Fox Nation’s Impotent Attacks On Obama’s Campaign Ad

The Obama campaign released a new ad today that points out Mitt Romney’s failed record on job creation as the CEO of Bain Capital. It tells the story of former employees of a company that Bain drove into bankruptcy, destroying the jobs and dreams of the people who worked there for decades.

It didn’t take long for Fox to ramp up a rebuttal to the ad. In fact, they rushed two responses to their Fox Nation web site in the hopes of quickly diminishing the impact of the ad. Unfortunately, they neglected to insure that their rebuttals made any sense.

Fox Nation

In one of the articles the Fox Nationalists assert that the “Obama Camp Attacks Capitalism.” However, nowhere in their article do they support that assertion. It is just a dangling notion that appears to rest on the fact that the Obama ad criticizes Romney for presiding over the loss of thousands of jobs while he ran Bain Capital – which is unarguably true. In fact, Romney’s own response to the ad doesn’t argue with its truthfulness. It said simply that “We welcome the Obama campaign’s attempt to pivot back to jobs and a discussion of their failed record.” It never disputed the facts presented in the ad. However, it did make a laughable attempt to tie Obama to “wealthy campaign donors,” apparently forgetting that it is Romney who is most dependent of such support.

The other article makes an even more blatantly false claim that Obama’s ad had been debunked. The substance of the debunking consisted of presenting a timeline that supposedely absolves Romney of any responsibility: “Romney’s departure from Bain: 1999. GST Bankruptcy Filing and layoffs: 2001.”

That’s true, but it neglects to note that it was Romney’s actions while at Bain that resulted in the bankruptcy. As noted in the ad: (and at Obama’s RomneyEconomics web page) 1993: Romeny and his partners invest $8 million to acquire GST. 1995: Merger creates $378 million in debt. 2001: GST files for bankruptcy with $500 million in debt. With Romney at the helm, Bain had sucked the blood (and money) out of GST leaving it unable to meet its obligations. The profits Bain secured were all prior to his departure in 2001. The fact that the shell of the company didn’t collapse for a couple of years after Romney left is irrelevant.

So neither rebuttal to the ad hits home if all the facts are presented. And it’s notable that even Romney’s response did not dispute the facts in the ad. But none of that prevented Fox from posting not just one, but two lame rebuttals that will be devoured by their dimwitted audience.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox News Culture War: Obama’s Gay Marriage Endorsement Like Another 9/11

Leave it to Fox News to escalate every political discussion to a nuclear holocaust. In the wake of President Obama’s personal support for gay marriage, Fox, and the rest of the Right-Wing Noise Machine, has declared yet another “war.”

Fox News Culture Warrior

And if it’s not enough that Fox characterizes a position with which the majority of the country concurs as hostile, they up the ante by posting an item on their Fox Nation site that compares this position to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

Fox Nation

The Fox Nationalists quote controversial right-wing pastor Dwight McKissic, who has a history of virulently anti-gay rhetoric. He has said that the Anti-Christ will be gay and that Hurricane Katrina was God’s wrath on the “sinners” of New Orleans. He also says that the gay rights movement was inspired “from the pit of hell itself.” Now he says of Obama’s remarks that…

“The moral impact of this day and decision is equal to the military impact of AL-Queda when they attacked the Twin Towers on 911.”

Of course. It’s exactly the same thing. Who could deny the similarities between extremist religious zealots murdering thousands of innocent people, and the President’s expression of support for unconditional love. If there is any similarity it is between the Muslim radicals who hate homosexuality as much as Christian radicals do.

Fox, for its part, is demonstrating their innate bigotry by providing a national platform for McKissic’s repugnant views. They are giving a megaphone to a known homophobe and professional hate monger. And nowhere in their reporting do they elaborate on the character of McKissic. They do, however, go out of their way to note that McKissic is black, a fact that has no bearing on the subject other than as an attempt to create a wedge between the African-American community and the President.

The Fox faction is again demonstrating their desperation to smear the President because they have no substantive case to make for their own candidate, Mitt Romney. Expect to see more of this culture war propaganda as the campaign progresses. It’s the only thing that Fox and their GOP enablers have to talk about.


Fox News Full Court Press Promoting Disreputable Author

Rupert Murdoch’s regime is coordinating closely to disseminate false allegations from an author that even conservatives regard as disreputable.

Edward Klein just released a book that alleges that Bill Clinton called Obama an amateur and tried to persuade Hillary to resign as Secretary of State and run against him in the 2012 primary. However, Klein is a sordid character whose work has been repudiated by fellow journalists. He has even been denounced by right-wing pundits like Byron York, and Fox’s own Greta Van Susteren. But that hasn’t stopped Murdoch’s Machine from blanketing his “news” assets with new accusations from Klein:

Fox Nation

The headline on Fox Nation, “Report: Obama Campaign Offered Jeremiah Wright Cash To Keep Quiet,” is sourced to Klein’s latest book of lies. Note that the allegation against the Obama campaign was not an accurate representation from Klein’s book where a go-between was cited as having made the alleged bribe. Fingering the Obama campaign was Fox Nation’s idea and, recognizing their own dishonesty, they later changed the false headline to say “Report: Obama Ally Offered Jeremiah Wright Cash To Keep Quiet.” It’s still false but maybe one degree less so. [Update: Fox Nation changed the headline yet again, this time to make it sound more scandalous: Obama Team Tried to ‘Bribe’ Rev. Wright: Book]

This same story was pumped out by Murdoch’s Fox News and New York Post. Clearly there is a coordinated effort to push this fakery and to reenergize the ancient Rev. Wright controversies. That suggests a fair measure of desperation on the part of Murdoch and his rightist cohorts who feel it’s necessary to rerun already debunked smears from a four year old campaign. And they didn’t work back then either.

Klein’s past excursions into Fantasyland have included assertions that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian; that Bill raped her; and that old stand-by, Obama is a Muslim from Kenya.

ThinkProgress has a more detailed bio of Klein and his past record of disinformation and deliberate dishonesty. Suffice to say that he is a weaver of tall tales that have no basis in reality. Which makes him a perfect source for Fox News and a desirable guest for Fox’s Lou Dobbs, where Klein is scheduled to appear next week.

It’s funny, in a despicable way, that the conservative media is hyping nonsense like this, while simultaneously accusing the President of not wanting to run on his record. The truth is that Obama has been highlighting his record at every public appearance, while the GOP harps on ancient irrelevancies. Did I mention that they were desperate?


The Wall Street Journal: Standing Up For Poor, Defenseless Billionaires

When Rupert Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal there was anxious speculation about what would become of the respected financial clarion. Many critics (myself included) predicted that the paper would devolve into a partisan tool for the advancement of Murdoch’s uber-conservative agenda. Now we have confirmation of the worst of our reckoning.

A few weeks ago, the Journal’s Kimberley Strassel wrote a column complaining about an Obama campaign web page that identified a few of Mitt Romney’s wealthy donors and described their inherent interests in helping Romney to buy the presidency. Strassel’s take at the time was a departure from rational thought as she dredged up delusions about McCarthyism and enemies lists. She portrayed the introduction of Romney’s contributors as an attempt to intimidate them, as if being branded a Romney supporter was in itself an insult from which they must be shielded.

The truth is that Strassel was acting as a defender of the super-rich who prefer to operate in anonymity in order to achieve their self-serving ends. And while criticizing wealthy Republicans was tantamount to treason, she had no such sympathy for the likes of George Soros or George Clooney who somehow deserved the exposure and criticism they endured. Strassel is nothing but a mouthpiece for her boss, Murdoch, who is rushing to aid his aristocratic comrades. That explains how Strassel’s looney observations traveled so briskly from the Journal to Fox News and other right-wing media.

But apparently her article didn’t do the trick. So yesterday she followed up with another piece that sought to shelter one particular Romney supporter from the slings and arrows of outrageousness due to his vast fortune. Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca, an Amway-ish multi-level marketing enterprise. He has been described as an ultra-conservative and virulently anti-gay activist who generously spreads his wealth in pursuit of his politically narrow and socially constricting goals. [For a revealing look at VanderSloot see Glenn Greenwald’s excellent and in-depth essay in Salon].

The focus of Strassel’s new column is her dismay that VanderSloot is the subject of research by presumably Democratic operatives. Once again, the notion that wealthy power-players should be exempt from scrutiny is the core of her complaint. She even begins her article by saying…

“Here’s what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.”

First of all, VanderSloot is not what any objective person would describe as just a “private citizen.” He is a prominent, big-money backer of political issues and candidates and he is the national finance co-chair of the Romney campaign. That makes him a very public person whose activities are relevant. Strassel’s position is that he is off-limits for public discourse despite making himself a notoriously vociferous spokesperson for his conservative views. This is a common stance from the right wherein they assert that they can say anything they want about anyone, including slanderous attacks on the President, but if the targets of these attacks dare to respond they are guilty of intimidation and suppression of free speech.

Just as with her previous column, this one also made the journey from print to television. Fox News committed significant airtime to the story. Megyn Kelly interviewed Strassel in one segment of her program, then came back with another segment pitting a couple of political analysts against each other. Later, Neil Cavuto did a report on the subject for one segment, and returned to “interview” a couple of right-wing, Fox legal contributors. That’s a lot of airtime to devote to protecting a billionaire from having to be accountable for his political actions.

Poor Frank VanderSloot. What a burden it must be for him to have people discover what he’s up to with his campaign spending. And what a blow to his dignity that he should have to answer questions from the peasants he is seeking to control through disbursement of his wealth. It’s a good thing he has Rupert Murdoch, and the Wall Street Journal, and Fox News to cover for him because he surely doesn’t have any means of defending himself. He can now join the Koch brothers who were aided by the Murdoch Machine earlier this year when the Journal gave space to their attorney, Ted Olsen, to make largely the same arguments that Strassel is making about McCarthyism, just because they experienced some push-back for their right-wing advocacy.

It’s startling how thin-skinned these billionaires are. With all of their financial resources, media access, and Washington connections, they still cry like babies when confronted. And it’s pathetic what the Wall Street Journal has become as it seems to be destroying it’s reputation for the sake of a few wealthy patrons.


Mitt Romney And The Sacred Institution Of Marriage

In the few days since President Obama expressed his personal support for same-sex marriage, the knee-jerk Right-Wing Noise Machine has blasted the historic stance as a flip-flop, a fundraising stunt, and an affront to God. But Mitt Romeny’s response was particularly noteworthy in that he managed to reverse his previous position (when he promised to be a stronger advocate for gay rights than Ted Kennedy) and lied about his own family at the same time.

Mitt Romney's Grandmothers

If Romney agrees with 3,000 years of recorded history, he is attacking his own family legacy. Miles Park Romney was his great grandfather who had five wives. So Romney’s sacred institution doesn’t even go back 200 hundred years, much less 3,000. And if we really want to get technical, throughout much of the history of western culture men were permitted to have multiple wives, including many biblical figures.

So the question for Romney is: What the f#&k are you talking about?


Breitbart’s Unhinged Hypocrisy: Vetting Obama OK, Vetting Romney Disgraceful

The Breitbart site is well known for dishonesty and rabid servility to the uber-rightist agenda. But this morning they may have outdone themselves in an Olympian feat of hypocrisy.

The Washington Post published an article today by Jason Horowitz, detailing accounts of bullying and possible gay-bashing by Mitt Romney while attending the elite Cranbrook prep school. According to five independently acquired reports by his former schoolmates, Romney led verbal and physical assaults on other students who were presumed to be gay.

Responding to that article, Breitbrat Ben Shapiro posted a frenetic critique that took the Post to task for what he called “an egregious hit piece.” Shapiro saw both fallacy and conspiracy on the part of the Post.

[T]he timing of the story is obviously designed to protect President Barack Obama, who just yesterday said that he would embrace same-sex marriage. The narrative from the media therefore became: Obama is fine with gays, Romney hates them. Since they had zero evidence that Romney has any antipathy toward homosexuals, they had to dig up an incident nearly 50 years ago, invest it with anti-gay rage, and print it as fact.

This is character assassination of the worst kind. It doesn’t go to Romney’s deeply-held beliefs and positions. It doesn’t show how he was defined as a young man. It’s just an old prank brought up and infused with nastiness, sans evidence, in order to turn Romney into a jerk in the public eye.

Breitbrat Ben’s assertion that this story was timed to benefit the President reveals his inability to comprehend reality. For Shapiro’s timing conspiracy theory to be true, the White House must have told Horowitz to start working on the story months ago so that it would be ready the day after an announcement that no one could have anticipated.

Shapiro’s defense of Romney as having no ‘antipathy toward homosexuals” surely rings hollow to all the homosexuals who would be forbidden to marry or even enjoy the same civil liberties as straight citizens. And his characterization of physical assault and possible gay-bashing as merely “an old prank” is evidence of Shapiro’s own insensitivity to such victimization.

But the most brazenly unhinged assertion in Shapiro’s column is his lambasting of the Post for “dig[ging] up an incident nearly 50 years ago” and declaring that “It doesn’t show how [Romney] was defined as a young man.” Seriously?

Shapiro, and others on the Breitbart team, have spent months digging up ancient material about Obama in a relentless campaign of character assassination. All of it was meant to show how Obama was defined as a young man. However, most of it fell impotently into the dustbin of pseudo-journalism due its irrelevancy, but their intent was clear. They called their slander “vetting” and posted such inane classics as Obama embracing his law professor at Harvard – the well-respected Derrick Bell, who was the first African-American to receive tenure at Harvard Law School.

Even more astonishing, while Shapiro blasted the Post for publishing information about Romney’s high school history, Shapiro himself posted information about Obama’s high school past.

Breitbart

Somehow the irony and hypocrisy of posting two stories – one complaining about reports of Romney’s past and the other doing to Obama what he was complaining about – on the very same day, seems to have escaped the wet noodle mind of Breitbrat Ben. His article on Obama rehashed information that has been known for years and was disclosed by Obama in his own writings and speeches.

But that didn’t stop Shapiro from misrepresenting the truth. He contradicted himself by asserting that “Obama, by all accounts, was a habitual drug user in high school,” even though a couple of paragraphs down he cited a report in the New York Times wherein Obama’s classmates said that drugs played only a “bit part” in Obama’s youth. So it obviously wasn’t “by all accounts.” Then Shapiro went on to scattershoot tired and false allegations that Obama was a black nationalist and a communist.

When a phony journalist like Shapiro can write an article about the absurdity of dredging up a decades old story, and then himself dredges up a decades old story – the same day – there has been a serious cognitive disconnect. It is a sign that these people are either severely disturbed or deliberately deceitful. Either way it is additional evidence that they simply cannot be taken seriously and that they may require acute care at an in-patient facility.

[Update] Romney has responded to the WaPo story by saying that…

“I played a lot of pranks in high school and they describe some that well you just say to yourself, back in high school well I did some dumb things and if anybody was hurt by that or offended obviously I apologize but overall high school years were a long time ago”

Romney also said that the didn’t recall having held down a classmate and cutting off his hair. Yeah right. His five school chums all remember, but the guy with the scissors has forgotten. He further said that it had nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the victim. But how could he know that if he doesn’t recall the incident? That’s like saying “No, I didn’t kill my wife. And besides, she deserved it.”

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation Hyperventilation: Obama Flip Flops, Declares War On Marriage

Good grief…another war. Fox News is the most war happy confederation of dunces since the Huns. For Fox it is absolutely impossible to have a position on any subject without it being an official declaration of hostilities. Whether it’s Christmas, Easter, Halloween, light bulbs, the Constitution, hybrid cars, salt, or Happy Meals, Fox has cut off diplomatic relations and is mobilizing its military forces. Now it’s marriage.

Fox Nation War On Marriage

This afternoon President Obama told a reporter from ABC News that his position has evolved and that he now supports the right of all people to enter into same-sex marriage. It is a position that is supported by a majority of Americans including Dick Cheney. But rather than approach this news in a rational manner that promotes civil discourse, the Fox Nationalists sensationalized it by asserting that Obama is at war with somebody.

Never mind that no one can explain how same-sex marriage in any way interferes with straight marriage, or that the divorce rate among straight couples is far more destructive to the “institution” than anything gay couples could ever do, this is WAR and Fox will not back away.

Remember, Fox is the network that featured such marriage-honoring programs as “Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?,” “Temptation Island,” “Married by America” and “Joe Millionaire.” All of these programs pitted contestants against each other for the opportunity to marry a perfect stranger. How romantic and respectful of traditional marriage.

Mitt Romney responded to the President’s remarks saying…

“I have the same view on marriage that I had when I was Governor. I believe that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. I know other people have differing views. This a very tender and sensitive topic as are many social issues, but I have the same views I’ve had since running for office.”

Not exactly. In 1994, Romney told the Log Cabin Republicans (a gay GOP group) that “We must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern.” He ran for the senate in Massachusetts saying that he would be “a stronger advocate for gay rights” than his opponent, Ted Kennedy. More recently Romney bowed to the demands of Bryan Fischer, an anti-gay preacher who objected to an openly gay spokesman on Romney’s foreign policy team. Then Fischer blasted Romney as weak for having capitulate to him.

I would agree that Obama’s position on this issue has changed over time. Even Obama would agree with that and has said so himself. But for Romney to assert that his position has never changed is an outright lie. Although that shouldn’t surprise anyone coming from the man who now takes credit for saving the auto industry with policies he claims to have proposed, when in fact he opposed those policies and argued that we should “let Detroit go bankrupt.” Romney is also the guy who today claims he would have made the same call as Obama on getting Bin Laden. However, he previously blasted Obama’s position and said that he (Romney) would not go into an ally like Pakistan to chase down the terrorist leader.

Hypocrisy and dishonesty are traits that Fox and Romney share. That makes Romney the perfect Fox News candidate for president. What’s really pathetic is that Fox is the general in this war and Romney is their figurehead who lacks any real aptitude for leadership. And Fox’s war plan is to lie by presenting articles like this one that accuses Obama of flip-flopping and declaring war on marriage when any sane observer can see that he did neither.

[Credit where credit’s due] Fox’s Shepard Smith is an island at the network. He wisely wonders “if Republicans would go out on a limb and try to make this a campaign issue while sitting very firmly, without much question, on the wrong side of history.”

Without much question, Republicans will ignore Smith’s inquiry. You can bet they will this an issue. And, as can be seen above, Fox News already has. I can’t help thinking that Smith has sex videos of Roger Ailes with an underage boy from Thailand. How else does he manage to keep his job?


Fox Nation vs. Reality: West Virginia Is For Lovers Of Felons

Yesterday was another election day in this seemingly never-ending primary season. And, true to its nature, Fox Nation has managed to mangle reporting of what took place. Here is the headline they went with this morning: “Democrats Pick Jailed Felon Over Obama.”

Fox Nation

There are only two reasons that Fox would run with this story: 1) It makes Obama look bad. 2) They had funny pictures of Obama and a pony-tailed felon. The decision to publish this obviously had nothing to do with truthful reporting because, contrary to the sensationalistic headline, the Democrats did not pick a jailed felon over Obama. The felon lost. Nevertheless, Fox posted this story at the top of their web page indicating that they considered it more important than any other election news, such as the defeat of veteran senator Dick Lugar in Indiana and the victory for homophobes in North Carolina.

More to the point, however, the Fox Nationalists failed to provide any context for this item. They never mentioned that in West Virginia Independents are permitted to vote in any primary. What’s more, all voters are permitted to declare and/or change their party affiliation in the voting booth. Consequently, there is a pretty good chance that the votes for the felon were actually made by Republicans seeking to cause mischief. Since Obama was not being challenged by any serious candidate, the turnout for Democrats was probably quite low. And since Romney’s opponents had all quit, GOP voters could safely cast their votes for a joker on the Democratic ballot.

In any case, the tendency for some portion of West Virginians to align themselves with a white criminal over the President says more about them than it does about Obama. And a closer look at the felon reveals a decidedly Republican mindset. His FEC filings resemble the mission statements of Tea Partiers that rant about gun rights and the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. That affirms the likelihood that his voters are predominantly right-wingers.

Another bit of context that was left out is that 30% of Republicans voted against Romney in the GOP primary. That means that 30% of West Virginian GOP voters preferred people who were not even in the race to their presumptive nominee. And more West Virginians overall cast ballots for Obama (70k) than for Romney (54k). But don’t expect to hear any of this from Fox News.


Rush Limbaugh Affiliates Losing Millions As Advertisers Flee

When Rush Limbaugh called law student Sandra Fluke a slut he may not have grasped how expensive his despicable misogyny would be. Yesterday Politico reported that the CEO of Cumulus Media revealed that…

…the advertiser boycott against Rush Limbaugh cost his company millions of dollars in revenue for the first two quarters of the year.

“It hit us pretty hard,” [Lew} Dickey said during a call with financial analysts yesterday. “A couple of million bucks in the first quarter and a couple of million bucks in quarter two.”

Thirty-eight Cumulus-owned radio stations currently carry Limbaugh’s show. The public admission that the cost of the advertiser exodus has reached into the millions directly contradicts Limbaugh’s transparently phony assertions that the defections have had no effect on him. Limbaugh is broadcast on about 600 stations nationwide. If the loss at 38 stations runs into the millions, extrapolate what the losses must be across the whole Limbaugh network of 600 stations.

Coincidentally, the same day that news broke of the costly repercussions of Limbaugh’s beastly behavior, Limbaugh announced the launch of his response to the controversy. In an attempt to prove that he does not hate and disparage women, he created “Rush Babes for America.” That’s right, Limbaugh’s way of demonstrating his respect for women is to start a self-promotional campaign that disparages women right in the name. Perhaps we should be thankful he didn’t call it FemiNazis for America.


Sean Hannity’s Great Misogynist Panel

Last week Sean Hannity welcomed to his Fox News program Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a frequent guest with whom he has a close association. Here is how Hannity introduced him:

“He’s the founder, president of the group BOND Action, Brotherhood Organization for a New Destiny, of which I’m a board member, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson. I say that just for Howard Kurtz because he whines about it like a big baby every time I don’t mention it.”

It’s ironic that Hannity calls Kurtz a big baby when it’s Hannity who is whining about having to exercise the ethical practice of disclosing personal affiliations with his program’s guests. It is apparently too big a burden for Hannity to behave honestly or professionally.

However, that is not the real problem with Hannity’s “reverend” pal. It seems that Peterson recently delivered a sermon in which he demeaned women as whores and bemoaned that they were ever given the right to vote:

Peterson: “I think that one of the greatest mistakes America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote,” Peterson says. “We should’ve never turned this over to women. And these women are voting in the wrong people. They’re voting in people who are evil who agrees with them who’re gonna take us down this pathway of destruction.”

“And this probably was the reason they didn’t allow women to vote when men were men. Because men in the good old days understood the nature of the woman,” he adds. “They were not afraid to deal with it. And they understood that, you let them take over, this is what would happen.”

Peterson has a long history of misogyny, as well as some other repulsive views. For instance, he thinks it would be a good idea to bring back slavery so that blacks would learn the value of work. This is the sort of caliber of guest that Hannity not only invites to be on his “Great American Panel,” but also serves on his board.

Hannity’s other guests that evening included Indiana GOP/Tea Party senate candidate, Richard Mourdock, and Fox Democrat Kirsten Powers. Uncharacteristically, Powers actually stood up for principle by objecting to Peterson’s presence on the program. Powers blasted his hateful rhetoric and told Hannity that had she known he would be there, she might not have been. Neither Hannity, nor Mourdock, had anything to say about Peterson’s open hostility toward women.

If this is a “Great” American Panel, I’d hate to see Hannity’s idea of a crappy panel. Or maybe that is what Hannity has every night.