclusive club that can’t let just anybody in. Even the most disadvantaged, undereducated alien represents a risk to American workers, whom we’ve already established have a low regard for education, lest it turn them into the elite.
Finally, a foundation of faith is required of any seeker of high office. Submission to an unseen authority may be the single best evidence of a candidate’s refusal to be submissive. So long as you pronounce your allegiance to God, all of your other pronouncements are divinely inspired. Unless, of course, you are Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, or Allah forbid, Muslim. You may also want to steer clear of quirky, ethnic Baptist’s.

Yes, it’s taken over 200 years, but American politics is finally evolving into a mature process that honors the mediocrity of its people. In doing so it has laid the groundwork for electoral victory for anyone who understands and respects the new reality

George W. Bush understands, and he has provided a working model for success: You don’t have to be like ordinary Americans, you just have to be able to pretend you’re like them. How else could this son of Connecticut aristocracy; this progeny of senators and presidents; this oil baron and sports magnate, pass himself off as Texas bumpkin who enjoys clearing brush? This inarticulate, draft-dodging, C-, dynastic runt actually validates the American dream. As the first remedial president he has proven that you can grow up to be the Commander-in-Chief, in America, no matter how stupid you are. What other country can say that?

The presidential campaign of 2008 is shaping up as a testament to Elitistism: the practice of discriminating against those who are, or are perceived to be, elite. The goal of Elitistism (aka Simpsonism) is to drive from public life anyone who diverges from the sacred visage of American Averagism.

From an electoral perspective, the highest attainable ambition is ordinariness. Of the three remaining candidates we have:

  1. A millionaire lawyer/senator, who is married to a former president, with decades on the government teat.
  2. Another millionaire son of Admirals with a trophy wife and even more decades of being supported by the public.
  3. A mixed-race child of a single mother who has spent years as a community activist and organizer.

For the record, number three is regarded by the media as the Elitist. Go figure.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Clinton And Obama On Fox News: A Damage Assessment

Posted by on May 2, 2008 at 6:24 pm. 47 Comments :

Clinton on O'ReillyHillary Clinton’s rendezvous with O’Reilly is now history. All that is left is to try to assess the damage and establish what lessons were learned.

The Damage: Bill O’Reilly’s ratings leaped 81% in total viewers and 43% in the 25-54 demo (two night average). That is a massive, though temporary, increase and it will have the effect of inflating his average over time. I’m assuming that the bulk of the new viewers were Clinton supporters, curious independents, or morbid voyeurs hoping to observe a train wreck. It is highly unlikely that these numbers will endure. Last year I did an analysis that showed that Fox News viewers were more loyal to the network and its stars than they were to Bush or Republicans: The Cult Of Foxonalityâ„¢. O’Reilly’s base audience will quickly return to normal, probably tonight. (For the record, The Factor’s ratings dropped significantly from part one of the Clinton interview, to part two. There was a 12% decline in total viewers and a 26% drop in the 25-54 demo).

However, the damage is done. O’Reilly gets his ratings spike, bragging rights, and legitimacy transferred by osmosis from Clinton. Clinton gets nothing. O’Reilly’s base audience is firmly predisposed against her. The visiting viewers have all had plenty of opportunities to see her on other networks. So if you’re scoring it’s O’Reilly: 1.2 million (viewers) – Clinton: zero.

Clinton on O'ReillyThe Lessons: Now that both Clinton and Obama have capitulated to Fox News, will Fox abandon their crusade to defeat Democrats? Hardly. Consider a couple of the classic taunts frequently leveled at Democrats by Foxies:

“If you can’t deal with Fox how can you deal with Iran or Al Qaeda?”

Now that the Democrats have dealt with Fox, will Fox announce their confidence in the Democrats’ ability to deal with terrorists and hostile nations?

“The Democratic Party is held hostage by “far-left, liberal interests groups” like MoveOn, DailyKos, and MediaMatters, who pressure them to reject Fox.”

Now that the Democrats have accepted Fox, proving that these groups are not controlling them, will Fox cease to make these accusations? Will they refrain from disparaging our patriotism? Will they stop insinuating that we’re socialists? Will they present honestly our positions on war, faith, global warming, health care, etc.?

Clearly the answer to the questions above is “No on all counts!” In fact, the reversion to form has already begun. Chris Wallace can hardly contain his glee that the Democrats have folded. This morning he explained to the Fox & Friends crew why he was in such a good mood:

“…after all the boycotting, after all the huffing and puffing, [the Democrats] have found their way to Fox News, and you know, it’s really fun to watch, and particularly to watch the heartburn among the left-wing base – the anti-war, the MoveOn.org, they can’t stand it.”

In this spew of triumphant ecstasy, Wallace has just admitted his own personal bias against a broad swath of progressive citizens. And, shockingly, it is not just a political bias. He is actually deriving pleasure from the pain of the ideologically diverse majority of Americans who oppose the war. Indeed, he is laughing at them … at us.

He also joked with F&F that John Edwards’ poor performance in the presidential race is somehow attributable to his refusal to go on Fox? By that logic, Obama’s and Clinton’s success in the race is likewise attributable to their refusals to go on Fox. They only just agreed to appear this week, so all of their prior success was achieved without Fox and, therefore, due to its Foxlessness.

O’Reilly has been in just as good a mood as Wallace.

“The greatest thing about this interview . . . is that it’s emasculated all these far-left extortion types like MoveOn and the Kos, which threatened Hillary Clinton and threatened Barack Obama and all the other Democrats.”

So the greatest thing to O’Reilly is “emasculate[ing] all these far-left extortion types.” The most fun for Wallace is “watch[ing] the heartburn among the left-wing base.” It should be noted that the number of members of MoveOn and DailyKos alone exceed the number of viewers of many of Fox’s programs. And there is much more to the liberal base than those two examples. From what part of this should Democrats and progressives draw comfort? Fox doesn’t care about the interview. They don’t care about informing the public. They only care about how badly they can cripple their enemies.

Bill O’Reilly, Chris Wallace, Brit Hume, et al, were flailing pathetically when they were being ignored by the cool kids. We were having a real impact on their ratings, their revenue, their reputation, and their respiration. It was unwise to loosen the screws at this time. Hopefully, after having seen how they’ve reacted to our largess, our Democratic representatives will realize that Fox News is unfriendly and untrustworthy. They will whine about not being invited to the party, but will break all your furniture when you admit them. Then the whining will begin all over again.

Just stay the HELL off of Fox News!


George Bush Lauded By Berlusconi For Time 100

Posted by on May 1, 2008 at 2:43 pm. NO Comments :

GoodfellasTime Magazine has published it’s fifth annual list of the World’s Most Influential People. It’s a mixed collection with a few standouts for hilarity.

Rupert Murdoch made the list as a “Builder and Titan,” an honor he shares with Radiohead. Thom Yorke would make a great media mogul, and they could keep the band’s name as their corporate brand. Disney temptress Miley Cyrus is listed in a category where she challenges Tim Russert, the only “journalist” of the group. They are both listed under “Artists and Entertainers.” Which of these Russert is supposed to be, I don’t know. But Russert is apparently quite influential, as he has reportedly had Arianna Huffington banned from promoting her new book, Right Is Wrong, on any NBC program.

Also on the list is George W. Bush under “Leaders and Revolutionaries.” I can’t see where he’d place in either group. But the truly creepy aspect of this is that the essay accompanying his inclusion was written by the Italian Murdoch, Sylvio Berlusconi. Berlusconi, media baron and Prime Minister, related his impressions of Bush as a leader who knows that…

“…justice, freedom and democracy can flourish only if there is security.”

Spoken like a true totalitarian fascist. He is, however, right about Bush, who has shown that he will sacrifice any Constitutional principle, civil liberty, or democratic process, in the pursuit of a false security predicated on fear and lies.

Having Berlusconi pen Bush’s bio for the Time 100 holds a unique significance in light of Berlusconi’s recent electoral successes in Italy. He declared after the election that “We are the new Falange.” The original Falange was the Spanish fascist party of Francisco Franco. Berlusconi’s supporters also hailed the victory of his party’s candidate for mayor of Rome, Gianni Alemanno, a former neo-fascist youth leader, with Hitlerian straight-arm salutes and chants of “Duce, Duce…”, Mussolini’s version of “Fuhrer.” Bush must be proud to have his friend Berlusconi compose this touching tribute.


Fox News In Critical Condition

Posted by on April 30, 2008 at 3:38 pm. 15 Comments :

In the first quarter of 2008, Fox News was the slowest growing cable news network (10%), behind MSNBC (66%) and CNN (87%). For the first time in six years they finished in 2nd place. Now, in the first month of the 2nd quarter, the diagnosis is even worse.

Ratings April 2008

Notably, Fox is showing a 14% decline form their year-ago numbers, while their arch nemesis, MSNBC, posts a 9% increase. This comes in the midst of a contentious election year when demand for news is uncommonly strong. Why then is Fox waning? The same dynamics I wrote about a month ago are still in play today:

“The stagnation of Fox’s audience can be traced in part to the downward spiral of the Bush presidency. Fox has long tethered its fortunes to a conservative ideology that has fallen out of favor.”

Mainstream audiences are less interested in the partisan cheerleading of right-wing zealots. They may also be tiring of the Crossfire-style tongue lashing engaged in by the modern punditocracy. A case in point is Keith Olbermann’s Countdown, which has been criticized for avoiding confrontation by declining to book adversarial guests. But its strategy is validated by consistently being the fastest growing program on cable news. The numbers for April show that it is the only program to grow (+21%), compared to CNN’s Campbell Brown (-23%) and Fox’s Bill O’Reilly (-12%).

MSNBC also benefited from the contributions of the rest of its lineup (Race For the White House, Hardball, Verdict) which were all either stable or higher, while their competition was uniformly lower. Even Countdown’s repeat contributed by improving on last year’s Doc Block by 10%.

What is particularly disturbing is that, in this environment where Fox News is gasping for air, the Democratic candidates for president chose this week to succumb to the howl of publicity hounding. What we already know about the narrow-minded nature of Fox’s audience, combined with the evidence that it is shrinking precipitously, should be enough to convince rational Democrats to remove Fox News from their itinerary.

This is not the time to surrender. The Democratic embargo of Fox News has almost certainly played a part in the network’s decline. Their programming has suffered by being over-weighted with right-wingers and Republicans. They have resorted to whining on air about the kids who won’t play with them. If it wasn’t hurting them they wouldn’t mention it. Now, with Fox on the ropes, Democrats should stay strong and resist whatever urge it is that compels them to act against their own interests by accepting invitations to a party from a host that seeks only to diminish them.

Let’s hope that now that the thrust and parry of the Obama/Clinton appearances on Fox are history, they can manage to rein in their impulses and get back on the team. Fox is hostile territory and our generals should not be giving them aid and comfort.


Hillary Clinton To Suck Up To Bill O’Reilly

Posted by on April 29, 2008 at 2:38 pm. 11 Comments :

Clinton on O'ReillyHillary Clinton is following in the futile steps of Barack Obama after his appearance on Fox News Sunday. My analysis of that affair applies in spades to Clinton’s announcement that she will fraternize with the noxious Bill O’Reilly this Wednesday. This is what I said about Obama’s lapse in judgment:

“A strong performance will net him nothing because the audience is limited in both size and ideological diversity. It will end right there. But the slightest misstep will be magnified a hundred fold throughout the Murdoch empire.”

It’s even worse for Clinton. The number one priority for O’Reilly is to applaud his own magnificence. The boundaries of his ego are approaching a state that is becoming an imminent danger to Earth’s orbit. The number two priority for O’Reilly is to bash Democrats. In pursuit of that he will have an ally in Sen. Clinton. She is likely to use this opportunity to assail Obama on tangents like Rev. Wright. And if she doesn’t volunteer to do so, O’Reilly will provide her with the opening. O’Reilly’s obsession with Wright is a near fetish. He has featured the ex-pastor in 19 of his 26 Talking Points Memos since the story broke last month.

Clinton’s friendliness with right-wing media is nothing new, of course. She attended a fundraiser thrown for her by Rupert Murdoch, then was endorsed by his New York Post. She sat down with Richard Mellon Scaife, who had accused her of murder when she was still First Lady, then was endorsed by his Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Her campaign’s General Chairman, Terry McAuliffe, appears in Fox News promos lauding their fairness and balance. And now she will sit across the table from the 21st century’s Father Coughlin.

As I’ve said many times before, no good can come of this. In Clinton’s case it is even more foreboding because she has demonstrated a willingness to collude with conservative opponents for her political gain. Obama promised to “take Fox on” prior to meeting with Wallace. He didn’t. If Clinton gives O’Reilly a hard time, he will hit back, but not until after she has left the stage, and for days after that. But he will come close to endorsing her if she throws him enough red meat about Obama.

There is just no upside. Fox only exists to defeat Democrats. When will these people learn?