What Is Roger Ailes Doing On ABC’s This Week?

For some reason ABC News saw fit to invite Roger Ailes, CEO of Fox News, onto ABC’s This Week to participate in the panel discussion. I wonder what Barbara Walters and the show’s producers thought Ailes would contribute. I wonder if they knew, when they sent the invitation, that Ailes would spend most of his time lying. I wonder if they ever gave consideration to inviting Michael Moore or Keith Olbermann. And I wonder if, in retrospect, they think the segment contributed to honest discourse and served to inform their viewers.

It may be unprecedented to have a CEO of a news network appearing on air as an advocate for the Republican Party. Just imagine the outrage that would ensue if the NBC or CBS chief took to the airwaves espousing Democratic politics. Ailes must have studied hard for his appearance because it shows in the quantity of grade A lies he produced (Media Matters has video). For instance:

Ailes said that the White House tried to ban Fox News from the media pool. That never happened. Fox failed to submit a request in time, so they were left off a list. As soon as they notified the White House, they were put back on by communications director Anita Dunn.

Ailes endorsed Glenn Beck’s accuracy but for “one unfortunate thing which he apologized for.” That was presumably in reference to Beck calling the president a racist who “has a deep-seated hatred for white people.” Beck has never apologized for that. In fact he affirmed it on his radio show the following day. He has subsequently lost more than 80 advertisers.

Ailes reviewed the State of the Union speech as “pretty good” except that the President “did some dumb things like take on the Supreme Court. But the media saved him by blaming it all on Alito.” Maybe, if by media he means Fox News. It was his own network that repeatedly replayed Alito calling the the President a liar (ala Joe Wilson). And they weren’t doing it to blame Alito for anything, but to agree with him and to attack the President. Furthermore, it wasn’t dumb to criticize the Court for a disastrous ruling that gives corporations even more power to influence elections.

This appearance on ABC may reveal why Ailes is so rarely seen on TV. He is neither compelling nor persuasive. Even worse, he is laughably illogical. In one segment he said about Obama…

“He is enormously likable and I think despite what everybody says, people would like him to succeed. But he came in with a belief that the radical change he wanted, or what some people say is the radical change he wanted, would be widely accepted.”

First of all, to preface his remarks by saying “despite what everybody says…” Ailes is asserting that everybody is saying that they don’t want the President to succeed. That may be true for him and for “everybody” on his network, but not for the rest of the nation. The way Ailes puts it, people want Obama to succeed despite saying that they don’t. Secondly, Ailes is promulgating the falsehood that Obama has a “radical” agenda. That’s right out of Beck’s playbook. And finally, if Obama does advocate radical change, and people find him likable and want him to succeed, then isn’t that a mandate for radical change? Ailes’ logic is working against his argument.

There were a couple of enjoyable exchanges. In one, Paul Krugman flustered Ailes with a classic example of Fox News’ “deliberate disinformation.” During the campaign Obama addressed a question about health care by prefacing it with his own question, “Why don’t we have a European style health care system?” Then Obama explained why we do not, and should not, and went on to describe his own plan. But Fox News just played the truncated clip implying that Obama favored the European system. Ailes’ response to that was to change the subject.

In another segment, Walters brought up the newest Fox News contributor, Sarah Palin:

Walters: Do you think she has the qualifications to be president?
Ailes: Fox News is fair and balanced. We had Geraldine Ferraro on for ten years as the only woman the Democrats ever nominated. Now we have the only woman that the Republicans ever nominated. I’m not in politics. I’m in ratings. We’re winning.

Hmmm. What’s missing from that answer? Oh yeah. Whether or not Palin has the qualifications to be president. I suspect he dodged this one because he must remain fair and balanced toward the four potential Republican presidential candidates who are on his payroll: Palin, Huckabee, Santorum, and Gingrich.

As much as I would like to castigate ABC for giving Ailes a platform on their political panel, I can’t help thinking that it might actually serve the country better to have him on TV even more. There aren’t too many less appealing spokespeople for conservative hogwash than Ailes. However, if they are going to host him and his kind, they need to do a lot better job of balancing his propaganda and self-congratulatory bluster with serious liberals who can disinfect the studio with some truth.

SOTU: Cue The Silly Arguments And Sound Bites

Tonight the President delivered a rather typical State of the Union speech. That is not a judgment as to its content, but recognition that most State of the Union speeches have the same political goals. The President covered the territory that he regards as his priorities and exhibited the requisite measure of empathy for the difficulties many Americans are enduring. He also balanced his resolve to continue fighting for his health care and jobs programs, with a nod to his trademark (and pointless) affinity for bipartisanship.

But this is the part that stood out for me:

“Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions – our corporations, our media, and yes, our government – still reflect these same values. […] The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates into silly arguments, and big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away. No wonder there’s so much cynicism out there. No wonder there’s so much disappointment.”

And with that the silly arguments and sound bites ensued. It hardly mattered what the President said because the reactions from the TV pundits were as predictable as the sunrise. Charles Krauthammer didn’t think the speech was presidential. Chris Matthews forgot for an hour that the President was black. And Sarah Palin – oh hell, I couldn’t really figure out what she was trying to say. Her run-on gibberish mentioned something about him being condescending toward Republicans, but it was impossible to translate into English.

I can, however, empathize with the President’s frustration with the media. But it may be naive to expect much to change. Fox News is not likely to abandon their mission now that they have successfully created the world’s first Pavlovian network. Their viewers have been carefully trained to salivate when the bell rings. Just this afternoon Glenn Beck exhorted his audience to avoid the speech altogether:

“You don’t even have to watch the State of the Union. I’ll watch it for you.”

See how easy it is to understand the world when you have people like Glenn Beck to do all the messy work of actually having to be conscious? And talk about your silly arguments…Beck’s certainly got that covered.

Go Back To Sleep. Glenn Beck Will Watch Out For You.

I am so sorry but I JUST HAVE TO SCREAM!!!

I’m watching Glenn Beck (don’t ask) and he’s talking about how whatever Obama is going to say tonight it is a lie (© Joe Wilson) – even though he hasn’t said anything yet.

Then Beck says this:

“You don’t even have to watch the State of the Union. I’ll watch it for you.”

NO THANKS, Glenn!

This is exactly the sort of mindless, groupthink that results in Fox viewers’ blind loyalty to the network and its cult-driven ratings. To think that he would be so brazen as to advise his disciples to wallow in ignorance and to just let him interpret everything for them is astonishing, even for Beck.

This is the last step in a progression toward total hypnotic control by fascist media. Television really is the opiate of the masses, and now it is prepared to take over all of your remaining cognitive capability. Just tune out everything but Fox News. They will let you know if anything important happens and what it means.

Ignoramus Uber Alles!

State Of The Union: Are We Fundamentally Transformed Yet?

Even before President Obama delivers his State of the Union message, the rumblings of partisans can be heard rattling the media timbers. Democrats are putting the finishing touches on their heartfelt endorsements of the raw honesty of the speech and the bold agenda it laid out for America’s future. Republicans are polishing their spontaneous reactions to the flaccid presentation and counting every occurrence of keywords like “terror” or “deficit” as if the number of times you say them has an impact on their destiny. The post-game on these events is so thoroughly predictable it hardly requires a spoiler alert.

These ceremonies never really describe the state in which we find our union. It is more like a confessional wherein our shortcomings are enumerated and our commitment to dispatch them is renewed On both of those measures the President has much for which to answer. A little more than a year ago, just days before the election, he told a cheering audience of supporters that…

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

That was 453 days ago. I’m not sure that he can make a case that the U.S. has been fundamentally transformed yet. It was a stirring promise that was received with overwhelming enthusiasm at the time. But after a year of Town Howlers, Tea Baggers, and pusillanimous pundits praying for failure and openly weeping, that moment of inspiration has been twisted into an ominous threat. Glenn Beck repeatedly plays video of the sound bite with a sneering implication that the transformation Obama had in mind was one from an American fable of perpetual prosperity and freedom, to a hellish realm of impoverishment and tyranny. Never mind that many politicians invoke the vision of transformational change. Even Beck himself in his announcement for his contrived and disingenuous 9/12 Project:

Beck, 3/17/2009: We’ve got to fundamentally change. We’ve got to be involved.

Dick Cheney, 3/20/2008: There has been a huge fundamental change and transformation for the better.

Mitt Romney, 9/21/2007: [W]e’re going to have to take fundamental change in Washington.

Newt Gingrich, 2/7/2008: [A]nything less than fundamental change will lead ultimately to a weaker and more vulnerable America.

See? Everybody wants change. It’s a universal trait of humanity. Except for those who fear change. Which, ironically, is just as universal. Nonetheless, the hope and change that many were led to believe was just a new president away still eludes us. There is a laundry list of aspirations that remain unfulfilled. In fact, much of the current landscape looks eerily like the one we thought we had escaped.

  • Iraq
  • Afghanistan
  • Gitmo
  • Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
  • Rendition and Enhanced Interrogation
  • Patriot Act
  • Wall Street Bailouts
  • Massive Deficits
  • Record Foreclosures
  • Crippling Unemployment
  • Global Warming
  • Health Care

Even worse, the appetite for change, and for the agenda articulated in the campaign, has seemed to wither. It appears that all of the momentum today is for regression to the last decade’s legacy of war, greed, and the bliss that so famously accompanies ignorance. How else can you explain the once unimaginable yearning for a return to the shallow austerity of George W. Bush’s America? Could anyone have ever seriously predicted this:

No, I do not miss him. I do not miss the smirking arrogance, the corruption, the cronies, the incompetence, or the bull-headed insistence on selling our nation out to corporations and masters of war. But I do miss the hope that I held for a resurrection from the morbid state in which Bush left the union. I miss having faith that the goals to which our nation aspired were closer than ever to our grasp. I miss believing that we, as a country, were coming to our senses.

Many of the President’s defenders make the legitimate point that a year is not nearly long enough to erase the fiasco of the previous eight. But it would be nice to have the sense that we were a little farther down that road. With the disheartening compromise and collapse of the health care legislation, and the recent electoral debacles, and the enduring economic and job slump, and the persistent rise of right-wing media, it is getting harder to remain optimistic.

None of these issues will be resolved this evening when the President gives his speech. I don’t expect him to leave the podium with legislative victories in hand. Nor do I expect unemployment to decline tomorrow morning. And it appears unlikely that our troops will be returning from the Middle East any time soon. The only thing I would ask of the President from this address is that he return to the message that got him elected in the first place. I ask that he rediscover in himself the ambition to serve the poor and working-class Americans who worked their hearts out so that he could assume this high office and be their representative.

That’s all I ask. Just a simple request for a return to genuine compassion, fairness, and justice. Is that too much to hope for?

Why Does Glenn Beck Hate Democracy?

In another display of hysterical dementia, Glenn Beck spent much of his program yesterday mangling American history and redefining the meaning of progressive. As usual, his interpretation of current events is rife with Apocalyptic gloom:

Beck: What we’re talking about is an ideological movement that has set its sights on the destruction of the Constitution and the fundamental transformation of the republic.

Beck’s proof for this prophesy of despair was a series of videos wherein Democrats described themselves as progressive, or promised to make progress on matters of interest to the nation. Progress, of course, is something that Beck and other conservatives deeply despise. That is why there has never been much of it during conservative administrations. As for progressives, Beck is recasting them as Satan’s minions who are “sucking the blood” out of the Democratic Party (Republicans too). He insists that there are no more Democrats, that they have all become infected and are now Marxists. To illustrate his point, Beck quoted Michael Moore issuing a warning to Democrats.

Moore: To the Democrats in Congress who don’t quite get it: I want to offer you a personal pledge. I, and a lot of other people have every intention of removing you from Congress in the next election if you stand in the way of health care legislation that the people want. That is not a hollow or idle threat. We will come to your district and we will work against you. You think that we’re just going to go along with you because you’re Democrats? You should think again. Because we’ll find Republicans who are smart enough to realize that the majority of Americans want universal health care.

To which Beck replied: “Got it? They don’t care about the parties. They never have.”

You see? Moore articulated a pointedly non-partisan challenge to the people’s representatives, exhorting them to align themselves with the public will or face payback at the polls. It’s called democracy. Yet Beck construes this expression of democratic engagement as hostility to party politics. What’s funny about this, aside from Beck’s daft analysis, is that he himself has made a career of being hostile to party politics. In fact, if you remove some of the identifying words in Moore’s statement it could easily be mistaken for Beck himself.

Last August Beck embarked on a major project that he called “In or Out 2010.” It’s whole purpose, he said, was to hold elected representatives accountable to the people and to a 5-point pledge he proposed. In the program introducing the project Beck said:

“If your politician doesn’t believe, support or reflect these beliefs, in their actions, not what they say in cute little speeches, then they aren’t supporting you. You bring these words to them. They’re not supporting or protecting or defending the Constitution of the United States…It’s time to throw those bums out…You tell these politicians that you’re either in, or next election season, you are out.”

How is this different from what Moore said? The only difference is that it’s OK for Glenn Beck to say it, but not Michael Moore. It is the result of the entitlement Beck feels to threaten whoever he wishes, a right not afforded to anyone else. It is a decidedly anti-democratic attitude that pervades Beck’s philosophy. Yesterday’s blackboard sermon was an extended assault on democracy that focused on how corrupt it must be because Americans voted to send more Democrats to Washington than Republicans.

Beck: I could erase the Republicans. We could take them all outside and send them to the zoo all day long and it doesn’t matter. The Democrats could still pass all their legislation.

First of all, that would only be true if there were no diversity of opinion in the Democrat’s caucus, which we all saw last year is far from the case. Secondly, so what if were true? Isn’t that what democracy is all about? If you persuade more citizens to vote for your party/platform then you get to implement it (pay attention Democrats). But Beck gets even more squirrelly as he continues bashing democratic principles.

Beck: That’s why the Democrats need these phantom villains because who’s resisting them? There’s no debate, right? Except the debate inside their own party. Inside the 256 Democrats and the 58 Democrats. You see debate…debate…that’s a needed ingredient for a recipe. One that doesn’t end up in tyranny. Debate. That’s not what we have now in the house and the senate.

In Beck’s world, which is overrun with phantoms and villains, there is no debate amongst Democrats. Of course, in the real world, getting Democrats to agree on anything is a Herculean undertaking. That’s why they have failed to invoke cloture on the record number of Republican filibusters. And it’s why so many judges and other White House appointees are still awaiting confirmation. And it’s why there still isn’t a health care bill.

On the other side of the aisle, however, the GOP marches in lockstep, holding together their homogeneous caucus without debate. It is a strictly disciplined organism that will not countenance dissent. It is the epitome of the recipe for tyranny that Beck assails. But somehow Beck recites this quotation from John F. Kennedy with no irony whatsoever:

JFK: Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can survive.

Unless they are Republicans, in which case they get a free pass from Beck who simply finds democracy distasteful. If the people speak out in favor of candidates or policies that Beck dislikes they are misguided and the system is broken. If Beck approves of the people’s decisions then those in the minority should shut up and stop trying to peddle their socialist propaganda. That’s what passes for debate in Beck’s cartoon brain. After all, how do you argue with someone who believes that God is the grantor of rights?

Last year, Beck announced that “the whole approach changes” for his show starting this month. I haven’t seen any evidence of that, but the month isn’t over yet. His announcement coincided with the disclosure of yet another Beck initiative (following the 912 Project, Re-Founders, In or Out 2010, etc.), the ominously christened “The Plan,” a one hundred year blueprint for the restoration of an America that exists only in his mangled mentality. Speculation circulated that this would be a voter registration/community organizing project. In other words, Beck may be starting his own ACORN. So we’re still waiting to see if the democracy-hating Beck will emulate an organization that he regards as anti-democratic.

Glenn Beck: God Is The Grantor Of Rights

Pope BeckYesterday’s sermon from the Reverend Glenn Beck was a revelation into the source of the rights enjoyed by the American people. His examination of these holy endowments was undertaken with his customary superficiality.

The sermon began with Beck chastising Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) for his determination to treat health care as a right. That blasphemy was too much for Beck to endure.

Beck: Harkin is declaring Congress as God, because we all know where the rights come from. If you read the Declaration of Independence there’s a phrase from the Declaration of Independence on where those rights come from. You may have heard it before. It goes something like this: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. […] God is the grantor of rights. No one else.

This is going to come as a surprise to Constitutional scholars and legal experts. According to Beck, it was God who established freedom of speech. And the bearing of arms is also a gift from the Most High. And apparently God didn’t take kindly to the quartering of troops, but He did insist on jury trials and reasonable bail. These rights are just a few that are enumerated in the Bill of Rights whose preamble begins with…

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States…

Apparently these lawmakers think that they are the grantors of rights. And they continued to believe that as they persisted in drafting additional amendments to the Constitution and passing thousands of other laws. Amongst these are rights like being permitted to vote if you’re a woman or not having to be a slave. God must have overlooked those rights when the Constitution was originally ratified. Or maybe He didn’t consider them unalienable. At any rate, it’s a good thing that legislators got around to cleaning up God’s mess.

The only difference between health care being a right and it being a profit center for greedy, compassionless corporations is the passage of a bill and the signature of a president. It doesn’t require God’s endorsement. That’s a political framework more aligned with the Taliban than with democracy. Maybe that’s why Beck doesn’t understand it. After all, “democracy” has many of the same letters as “Democrat.” Hmm? Coincidence?

The Declaration of Independence gave specific examples of what the framers considered to be unalienable rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). They were all general principles that the framers regarded as foundational to a free society. However, the actual rights were established by legislators and citizens who were decidedly mortal, contrary to Beck’s assertion that no one else but God can grant rights. Beck’s inability to comprehend the role of law is boundless. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has heard his interpretation of law.

For instance, lately Beck has escalated his rhetorical ravings to maligning progressives as … I’ll give you one guess … that’s right, fascists (what else?). In a hilarious fit of befuddlement he has taken to charging that progressives were responsible for Prohibition. Never mind that it was largely church-based temperance groups who campaigned for the 18th Amendment, and the enacting legislation, the Volstead Act, was proposed by Andrew Volstead, a Minnesota Republican. That bill was subsequently vetoed by Woodrow Wilson, whom Beck regards as the father of modern progressivism and whom Beck has called “One evil SOB.”

So contrary to Beck’s claim, it was religious fundamentalists and Republicans who gave us Prohibition, in spite of Wilson’s veto, which was over-ridden by Congress. And the kicker is that, when the nation realized its mistake, it was Heber J. Grant, an apostle in the Church of Latter-day Saints (Beck’s Mormon Church), and the LDS who led the fight against repealing the 18th Amendment. Once again, reality is diametrically opposed to Beck’s perverse perception of it. But he is devoted to his dementia. The more absurd, the tighter he grips. Until he he ends up spewing nonsense like this:

Beck: More and more Americans are finding themselves where I am. In a place where you don’t want to believe the stuff that you now do. Even the stuff that you would have thought a year ago was crazy town. But you do believe it because you’re honest with yourself. You promised yourself, as I have, to seek the truth no matter how many times you think about it. No matter how many times you think, “Oh my gosh, what does this mean to my future or the future to my children.” If it makes me a pariah, so be it. It is the truth, not stuff I want to believe. But everything is in jeopardy. Our children’s future is at stake.

Yes, Glenn is stuck believing things from crazy town that he doesn’t want to believe. He seeks the truth no matter how many times he has to think about it. And he manages somehow to carry on though everything is in jeopardy. On the plus side, it’s fortunate that he is comfortable being a pariah.

Glenn Beck Tells His Biggest Lie Yet

This is going to be a fun week. 2009’s Misinformer of the Year, Glenn Beck, has promised us a week during which he will end the debate on some of his most ludicrous, paranoid delusions. That will be a relief. I can’t be the only one who is sick to death of hearing him repeat endlessly his lies about Van Jones or ACORN or Saul Alinsky. But no more. This week is it. Next week…who knows? Unless, of course, he’s lying.

“A week from today this program is going to change. I’m no longer going to be debating the things we already know are true.”

And how does he know which things are true? Easy. They are whatever things he said last year that the White House hasn’t refuted by calling his in-studio chat line. And we all know that by not returning Beck’s phone calls it is as good as an admission of guilt. That is, in fact, how I know that Glenn Beck idolizes Adolf Hitler. Despite my many invitations to him to call and deny it, he has not done so, and therefore it is safe to conclude that it’s true.

Starting off his landmark week of television, Beck is going straight to the root of the problem. He is attacking head on the question of truth and lies. In the process he has delivered what may be regarded as his biggest lie yet.

“If I were lying I’d be off the air.”

Huh? Beck may have taken lying to a whole new dimension. This is a lie that lies about the context of his lying. It’s a lie that doubles back on itself as its own exculpation. Since he is not off the air, his dementia contends, he must not be lying. Were his statement to be true, much of the broadcast spectrum would go dark overnight. And that’s just the part of the spectrum controlled by Fox News. We can even look at this from a non-partisan viewpoint. If his statement were true, then how would Beck explain the continuing on-air presence of Keith Olbermann and his comrades at MSNBC? Surely Beck believes they are lying, yet they are still on the air. How can that be so without making him a liar? Perhaps he only meant that market forces would drive him off the dial as disillusioned viewers tuned out someone they considered to be dishonest. Nope, that aint it:

“Lies that are broadcast nightly to an entire nation are easily stopped. They are called laws. Or here’s an idea, standards.”

Beck truly seems to believe that there are laws that could be invoked to bar him from broadcasting due to his infatuation with falsehoods. The First Amendment notwithstanding, this is something he has predicted would occur ever since a Kenyan socialist moved into the White House. But this is the first time he has asserted that such laws have already been enacted. He doesn’t say which laws they are, but he’s certain they are there. And since these imaginary censorship dictates have not been exercised, Beck takes that to mean that the officials at the Department of Truth have certified his babble. One person who knows he is certifiable is his boss Rupert Murdoch, whom Beck believes hired him as a truthteller.

“Even if you think I’m wildly irresponsible, you have to know that News Corp. is not stupid. It’s a company worth billions of dollars. You really think that this corporation would risk everything on an irresponsible crazy guy?”

With this Gordian logic, Beck concludes that because Murdoch hired him, he must not be crazy. He may be jumping to an unsupportable conclusion. Murdoch made his reputation by exploiting the fringes of journalism. His tabloid papers featured outlandish gossip, sensationalistic headlines, and topless models. He is the carnival barker of media barons. Murdoch probably doesn’t think he is risking much by providing a platform for this schizoid sideshow freak. That is the keystone of his business philosophy and the engine of his wealth. As far as Murdoch is concerned, the crazier the better. And he hit the mother lode with Beck (although advertisers disagree).

Beck spent much of today’s program lying about not having lied on his previous programs. For example, he declared that he had only ever called one person in the Obama administration a communist. Not only is that not true, but on this same show he insinuated that many people in the White House preferred Karl Marx to James Madison, including President Obama. Maybe Beck would argue that that isn’t the same as calling them communists, but that would only be true in his warped brain. Media Matters has many more examples.

Beck’s defense of his veracity only sinks him deeper into duplicity. But with today’s pinnacle of prevarication, Beck has raised the bar on bullshit. To assert that he would be off the air if he were lying is a truly brilliant deceit. And his ability to render it with a straight face deserves some credit as well. Bravo Mr. Beck. You have more than earned your place in the Liars Hall of Sham.

ADDENDUM: Lest anyone absolve Fox News from complicity with Beck’s mania, here is a year-end compilation of the biggest stories missed by the mainstream media per Fox News. All but one were stories either originated or heavily promoted by Beck (i.e. Van Jones, ACORN, ClimateGate, Tea Baggers, etc). Fox cannot dismiss the evidence that Beck is their prime source for news.

The News Corpse 2009 Retro-Speculum

Looking back on 2009 can be a harrowing experience. There has been much that many people would rather not recollect. It was a year that began with dreadful economic suffering. From there it went on to unprecedented political division, animosity, and disappointment from virtually every perspective. And it ended with a reminder of our vulnerability to violent extremists at home and abroad. For that reason, like the mythical Medusa, it may be best not to look back on 2009 directly.

Nevertheless, News Corpse has compiled some moments that, for our own good, ought not to be forgotten.

SPINCOMMedia Malfeasance of the Year:
SPINCOM. In 2008, David Barstow wrote an article for the New York Times detailing how television news programs were employing Pentagon-trained military analysts to promote the Bush administration’s agenda for an unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq. In 2009, that article won a Pulitzer prize, a Golden Keyboard from the New York Press Association, and an Emmy nomination. Yet the article and its author never once appeared on television to discuss it. Despite Barstow’s many accolades and awards, the story was blackballed by the same TV producers who hired the phony pundits (who were also enriching themselves as consultants for the military contractors who benefited from the war). And by refusing to report on one of the most egregious examples of propaganda ever directed at the American people by their government, they also covered up their own complicity in cheerleading for the war.

2010 Prediction:
Someone famous will die while fleeing from police in a high-speed TV chase after being caught cheating on a spouse for a new reality show.

ACORN: Pimp. Prostitute, BoratThe Pimp & The Prostitute
What passes for journalism took a huge hit in 2009 when a couple of rightist activists dressed up for a Halloween expose on what they regarded as America’s most feared enemy: community organizers. James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles played the roles they were made for, a pimp and a whore, as they visited offices of ACORN. The results were dishonestly edited videos that were played incessantly on Fox News despite having zero news value. The pair never appeared on any other television news network as they were closely guarded by their mentor Andrew Breitbart, and their patrons at Fox. Sadly, the other networks acquiesced by reporting the story despite having no access to the pseudo-news team.

2010 Prediction:
Osama Bin Laden will buy Philip Morris, thus taking responsibility for killing 197,000 more Americans EVERY YEAR than he did that one time on 9/11.

Glenn Beck Rodeo ClownColor of Change We Can Believe In:
After Glenn Beck called the President a racist, a previously little-known group embarked on a boycott campaign directed at Beck’s advertisers. By last accounting Color of Change had persuaded over 80 advertisers to pull or withhold their ads from Becks show. What’s more, they compelled a retraction from the DefendGlenn web site (whose proprietor, Gary Kreep, is a story unto himself) that had been falsely disparaging the boycott efforts.

2010 Prediction:
Twitter will fold when its enfeebled users decide that 140 characters is too many to comprehend. It will be replaced by Blather, where messages are restricted to 26 characters and you can only use each letter of the alphabet once. The media will herald it as a phenomenon.

Fox News Tea PartyThe Tea Party Delusion
What can be said about the year’s most overblown non-story: The Tea Party Movement? Never has there been a less significant amalgamation of disruptive whiners that received more attention from a controversy-challenged media. The Tea Baggers were always just a noisy minority who were fully sponsored by right-wing lobbyists and Fox News. But near the end of the year a poll was released that revealed the truth, even though the true part was ignored. The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll hit the airwaves proclaiming that Tea Baggers (at 41%) were more popular that Democrats (35%) or Republicans (28%). What they didn’t report, although it was in the same poll, was that 48% of respondents knew very little or nothing at all about the Tea Baggers. When almost half of the country doesn’t know who you are, you are not much of a movement.

2010 Prediction:
Fox News will lie. (I know. That one was too easy, but it’s New Year’s Eve and I have a party to go to).

Undisputed Scumbag Pundit Hall of Shame
This award is a tie due to the presence of two so thoroughly deserving Scumbag Pundits. These despicable cretins earned their awards by claiming a couple of the most repulsive utterings ever contemplated in the press:

Retired Lieutenant Colonel, Ralph Peters: “Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media.”

Former CIA employee Michael Scheuer: “[T]he only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States.”

And just for fun, I now present the Comedy Colonoscopy Award for 2009. So far as I know, there was only one entry. But it’s a doozy:


HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Glenn Beck: 2009 Misinformer Of The Year

On the heels of the announcement that Sarah Palin had edged out Glenn Beck for “Lie of the Year,” Beck has bounced back to nab the Media Matters honor of 2009 Misinformer of the Year.

This award caps a year of distinguished prevarication by an acknowledged master of the art. Beck has broken records for dishonesty with creative use of insinuation, hyperbole, conspiracy, insults, exaggeration, and paranoia induced hallucination.

Congratulations Glenn. You earned it.

Sarah Palin Wins ‘Lie Of The Year’ Award

Congratulations are in order for Sarah Palin. PolitiFact has bestowed upon her the great honor of being the author of the “Lie Of The Year.” Granted, she was competing vigorously for the award by submitting the most entries for consideration. It was inevitable that one of her numerous and extravagant deceits would capture this venerated commendation.

The falsehood specifically singled out for this acclaim was Palin’s classic confounding of an otherwise non-controversial component of the health care bill that permitted reimbursement for end-of-life counseling. These were simply discussions with your doctor on what measures you would want taken in the event you were gravely ill and unable articulate your desires. But Palin turned these prudent consultations into “Death Panels.”

Palin: The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Yes indeed. That would be downright evil – if it existed. And for inventing this dastardly conspiracy out of thin air, Palin has earned the distinction of having spewed the year’s biggest whopper. She had to beat some formidable competition including Glenn Beck and the inimitable Orly Taitz. But Sarah came through.

For sheer volume, however, I still think Glenn Beck is the unparalleled champion. PolitiFact doesn’t seem to have this as a category, but if they did Beck would have to be the odds on favorite. Here is just a sampling of his fibbery:

  • Obama is creating a Nazi-like civilian force.
  • Van Jones is a convicted felon.
  • ACORN is receiving billions of dollars.
  • Eco-terrorists bombed radio tower in Washington.
  • 1.7 million Tea Baggers at 9/12 rally.
  • UAW workers earn average $154.00 per hour.
  • Carbon dioxide not a dangerous pollutant.
  • Anita Dunn worships Mao.
  • Obama threatened to close Nebraska military base.

Perhaps PolitiFact will create a Lifetime Liars Achievement Award. They could call it the Becky.