Karl Rove’s Super Amazing Political Funtime Analysis Happy Hour

Posted by Mark NC on June 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm. 2 Comments :

The man who used to be known as Bush’s Brain may have spent too much time with America’s foremost remedial president. Karl Rove seems to have leaked a significant amount of grey matter as evidenced by this stunningly inept observation about President Obama and the economy:

“It is fine for him to try and blame it on President Bush or a Japanese tsunami or on ATM, but it makes him look weak, and the American people are not that dumb! […] Let him keep doing that because the American people see that as a weak leader. That’s not somebody who’s in charge. That’s somebody who’s making excuses. And we do not like to elect people President of the United States who are excuse makers. We want a president to be big and bold.”

Romney - Not Stupid Got that? America wants a big, bold, non-excuse maker. And blaming Bush for the wrecked economy won’t work because the American people aren’t stupid. That’s a mantra that Romney also likes to chant. In fact, he made it into a campaign slogan. This may be the first time a candidate has ever had to go to such lengths to remind his followers that they aren’t idiots. But that argument becomes more difficult to defend when polling shows what the American people really think. A new Gallup poll says that…

“Americans continue to place more blame for the nation’s economic problems on George W. Bush than on Barack Obama, even though Bush left office more than three years ago.”

The poll shows that two-thirds of respondents (68%) still blame Bush for the state of the economy. That includes about half of the polled Republicans who also continue to hold Rove’s former boss accountable. Consequently, Obama should not be shy about hanging this economic albatross around Romney’s neck. The Romney campaign has already affirmed that their policy agenda is “Bush on steroids.”

Ironically, I have to agree with Rove about a couple of things. First, he appears to be right that the American people are not dumb. They know exactly who is responsible for where we are today and they are not likely to to want to return to the policies that got us here. Secondly, Rove’s advice that Obama continue to blame Bush is pretty sound based on the mood of the electorate.

The problem for Rove is that he’s right for all the wrong reasons. He doesn’t understand where the American people are, and he wouldn’t agree with them if he did. He’s just trying to rehabilitate his own shattered reputation because, as the political architect of the Bush administration, he’s just as responsible for the financial hole we are in as Bush is.

It’s about time that the right quit yakking about Democrats looking backwards to blame Bush. Obama is not reaching backwards to assign responsibility for current conditions to the past president. He is forecasting the future consequences of repeating those mistakes. It is the Republicans who are bringing the Bush era back to the table by proposing nothing but what the Bush administration did. They are offering nothing new in the way of solutions. In fact, the only initiative they will articulate out loud is to preserve the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy. So the Obama administration has no choice but to rebut those proposals. That is not an attack on Bush. It is an attack on the current crop of Republicans who are parroting Bush.

And if it weren’t bad enough that Americans blame Rove and Bush for our current economic problems, they also blame Republicans in congress today for deliberately sabotaging the recovery in order to make Obama look bad. So not only are they dredging up the old Bush era policies that already failed so decisively, they are obstructing Obama’s new solutions from being enacted.

Since the day that Obama was inaugurated, the GOP has explicitly stated that their top priority is to make Obama a one-term president. That’s not a governing agenda. That’s the purest and most cynical form of self-serving, political gamesmanship imaginable.

Glenn Beck Reviews Black-Themed Obama Campaign Ad

Posted by Mark NC on June 13, 2012 at 10:59 am. 3 Comments :

If you were looking for an authoritative analysis of an Obama campaign advertisement targeting an African-American constituency, who better to consult than homeboy and O.G. (Original German), Glenn Beck?

That’s who Bill O’Reilly turned to last night on the O’Reilly Factor, and he got his money’s worth. The segment included pleadings from Beck for O’Reilly to use the “M” word (Marxist) about Obama. O’Reilly giggled flirtatiously but succumbed only so far as to declare Obama the most liberal president in America’s history (which is news to liberals).

After listening to the new ad, the pair expressed their shock upon seeing an overt appeal to a targeted demographic group, something they seem to think never happens in advertising.

Beck: I’ve never heard anything like that, Bill.
O’Reilly: In a campaign ad, I haven’t either. I would love to see Mitt Romney’s backup singers though. They probably look like the Osmonds.
Beck: Here’s the problem with that ad. I mean it’s two-fold. In that ad they talk about, you know, we’ve got your back, Mr. President. Isn’t the President supposed to have our back? Isn’t he supposed to be that guy that insures that he’s watching our liberty and our life so nobody comes and kills our family or kills us, and nobody comes and scoops us up off the street in the middle of the night?

First of all, I find it interesting that O’Reilly would surmise that Romney’s backup singers would look like the Osmonds, a quintessentially white family of Mormons. I wouldn’t argue with that, but it’s Beck’s commentary that really demonstrates a fundamental ignorance and hypocrisy.

Beck seems to have missed entirely that the ad is a litany of all the ways in which Obama “has our back,” by enumerating the policies he is pursuing. The only thing that Beck hears is the Motown-like chorus. Even worse, Beck seems to be confusing the role of the president with the role of a bodyguard. His assertion that the President is supposed to protect us from some unidentified assailants is downright looney, however, it fits nicely into Beck’s patented formula of fear mongering. To Beck there is no dark corner of the room that isn’t filled with stalking demons.

Seeing as how Beck is also one of the biggest proponents of right-wing criticisms of the so-called “nanny state,” it is curious that he has now assigned the President the responsibility for policing our neighborhoods and protecting us from whoever it is that Beck imagines is threatening to “scoop us up off the street in the middle of the night.” That duty might distract the President from trivial matters like the economy, jobs, and foreign affairs. It might also piss off Spiderman who will surely regard it as an intrusion into his jurisdiction.

Watching O’Reilly and Beck analyze an Obama ad aimed at African Americans is not unlike watching Rick Santorum and Pat Robertson reviewing the DVD release of “Brokeback Mountain.” There is very little of value that one could extract from their analysis. But what’s truly frightening is that Fox’s viewers will sop up their bile and regard it as credible. At least until they are scooped up off the street in the middle of the night.

Mitt Romney: Protecting America From The Scourge Of Firefighters, Police, And Teachers

Posted by Mark NC on June 9, 2012 at 12:31 pm. 2 Comments :

Now here’s a campaign platform that takes real guts. Mitt Romney has boldly come out against big government and its coddling of superfluous bureaucrats that drain our nation of scarce resources. And Romney courageously puts names to these bloodsucking parasites who provide no discernible benefit to society. Here is what he had to say about them:

“[Obama] wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

That’s right. The American people need help, and not the kind that President Obama is proposing. They don’t need fires extinguished by lazy civil servants. Real Americans will pick up their garden hoses and attack the blaze from their rooftops. Forest and prairie fires are actually a cheap method of clearing unsightly trees and brush. And paramedics only serve to exacerbate the socialist notion that victims of heart attacks and car accidents are “entitled” to life-saving emergency care.

The American people don’t need more police either. Protection from robberies and assaults is only sought by pussies and the French. And besides, if you really want police protection you can just start earning more money and move to a wealthy community where more officers are deployed and private security can be acquired for hefty fee. This is America, dammit. If you can’t get rich and pay for your own security, that’s your fault. And if you don’t stockpile weapons in your home, then you don’t really love your family. Just ask Mitt Romney (shooter of varmints) if he relies on the government for protection (well, except for all those secret service agents that cost taxpayers millions of dollars).

And don’t even get me started on teachers. What a waste of money that could have been spent on invading Iran. It’s not like America is the stupidest country in the world. At 37th worldwide there’s like 100 other countries that are stupider (and 36 that are smarterer).
Mitt Romney - We're Not Stupid Again the solution is simple. Send your children to expensive private schools like Romney’s Cranbrook, where they can get a superior education while traumatizing other students because they look different than you. The kids that are stuck in overcrowded public schools should stop whining and be grateful for community colleges and the jobs awaiting them at McDonalds. Romney has finally shown the courage to put an end to the fallacy that our children are the future when, in reality, they are just a bunch of germ-ridden fiscal burdens. Although the end result of this might make it harder for Romney to live up to his campaign slogan: We’re Not Stupid!

Mitt Romney, and most of the press, are preoccupied with an out-of-context soundbite where Obama said that “the private sector is doing fine.” When the whole of Obama’s remarks are considered it is clear that he was making a relative reference that the private sector (that has gained 4.2 million jobs in the last couple of years) is doing better than the public sector (which is still down 700,000 jobs). And if the jobs of firefighters, police and teachers were restored it would not only help those Americans, but it would produce more economic activity as a result of their employment (reducing the unemployment rate a full point) and improve the quality of life for all the Americans who benefit from the work they do.

In his remarks, Romney said that Obama was “out-of-touch.” It really takes cajones for a multimillionaire son of governor to call somebody else out-of-touch. But leave it to Romney and the Republican Party to twist reality out of all proportion and to take a position advocating fewer first-responders and educators. And these are the same people hyping so-called American exceptionalism.

Breitbart Bites: A Tea Party At Disneyland With Junkfood And Chili Peppers

Posted by Mark NC on June 7, 2012 at 4:46 am. 1 Comments :

Breitbart News has an arduous task as it seeks to produce a daily menu of moronic musings to satisfy their dimwitted readers. It seems a near impossible mission to continually churn out the quantity and quality of idiocy that they somehow manage to maintain. Here are a few recent examples of the prime cuts of cretinism that have graced their puerile pages.

Ray Bradbury: Science Fiction Legend; Tea Party Patriot
The news that Ray Bradbury, author of classic books such as Fahrenheit 451 and The Illustrated Man, passed away Wednesday surely stirred pangs of grief and memories of inspiration for millions. But for the Breitbrats it was a morbid opportunity to polish their egos by sponging off of the reputation of a beloved storyteller. These parasites can’t even set aside a time to mourn without attempting to turn the occasion into a partisan political affair. At 91, Bradbury had a long life and expressed a wide variety of views. In his later years he did tend to lean to the right, but he never associated himself with the Tea Party. For the Breitbrats to assert that after his death is not unlike the disturbing Mormon practice of Baptizing Jews posthumously.

Disney Kneels Before The State: Bans ‘Junkfood’ Ads
To today’s conservatives, the worst thing that any business can do in the age of Obama is to align itself with any initiative whose purpose is the well-being of society and it’s inhabitants. That’s the cliff Disney stepped off of when, in partnership with First Lady Michelle Obama’s campaign for children’s health, they unveiled plans to keep junk food ads off of their child-focused TV networks, radio stations and Web sites. To the Breitbrats, when a business chooses to refrain from indoctrinating kids with unhealthy messages, it is not the free market at work, but a capitulation to a tyrannical government. Breitbrat John Nolte begins his advocacy of Big Mac brainwashing by denying the existence of the very real problem of child obesity. But then he launches into a surprising justification:

“The left’s rebuttal is always the same: Well, we have to pay the health care costs for the obese.

Yes, we do, but the cost of liberty is not always fair — but it’s worth every damn penny.”

Get it? Nolte favors passing on the costs of treating illnesses resulting from obesity and malnutrition to society-at-large. Sounds like universal healthcare (aka socialism) to me. He thinks it’s perfectly OK for all of us to pay for the consequences of behavior that will drain the nation’s treasury if that behavior was freely chosen by the patient. And he shudders at the thought of people being informed about their health choices, even if the person is only ten years old. At the same time, he opposes paying for medical care for those unfortunates who might randomly develop kidney disease or multiple sclerosis or any number of other illnesses that are not behavior driven. That’s because he values liberty so highly that even socialism is justified to preserve our right to totally screw ourselves up.

Chili Peppers Rally For President Kardashian
The Breitbrats like to see themselves as trendy fashionistas who are hip to the scene, man. That’s likely an emotional reaction to their having been such pathetic outcasts in their youth. So now, in adulthood, they strive pitifully to fit in with what they think is cool. The result is an attempt to ridicule President Obama by arbitrarily associating him with a Kardashian. And as if that weren’t lame enough, they go on to insult the Red Hot Chili Peppers who provided free entertainment to thank Obama campaign volunteers for their service.

Breitbrat Christian Toto derides the Red Hot Chili Peppers as “aging punksters.” OK, the Red Hots aren’t 20-somethings, but my guess is that Flea would kick Toto’s tail in a contest to see who rocks harder. What’s more, when the most prominent rocker in the Romney is camp is Ted Nugent, a senior citizen has-been with a gun fetish, you might want to lay off the age jokes. Nugent spends his weekends at state fairs on nostalgic reunion tours, while the Red Hots fill stadiums and still chart hits. This one is currently at #17:

In these few items the Breitbrats have thoroughly demonstrated that they are shameless partisan hacks, incoherent hypocrites, and wretchedly feeble culture critics. No wonder their model of obsession-fueled, juvenile journalism (i.e. “vetting” the President) is such a sorry failure. Somehow they have managed to make Andrew Breitbart’s laughably weak and transparently biased blog conglomerate even dumber and less consequential.

THE VETTING: Mitt Romney’s Shameful Record Of Military Cowardice And Hypocrisy

Posted by Mark NC on June 6, 2012 at 4:57 pm. 4 Comments :

Today is the 68th anniversary of D-Day, the day that commemorates the Allied forces’ invasion of Normandy in 1944. Mitt Romney has no scheduled appearances on his calendar to mark the occasion. Instead, he solicited donations from wealthy Republicans at private fundraisers in San Antonio and Houston.

Perhaps Romney’s reticence to bring attention to this anniversary has something to do with the fact that his personal history with regard to military service is an embarrassing jumble of hypocrisy, dishonesty, and irresponsibility.

Mitt Romney In 1966, Romney was a vocal proponent of the Vietnam war. At Stanford University he attended rallies in support of the conflict and engaged in counter-protests against peace activists. Nevertheless, Romney was content to let other young men risk their lives for their country while he attended school and went to France on behalf of his Mormon church. In 2007, Romney had the gall to tell the Boston Globe that…

“I was supportive of my country. I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam.”

However, Romney’s alleged frustration was contradicted by his remarks to the Boston Herald in 1994 when he admitted that…

“I was not planning on signing up for the military. […] It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft.”

So the Romney of 2007 was revealed to be a liar by the Romney of 1994. But that’s not all. The Romney of 1994 was also a liar because he did, in fact, remove himself from the draft for many years with deferments for both college and Mormon missionary work. And Romney’s lack of the character and courage to live by the principles he professed has rubbed off on his five sons, who were all old enough to serve in Afghanistan and/or Iraq, but who declined to enlist. In a display of utterly revolting elitism and ego, Romney defended them saying that “one of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected.”

So on this anniversary of D-Day, draft dodger Romney chooses to forgo a formal remembrance in favor of attending a flurry of fundraisers. And how does Fox News report this state of affairs?

That’s right. It’s all about Obama. And even though Romney skipped D-Day and went fundraising instead, there is no mention of that by Fox. They do however, say that “Obama’s failure to mark D-Day in any significant way is both a shame and a political mistake.” Therefore, it ought to be equally shameful for Romney. At least Obama never evaded military service at a time of war, as did Romney and his sons. It is also notable, in a disturbing way, that the Fox Nationalists took the extra step to complain about the political fallout from not commemorating this anniversary. That is really all they think about. Politics is far more important to them than principle. Had Obama held a D-Day event, the response from Fox would undoubtedly have been that he was exploiting it for political gain and using the troops for a photo-op.

Fox News can be relied upon for only one thing: Strictly one-side, partisan propaganda for the benefit of Republicans and the detriment of Democrats. Roger Ailes works for the RNC, or perhaps vice versa. It’s hard to tell.

For the record, both Obama and Romney tweeted memorials to D-Day participants and survivors.

Not So Breitbart: Pathetic Vetting Of Obama’s BBQ With Bill Ayers

Posted by Mark NC on June 4, 2012 at 1:12 pm. 11 Comments :

The “vetting” of Barack Obama continues at Breitbart News and, true to form, serves only to embarrass the juvenile efforts of Breitbrat Joel Pollak and his childish pals who suffer an acute case of Obama Derangement Syndrome. Today’s banner headline at the Breitbrats sandbox blares: “Exclusive – The Vetting – Senator Barack Obama Attended Bill Ayers Barbecue, July 4, 2005.”

OMG! Barack Obama has been caught at a clandestine socialist assembly of treasonous celebrants of America’s independence. These subversives were observed igniting fires (in BBQ grills) and launching explosives (fireworks). They may even have been imbibing beer and other alcoholic intoxicants.

Breitbrat Joel is clearly proud of the shocking revelation he has uncovered that puts Obama in the backyard of his neighbor, Bill Ayres, for an ostensibly patriotic party. The “proof” that so excites Pollak is an ancient blog post by another neighbor of Ayers that describes a third-hand witness to Obama sharing a picnic table at a Fourth of July gathering. The author said…

“Guess what? I spent the 4th of July evening with star Democrat Barack Obama! Actually, that’s a lie. Obama was at a barbecue at the house next door (given by a law professor who is a former member of the Weather Underground) and we saw him over the fence at our barbecue. Well, the others did. It had started raining and he had gone inside be the time I got there. Nevertheless.”

Well then, that settles it. The author of the post never saw the then-senator, but some unnamed person claims to have seen him. And there couldn’t be any possibility of this mysterious party guest making a mistake, could there? The post goes on to note that despite keeping a watch out for a confirmation siting, there were no other Obama spottings. The only corroboration was “another source” quoted by Pollak who was also not identified.

Even if true, Pollak’s unrestrained glee over this “discovery” means nothing. It stems from his false contention that Obama’s socializing with Ayers contradicts a statement his campaign issued in 2008. However, the quote that Pollak himself posted says…

“Mr. LaBolt said the men first met in 1995 through the education project, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and have encountered each other occasionally in public life or in the neighborhood. He said they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they bumped into each other on the street in Hyde Park.”

Of course, there is nothing in that statement that conflicts with an account of Obama encountering Ayers at a neighborhood party. In fact, it explicitly affirms that Obama had such contacts “in the neighborhood.” Where’s the controversy?

Pollak is plainly obsessed with smearing Obama for having had a relationship with a neighbor who was also a respected university professor and education consultant. But Pollak’s pea-brain can only contain information about Ayers that portrays him as the “radical, domestic terrorist” of his youth some forty years ago. Pollak cannot see past his hostility toward Obama, and the result is hysterical conspiracy tantrums like this. It’s the same sort of dementia that produces absurd postings on Fox Nation like today’s article that proposes that Obama had an “unpresidential” past:

The past to which the Fox Nationalists refer is his adolescence when he did unpresidential things like play basketball and wear hats. Seriously? This is the best they can do?

Mitt Romney Gives His Tea Party People What They Want – Pigheaded Nastiness

Posted by Mark NC on June 2, 2012 at 4:49 pm. 2 Comments :

From the start of the 2012 election cycle there was one thing that was clear and consistent about Mitt Romney’s campaign: that he would be neither clear nor consistent.

Romney has been on both sides of every major issue. Whereas he once bragged about his unwavering defense of Roe v Wade, he now calls for it’s repeal. He once claimed that he would be a stronger advocate for gay rights than Ted Kennedy, but now adamantly supports the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act. He mercilessly bashes ObamaCare, seemingly oblivious to the fact that his own RomneyCare in Massachusetts was the basis for it. Point to a Romney flip and there is a flop following closely.

The only consistent thing about Romney is his clockwork-like predictability in changing his shape to become whatever he thinks the far-right Republican base wishes for him to become.

Perhaps the most fervent desire of the conservative crowd is for a candidate that will mix it up with his opponent, Barack Obama. They want a fighter who will throw everything, including the kitchen sink, into the ring. Nothing is off the table – not birtherism, not race, not religion, nothing. They want a knock-down, drag-out brawl that leaves Obama bloodied in a gutter. And that is exactly what Romney is now promising to deliver. According to a Romney adviser…

“There were a lot of folks who didn’t think he’d have the edge to really take on the president […] They’ve been pretty surprised and impressed at how willing Boston has been to push back.”

Rush Limbaugh gave what to him must be the highest praise, saying that “This is not the McCain campaign.” Indeed, Romney is trading in substance for belligerence. His strategy hinges on avoiding weaselly policy positions that he knows will upset his base, and feeding them raw anger that appeals to their bloodlust for Obama. And above all, never back down or apologize. Even if it means tolerating Donald Trump’s ignorant birtherism and Ted Nugent’s violent wet dreams. Another Romney aide, after being told that conservatives were comparing his tactics to the late, notoriously dishonest bomb thrower Andrew Breitbart, said “Oh great, that’s what we were going for.”

The media, as usual, is getting it all wrong. After Obama made some comments about Romney, who unlike John McCain, lacked the moral leadership to denounce creeps like Trump and Nugent, a report by the Associated Press bore the headline, “Obama longs for GOP rival like McCain.” That’s taking it a bit too far, to say the least. Obama would just like to see the crazy fringe dwellers, like those who think Obama is a Muslim plant sent to hand America over to its enemies, be shunted to the sidelines where they belong. On occasion McCain would do that, but to Romeny that would signal weakness to his Tea Party masters.

A couple of days ago Bill Clinton was interviewed on CNN and said that Romney had “a sterling business career,” and that he was certainly qualified to run for president. The right-wingnut crowd frothed with excitement that this polite remark was tantamount to an endorsement of Romney, even though Clinton explicitly said that Obama was by far the better choice. That led to Clinton’s clarification today:

“I said, you know, Governor Romney had a good career in business and he was a governor, so he crosses the qualification threshold for him being president,” Clinton said. “But he shouldn’t be elected, because he is wrong on the economy and all these other issues.

“So today, because I didn’t attack him personally and bash him, I wake up to read all these stories taking it out of context as if I had virtually endorsed him, which means the tea party has already won their first great victory: ‘We are supposed to hate each other to disagree.’ That is wrong.”

That’s precisely what today’s Republican Tea Party is advocating. There is simply no place for reasonableness, compromise, or maturity. At the same time, there is no disgracefulness that is beyond the pale. The lesson that the right learned in 2008 was that any expression of respect or courtesy, or any accommodation to civility, is a betrayal of principle. The ideal aspiration of the right is for a candidate with the most pigheaded sense of nastiness and an absence of shame. And if that’s what they want then, by God, that’s what Romney will give them.

Romney’s most urgent goal now is to portray himself as the fiercest warrior on the battlefield. It doesn’t matter what he’s fighting for so long as he leaves a lot of corpses on the ground. As I said once before, he is “The Punisher.”

Right-Wing Racists Ask: Where Da White Women At?

Posted by Mark NC on June 1, 2012 at 2:58 pm. 5 Comments :

If you think that’s funny, you should hear the remarks made by Tim Graham, the Director of Media Analysis for the uber-conservative Media Research Center. In an interview with NRA News, Graham was curious as to why the press refrained from reporting a particular aspect of President Obama’s past:

“…they talked about his white girlfriends in college. Which again you would think that would be a story that a news media that is so conscious about race seemed to not think that was an interesting development, that Obama had these white girlfriends.”

Really? Why exactly would that be an “interesting development?” Is there something wrong with interracial relationships? Was Graham disturbed that the purity of his white sisters was being defiled by a young black man? How would he have the media report this scandalous revelation? And what relevance does he think it has to the presidential election today?

Graham has outted himself as a most vile bigot. He pretends that there is some social significance to the fact that Obama had white girlfriends, but the reality of it is that he’s just plain racist. And this is a theme that right-wingers have attempted to sneak into the campaign ever since Obama emerged as a national figure. Last year Fox Nation posted this thinly disguised racial attack on Obama.

It’s five months before the election and already the conservative haters are loading their attacks with overtly racist themes. And then they complain when people correctly point out their flaming prejudice. Well I have one message for them: If you don’t like being called racist, stop being racist.

Fox News Produces An Anti-Obama Video – Then Scrubs It, Sanitizes It, And Scrubs It Again

Posted by Mark NC on May 30, 2012 at 5:32 pm. 2 Comments :

This morning on Fox & Friends, the program’s hosts, two couch potatoes and one couch tomato, introduced a video that purported to examine “Four Years of Hope and Change.” What it was in reality was a four-plus minute campaign video attacking President Obama that presented a variety of soundbites by the President accompanied by ominous graphics and eerie music that falsely implied that his campaign promises were unkept. The video addresses subjects such as…

The national debt (which ballooned as a result of Bush’s tax cuts for the rich, bailouts for banks, and two wars).
The unemployment rate (which Fox failed to note has fallen from 10.1 to 8.1, and which was the result of an economic collapse precipitated by Bush’s pandering to, and deregulation of, Wall Street).
The price of gas (which at $3.63 a gallon is still lower (and falling) than at the height of the Bush administration when it reached $4.12).
And a variety of statistics that one would expect in a recession that were caused by the economic mismanagement enumerated above.

The video (which Media Matters thoroughly debunks here) could not have been a more pro-Romney, anti-Obama attack had it been produced by the Republican National Committee. When critics observe that Fox News is the PR arm of the GOP, it is precisely because of brazenly biased political activism like this. If there were ever a time for Fox News to be investigated by the Federal Elections Commission for improper political contributions, it is now.

Apparently Fox News has also recognized the gross inappropriateness of their anti-Obama attack ad. Minutes after the video was posted online it was removed from every place it had been posted. On Fox Nation a reader would have been greeted by a “Lost at Sea” page indicating that the content was no longer at that address. On the Fox & Friends site the video was replaced by an error message saying that they “were unable to play the media you selected.” What could have prompted Fox to bury their own video that had already been broadcast on the air?

Approximately an hour later the video reappeared on Fox Nation. However, it had been edited to remove all of the footage of the Fox & Friends crew introducing it and summing up at the conclusion. It’s almost as if Fox were trying to destroy any evidence of their involvement with the video.

Unfortunately for the propagandists at Fox, the evidence persists. Media Matters captured the whole production and made it available for all to see:

It was nice of the Fox Friends to credit the video’s producer, Chris White, for the fine job of partisan obfuscation he had done. Steve Doocy beamed, “No kidding. He remembered everything everybody said over the last three and a half, four years.” Well, actually he only remembered to piece together random bits from Obama’s speeches juxtaposed with negative graphics and false conclusions.

This should put an end to any talk that Fox News has been trying to moderate their bias, as some pundits suggested last year. Fox hasn’t changed at all. They are just as committed to falsifying their reporting, promoting their far-right agenda, and making imbecilic drones of their audience, as they ever were. This video would be ample evidence of that all by itself, but add to the mix Fox’s attempt to surgically excise their responsibility for it and you know all you need to know about their deceitful and dangerous intent.

Update: 2:30: The video has mysteriously disappeared again from the Fox web sites.
Update: 3:40: Now information is emerging that Fox News has been taking considerable heat for their bad behavior. It appears that the video has been disappeared by Fox. A weaselly statement was issued by Fox EVP Bill Shine who said…

“The package that aired on FOX & Friends was created by an associate producer and was not authorized at the senior executive level of the network. This has been addressed with the show’s producers.”

One has to wonder what happened to Fox’s “Zero Tolerance” policy that was instituted after a series of stupid mistakes. Now it seems that Fox is merely scapegoating an underling despite the glowing treatment that the Fox Friends gave the video and their effusive praise for the producer. The New York Times is reporting that Fox CEO Roger Ailes “was not aware of the video” even though he has previously taken a keen interest in the program. However, a lot of people were aware of this video because it was not only broadcast on air, it was posted to several sites online.

A few weeks ago a couple of NBC employees misleadingly edited an audio tape of George Zimmerman’s call to 911. NBC fired them and announced it publicly. Don’t expect the same from Fox. They don’t bother with trivialities like journalistic ethics. All they will do is say that it’s been addressed and then probably give the producer a bonus. That’s how Roger Ailes can make the ludicrous claim that “in 15 years we have never taken a story down because it was wrong.”

There is no way that Fox can avoid responsibility for this atrociously unethical affair. By now it is so obvious that Fox exists to promote Republicans and bash Democrats that this video fits squarely within their mission. The only difference this time is that they got caught crossing a line that they obviously weren’t worried about. That’s because they are so comfortable wandering across it that they’ve lost all cognizance of the line’s existence.

Fox Nation vs. Reality: Reviving Trump Birther Charges To Attack Romney

Posted by Mark NC on May 29, 2012 at 2:09 pm. 5 Comments :

Talk about desperate…

The Fox Nationalists have posted this article asserting that a desperate Obama campaign is “Reviving Trump’s Birther Charges.” And it is a devious strategy that Obama is plotting by somehow managing to get Donald Trump to reiterate his lunatic position on Obama’s citizenship. Last week, without any noticeable provocation from the Obama camp, Trump volunteered that “It’s very simple. He said [Obama] was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia.” Imagine the sophistication of the Obama Machine that can revive the Trump Birther charges straight from the mouth of Trump without anyone, including Trump, catching on.

And now that the charges have been revived, Obama can use Trump’s delusional extremism to attack Mitt Romney. This is also evidence of just how complex the Obama strategy is. After successfully manipulating Trump into making idiotic statements, Obama’s team has somehow maneuvered Romney into embracing Trump and forcefully declining to repudiate Trump as his chief surrogate. Romney responded to criticism of his association with Trump by saying…

“You know, I don’t agree with all the people who support me and my guess is they don’t all agree with everything I believe in. But I need to get 50.1% or more and I’m appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people.” [Note that Fox Nation excised the part in bold from their article]

How on earth did Obama get Romney to say publicly that he is willing to abandon his principles in order to get a majority and win the election? Then again, perhaps that wasn’t the hardest part of the plan since Romney’s principles are fairly malleable to begin with. It’s true that Romney may not agree with all of his supporters. On most issues he has taken positions in stark disagreement with himself.

Trump, it should be noted, has not been cowed by this controversy. He tweeted today that…

“@BarackObama is practically begging @MittRomney to disavow the place of birth movement, he is afraid of it and for good reason. He keeps using @SenJohnMcCain as an example, however, @SenJohnMcCain lost the election. Don’t let it happen again.”

Jeremiah Wright If directing criticism at Romney for his connection to the birther movement is evidence that Obama is afraid of it, then Romney’s criticism of Obama’s campaign for raising Bain Capital as an issue is evidence that Romney is scared Mittless of that. The difference is that Bain Capital is real and birtherism is a manifestation of acute mental decay. And that makes it all the more remarkable that Trump believes the reason McCain lost in 2008 was that he didn’t latch onto birtherism. While everyone else knows that the real reason Mccain lost was because he wouldn’t hit harder on Rev. Wright.

Only Fox Nation could look at this situation and come to the conclusion that it was Obama’s campaign that revived Trump’s inane attack. But that’s the purpose of Fox Nation – twisting reality into unrecognizable pretzel bits in order to to keep their audience as ignorant as possible. How else could their candidates win?

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: