Fox News Insults #OWS and Latinos With One Phony Story

Posted by on November 20, 2011 at 3:39 pm. NO Comments :

Just in case anyone was still unconvinced that Fox News is a shameless purveyor of propaganda that peddles its dishonest tripe in a manner that is patently biased, take a look at these treatments of a recent headline story:

Fox News Bias

It’s not bad enough that Fox News tries to associate a violent, mentally ill criminal with the Occupy Wall Street movement despite the police stating unequivocally that there was no evidence of any connection, but Fox also has to rewrite the story for their Latino news division in a manner that features the race of the suspect even though it is irrelevant to the story.

Nice job, Fox. You have now insulted a broad-based protest movement whose goals are shared by 70% of the American people, as well as the nation’s fastest growing minority group. Keep up the good work.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

The Newt Gingrich Plan: Fire Janitors And Replace Them With Children

Posted by on November 20, 2011 at 11:01 am. 7 Comments :

This election cycle has seen some pretty remarkable performances by candidates that seem to have no concept of decency but an abundance of ignorance. Michele Bachmann wants members of Congress to be investigated for treason. Donald Trump pushed Birtherism to new levels, even after President Obama provided the birth certificate the rightist conspiracy theorists had been clamoring for. Rick Perry threatened to lead Texas into secession. Herman Cain distracted the media from his predatory sexual exploits by appearing to have a stroke when asked an easy question about Libya. And all the while Sarah Palin stalked the announced candidates in her tour bus pretending to be considering entering the race while collecting extravagant speaking fees and hawking books.

Now it’s Newt Gingrich’s turn to make an imbecile of himself, and he doesn’t disappoint. At an event at Harvard, Gingrich answered a question about income inequality by declaring that the problem with schools in low-income communities is the union janitors. But Newt has the solution:

Fox Nation Newt Gingrich

“It is tragic what we do in the poorest neighborhoods, entrapping children in, first of all, child laws, which are truly stupid.” […] “Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school.”

This is why Republicans regard Gingrich as their shining intellectual. He pops out brilliant ideas like this with little thought or effort – obviously. Who else would propose terminating the professional maintenance staff, whose duties often include custodial services and facilities upkeep in addition to sanitation, in order to make poor kids clean the schools they attend between their classes? The Gingrich plan is to swap books for buckets and mops. And of course, Fox News helps to advance his nonsense with a feature article.

Gingrich’s innovative approach is one that would put adults who are supporting themselves and their families out of work, thus creating even more poor children to recruit into the work force. It’s sheer genius. Never mind that it would increase the unemployment rolls as well as costs associated with food stamps, housing, health care, and other welfare programs. And while impoverishing the families of the once gainfully employed janitors, it would simultaneously burden kids with responsibilities that would distract them from their studies, making it harder to get a good education and advance to college and the greater opportunities that higher education affords.

Meanwhile, privileged students who would not be similarly encumbered would sail through their academic years into the lucrative careers that are the birthright of their class. And it would ensure that the urchins from the barrios would remain safely segregated from the aristocratic set in the executive suites and suburbs.

Gingrich even goes so far as to champion the low aspirations of fast-food careers for disadvantaged kids and argues that all the successful people he knows “started their first job between nine and 14 years of age.” In that regard he seems to be equating delivering newspapers or selling lemonade to neighbors with repairing heating ducts and scouring toilets for government facilities.

The notion that it would somehow be beneficial to layoff productive adults and replace them with poor children could only have come from an upper-crust One Percenter like Gingrich. It’s absurd to suggest that such rank exploitation would prepare kids to compete with more fortunate peers who spend their formative years learning and shaping more ambitious goals. But it’s the sort of notion that typifies the Republican mindset that views children as chattel and industrious union workers as thugs. And it is affirmed by Gingrich’s stated mission:

“You’re going to see from me extraordinarily radical proposals to fundamentally change the culture of poverty in America.”

No doubt about that. And he isn’t wasting any time. Most American parents would already agree that diverting their kids from schooling to sanitation is a pretty extraordinary and radical proposal. If Newt Gingrich thinks that child labor laws are stupid, just think how stupid our children would become without them.


Banksters Plotting A Propaganda Offensive Against Occupy Wall Street

Posted by on November 19, 2011 at 1:24 pm. 8 Comments :

Chris Hayes has acquired a memo from a well-connected group of Washington lobbyists to the American Bankers Association. The memo proposes launching a comprehensive campaign against the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement with an $850,000 budget and an intent to “undermine their credibility.” Hayes begins his expose saying that…

“Speaker Boehner’s lobbying buddies are proposing a hit job on Occupy Wall Street. […] The former Boehner aides, who now lobby for Wall Street, sketched out a strategy for deploying proxies to shill for Wall Street and against Occupy without the public knowing.”

The lobbyists’ memo (pdf) goes into detail as to how they would deliver on their promise to suppress the impact of OWS and to punish their defenders whether they be Democrats or Republicans. In fact, the lobbyists are particularly worried about GOP defectors:

“Leading Democratic strategists have begun to openly discuss the benefits of embracing the growing and increasingly organized Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement to prevent Republican gains in Congress and the White House this year […] However, the bigger concern should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies – and might start running against them too.”

That’s a revealing admission that the OWS message has a much broader appeal than is generally acknowledged. It is not insignificant that when Speaker Boehner was confronted with the allegation that Republicans are the champions of Big Business, rather than proudly embrace his constituency, Boehner attempted to shift the criticism to President Obama by asserting that the President’s campaign was the biggest recipient of Wall Street donations. Obama has indeed received a considerable sum from the sector, but most of his contributions are from small donors. And since the Obama administration has been an advocate of financial reform and regulation, and created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau despite industry opposition, it could be said that the Banksters didn’t get much for their money. Further affirming the mass popularity of the OWS message, the memo continues…

“Well-known Wall Street companies stand at the nexus of where OWS protestors and the Tea Party overlap on angered populism. Both the radical left and the radical right are channeling broader frustration about the state of the economy and share a mutual frustration over TARP and other perceived bailouts. This combination has the potential to be explosive later in the year when media reports cover the next round of bonuses and contrast it with stories of millions of Americans making do with less this holiday season.”

The biggest nightmare of this crowd is that OWS and the Tea Party will unite against the One Percenters. An notice that the lobbyists are not concerned with the actual suffering of “millions of Americans making do with less this holiday season,” only the wrenching perception of that fact when juxtaposed with the extravagance and greed of the Wall Streeters whose holidays will be abundantly joyful. That’s why the lobbyists and their Bankster clients need to demonize OWS as lazy, dirty, violent, unfocused, etc. But the lobbyists’ memo appears to recognize that that tactic has not worked:

“It may be easy to dismiss OWS as a ragtag group of protestors but they have demonstrated that they should be treated more like an organized competitor who is very nimble and capable of working the media, coordinating third party support and engaging officeholders to do their bidding.”

Indeed, it is easy to use puerile insults to dismiss OWS, a role that Fox News has embraced with relish. But we are beginning to see the shift from ridicule to respect as the Banksters realize that this movement is competent, committed and has the support of the public. So the response from the lobbyists is to smear the group’s members and spread lies about its composition. The memo even reprises the false assertion that George Soros, a favorite villain of the right, is funding OWS. Then it continues to propose an analysis of OWS’ “extremist leaders” to construct “negative narratives for high-impact media placement,” otherwise known as propaganda.

Finally, the memo outlines an electoral strategy that targets races in battleground states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Mexico, Nevada, and North Carolina. These are all states that Obama won in 2008. In addition to this effort, they offer to “provide cover for political figures who defend the industry.” It’s a full service operation, after all. Watch the video from UP w/Chris Hayes here:


Fox Nation vs. Reality: On The Occupy Wall Street Assassin

Posted by on November 17, 2011 at 6:08 pm. 5 Comments :

More dishonesty from Fox Nation. This time the Fox Nationalists posted an item with the provocative headline, “Man Linked to ‘Occupy’ Protest Charged With Attempted Assassination of Obama”

Fox Nation

Fox News ran a story with the same deceptive theme. They hosted Michelle Malkin to engage in a discussion that was deliberately designed to smear the Occupiers. During the segment they displayed a picture of the suspect, Oscar Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez, with a caption that said: “‘Occupy’ Shooter.” There was no question mark or other qualifying notation to indicate that this was merely speculation on the part of Fox News.

For the record, the only link between this guy and the Occupy movement is the one invented by Fox. The Washington police have stated unequivocally that they have no evidence that he was affiliated in any with the protesters. Reports that he may have tried to hide in the crowds at the Occupy DC site should not surprise anyone. Any densely populated location would attract somebody trying to elude law enforcement. A football game or an Alzheimer’s Walkathon would serve the same purpose.

What little is known about Ortega-Hernandez would likely lead objective analysts to suspect him of being a Tea Bagger. He is said to be anti-government, hates President Obama, and has a history of mental illness. Could that be Glenn Beck in a fake beard?


PolitiChicks: Victoria Jackson & Co. Love Muslims And Gays

Posted by on November 17, 2011 at 5:04 pm. 7 Comments :

Here’s a logic puzzle for you: What comes next in this list?

Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich…

Of course, it’s former Saturday Night Live bimbo Victoria Jackson, who is continuing her performance as the greatest comedy hoax of all time. There is simply no way that what she has been doing and saying can be real. The only place her antics could be taken seriously would a Republican primary debate. In fact, if she were to announce her candidacy today she would probably be the next front-runner within days.

Jackson’s latest project (video below) is an Internet talk show that aspires to be a right-wing version of The View. In the debut episode Jackson shines with her Dadaist comedic stylings. She gets the show rolling with her song about Muslims that casts them as bloodthirsty pedophiles. The ensuing conversation leads to the shared conclusion that “all Muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims. That’s just a fact.”

Jackson is quick to point out that she loves Muslims, she just hates what they believe. It’s her Christian faith that requires that she love these people whom she regards as mass murderers. What’s more, she simply can’t understand “why liberals are pro-Muslim and pro-gay, because Muslims kill gays.” I supposed she is similarly confused as to why conservatives are anti-Muslim and anti-gay, for the same reason. The truth about liberals, however, is that they are pro-Constitution, and they know that American Muslims are no more likely to kill gays than extremist, Republican evangelicals like Jackson.

The happy talk continued with Jackson almost opining on matters ranging from Obama’s support for “the thing built on ground zero” [a mosque], to meat preparation “like how Jews do” [keeping Kosher]. This open and freewheeling discussion then turned to the subject of free speech, which Jackson and her co-panelist lamented as having been abolished decades ago:

Jackson: It used to be America, you could say whatever you want. Now everyone can say what you want except if you love the country and God and the family.
Ann-Marie Murrell: If you’re conservative you basically have to shut up and listen and let them say whatever they want. That’s the way it’s been for about 40 years now.

Exactly. Which is why everything they just said has been banned and cannot be heard by anyone, and warrants have been issued for their arrest. Neither can anyone hear their complaints about gay marriage because it infringes on the rights of others. For example, the churches that would be forced to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples. Of course, that isn’t true, but how could Jackson know that. Her research ability has been hobbled by a recent startling and terrifying discovery:

“I just found out that Snopes is owned by George Soros.”

Uh oh. Now where will she go to get the truth about rumors she reads in anonymous chain emails? Rumors like Snopes being owned by George Soros. Just to be sure, I did some research myself on this rumor and discovered this on Snopes:

“The snopes.com web site is (and always has been) a completely independent, self-sufficient entity wholly owned by its operators, Barbara and David Mikkelson, and funded through advertising revenues. Neither the site nor its operators has ever received monies from (or been engaged in any business or editorial relationship with), any sponsor, investor, partner, political party, religious group, business organization, government agency, or any other outside group or organization.”

That’s pretty definitive, but what else would you expect from a Soros controlled web site? The unabridged idiocy of this group is both hilarious and frightening. And the scariest part is that very little of what is said strays far from the mainstream of the Republican Party and its current crop of presidential candidates. Watch the whole video here:

And if that’s not enough, catch episode #2 here. It’s a classic that focuses on President Obama’s fake citizenship and contains another song by Jackson (“Yes, I am a Birther and I’m really, really proud”). Somewhere Andy Kaufman is squirting milk through his nose.


The Delusional Tea Party Plan To Cut $9 Trillion From The Budget

Posted by on November 17, 2011 at 12:43 pm. 4 Comments :

While the congressional Super Committee struggles to agree on budget reforms that would result in paltry savings of $1-2 trillion dollars, the financial geniuses at the Tea Party front group FreedomWorks have managed to shape a plan that will slash the deficit by more than $9 trillion without raising taxes on the long-suffering One-Percenters who control the vast majority of the wealth in America. How did they do it?

    The Tea Party Debt Commission

  • Repeals ObamaCare in toto.
    This would actually increase the deficit because, as the independent analysts at the CBO have concluded, the Affordable Care Act saves $143 billion over the 2010-2019 period.
  • Eliminates four Cabinet agencies — Energy, Education, Commerce, and HUD — and reduces or privatizes many others, including EPA, TSA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac.
    This furthers the Tea Party goal of dismantling any government program even if it is critical to national security, economic growth, and public safety.
  • Ends farm subsidies, student loans, and foreign aid to countries that don’t support us — luxuries we can no longer afford.
    In other words, keep America stupid and drive all of our international allies into the arms of unfriendly nations.
  • Saves Social Security and greatly improves future benefits by shifting ownership and control from government to individuals, through new SMART Accounts.
    Privatize Social Security and abandon seniors to the uncertainties of the stock market.
  • Gives Medicare seniors the right to opt into the Congressional health care plan.
    Kill Medicare by depleting the pool of members and siphoning off those with means leaving only low-income and high-risk participants, which would substantially increase costs.
  • Make the so-called Bush tax cuts, and other expiring tax relief provisions, permanent.
    Make permanent the tax cuts for the rich, which is the single biggest factor that has produced our current deficits.

The Tea Party proposal is wildly out of touch with economic reality, as well as public opinion. When exploring the details of the plan you will find such absurd suggestions as privatizing the Transportation Safety Administration and Air Traffic Controllers. That makes perfect sense to anyone who is pleased with the way that private airlines keep passengers trapped aboard planes that have been delayed on the tarmac for eight hours. Let’s empower those folks, who are motivated only by profit, to manage the safety of our airports and air travel.

The FreedomWorks Tea Party Debt Commission asks us to…

“Imagine a plan that cuts, caps, and balances federal spending without raising taxes; that gives future generations control over their own retirement security; and that lifts the massive debt burden from our children’s shoulders so they can know the American dream of ever-higher freedom and prosperity.”

I think I can imagine exactly what the Tea party has in mind:

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox News Has Its Own Version Of The Constitution

Posted by on November 16, 2011 at 11:55 am. 3 Comments :

The right-wingnuts on Fox News have been lamenting the decline of American values and calling for a return to the Constitution ever since Barack Obama was inaugurated. When challenged as to what Constitutional rights have been lost, the Fox whiners have been completely unable to cite any examples.

Today we learned the reason for their difficulty in documenting their complaints. They are using a different Constitution than the rest of the American people. In a segment discussing whether Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan should recuse herself from the health care case the Court recently agreed to hear, Fox’s national correspondent, Steve Centanni, had this to say:

“If she were closely involved with the health care bill, she would legally be required to recuse herself from the case. According to the Constitution a justice must recuse even if he or she quote, ‘…expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.’ That’s from Article 28 of the Constitution.”

Centanni’s remarks were accompanied by an on-screen graphic that displayed the quote and included the source: “U.S. Constitution, Article 28, Sec. 144.” Well, as Media Matters points out, there are…

“Three glaring problems with this argument: The Constitution has no Article 28, has no Section 144, and does not contain the language quoted.”

Apparently, Centanni’s quote actually comes from a congressional statute: U.S. Code, Title 28, Section 455, Sub-section 3. But legal experts have debunked any interpretation of that that would require Kagan’s recusal.

However, the same statute appears to require the recusal of Justice Clarance Thomas. Sub-section 4 states that a justice must disqualify himself if…

“(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;”

Thomas’ wife, Ginni, is the head of a Tea Party organization, Liberty Central, that is actively engaged in efforts to repeal the health care bill. She takes a salary and accepts donations from major contributors that are legally protected from disclosure. She is also the head of Liberty Consulting, a for-profit lobbying services firm. Clearly she has a financial interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding and, therefore, so does Justice Thomas.

The realization that Fox News is using a Constitution that is markedly different from the one the rest of know and love, explains how their audience has become so delusional with regard to Constitutional issues. Fox News notoriously misinforms their viewers and their ignorance is documented in studies and polls. This is just the latest embarrassing deception that Fox has loosed on its glassy-eyed congregation. And these errors persist despite an edict from Fox executives that they were implementing a “Zero Tolerance” policy for such mistakes:

“Mistakes by any member of the show team that end up on air may result in immediate disciplinary action against those who played significant roles in the ‘mistake chain,’ and those who supervise them. That may include warning letters to personnel files, suspensions, and other possible actions up to and including termination.”

So will heads be rolling at Fox News? Don’t count on it. Fox doesn’t regard these incidents as mistakes. In fact, they are an integral part of their mandate. A mistake would be if they inadvertently allowed something truthful to get on the air. That would be cause for termination at Fox.


Sarah Palin On Herman Cain

Posted by on November 15, 2011 at 1:37 pm. 12 Comments :

Sarah Palin[Editor’s Note: Please accept my apology for any mental image the headline of this article may have inadvertently caused]

Sarah Palin has taken great pains to cast herself as a new kind of feminist. Her crusade for a version of conservative feminism has spawned a movement of “mama grizzlies” who she regards as the defenders of traditional values. So it is interesting to look back a few months and recall how Palin stepped forward to fulfill her role as a women’s advocate.

When the Anthony Weiner story broke, Palin was quick to judge the congressman who had done nothing illegal and did not even have any physical extra-marital encounters. Nevertheless, Palin pounced on the scandal with a harsh condemnation complete with a sexually suggestive pun. Here is what Palin said about Weiner:

“From henceforth after his personal indiscretions were disclosed, he was going to be rendered impotent basically there in Congress and he wasn’t going to be effective…Obviously it was the right thing to do. Day late dollar short though, I think he should have resigned right when all of this came to light.”

However, Palin’s assessment of the Cain scandal, which does involve potentially criminal behavior and was described by the victim as physical, has not raised the same measure of indignation. Here is what Palin said about Cain:

 

That’s right. Palin has not bothered to comment on a case of alleged sexual harassment and, perhaps, assault. Even though she previously disparaged Cain as the “flavor of the week,” she cannot bring herself to make a statement on behalf of a victimized woman. Palin’s silence on this matter is deafening. If she expects people to give consideration to her views, she would be well-advised to express them.

Of course, it may not be her fault. Since bowing out of the GOP primary, Palin has all but disappeared from public view. The press is finally giving her the level of attention that she has always deserved – none. Since she is not an expert on any social or legal matter, and she holds no position of authority, her opinions are no more valid than any other media celebrity. So we should not expect to hear from her again unless she is appearing on a panel with Paris Hilton and Charlie Sheen.


Sean Hannity Decides Who The Real Conservatives Are

Posted by on November 15, 2011 at 3:14 am. 4 Comments :

In a conversation with Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity of Fox News appointed himself the official source for conservative credentials. He was reciting some of the criticism Gingrich has earned from a broad spectrum of analysts, and as a means of dismissing it, Hannity simply de-certified the source:

Hannity: You have Kathleen Parker, a CNN conservative, which isn’t a real conservative, accusing you now of hating mankind. Can’t get any worse than that I guess, if you hate all mankind.

Gingrich: Wait a minute. How could she possibly come up with something that goofy?

Hannity: I don’t know. I mean I don’t speak for these liberal conservatives that are hired by these other news networks cause they’re not conservatives.

First of all, let’s be clear about what Hannity is referencing. Parker was not on CNN when she made the remarks that riled up Hannity. CNN fired her months ago. She was on CBS’s Face the Nation and was commenting on what others have said about Gingrich:

Parker: He’s not very much of a campaigner. In fact, he’s been described as sort of a misanthrope.

Of course, Fox News has to provide a definition of misanthrope for their viewers because the word has more than two syllables. But more to the point, we now know that it is Sean Hannity who decides who is, or is not, a conservative. And first among those who fail his test are conservatives on CNN. By that he must mean RedState’s Erick Erickson, Andrew Breitbart’s editor-in-chief Dana Loesch, Glenn Beck contributor Will Cain, and even Glenn Beck himself who used to have a program on CNN’s Headline News. I suppose Hannity would also include MSNBC’s resident racist Pat Buchanan, former GOP chairman Michael Steele, and McCain/Palin strategist Steve Schmidt. Surely none of them are conservatives.

The irony is that Fox News has a penchant for presenting conservatives that they misrepresent as Democrats. People like Pat Caddell, Doug Schoen, and Dick Morris, who have not had anything to do with Democrats for years (and whom Democrats would have nothing to do with). Their sole purpose is to collect a paycheck from Fox while bashing their former party and any liberal initiative. Fox regularly scours the news wires to find any incident wherein a Democrat is critical of other Democrats. That’s the fastest way for a Democrat to get invited to appear on Fox.

We ought to be grateful to Hannity for clearing up the confusion as to who the real conservatives are. At least now we have an ideological benchmark from a bona fide expert to keep us from making a terrible mistake. We might otherwise have gotten the misimpression that Mary Matalin or Bill Bennett were conservatives.


Rush Limbaugh Attacks Chelsea Clinton – Again

Posted by on November 14, 2011 at 2:44 pm. 5 Comments :

Conservative blowhard, Rush Limbaugh, is blowing harder than ever at the prospect of a politically connected offspring getting hired by a news organization.

NBC announced today that Chelsea Clinton will become a correspondent for their non-political, human interest series, “Making a Difference.” That announcement has Limbaugh’s blood boiling this morning as he rants…

“Chelsea Clinton, starting today will be getting her paychecks from the National Broadcast Company – NBC. I wonder how Luke Russert feels about this? Chelsea Clinton at NBC. She is not a journalist. She is a politician in training. That’s what this means, politician in training. It’s an incestuous business, circuitous route, revolving door, politics in media, on the Democrat side, is one and the same profession.”

Limbaugh is appalled that a news enterprise would hire someone not specifically trained in journalism just because they are related to a Democratic political figure. On that point I’d have to agree with him. Journalists should have professional training and a commitment to codes of ethical conduct. But Limbaugh’s only complaint is that “this is an avenue not open to conservatives.” So he doesn’t really care about the degradation of standards, only that Republicans can’t participate in the degradation. On that score he must have forgotten Michael Reagan, Lynn Cheney, Meghan McCain, and even George W. Bush’s daughter Jenna Bush Hager, who is already working at NBC. But Limbaugh’s obliviousness doesn’t stop there. He continues with a delusional lament that only Democrats waver between media and politics:

“I guess you could say we go to the media after we bomb out in politics, and we go to Fox. But that’s after we bomb out. After we lose our elections, that’s where we get hired by Roger Ailes, and so forth and so on. But seldom do we go from Fox back to politics. I could be wrong about this. I’m trying to think off the top of my head if that happens, but we do know that Chelsea Clinton is going to go from NBC to politics. There’s no question about it whatsoever in my mind.”

Setting aside Limbaugh’s psychic aspirations, he is partially correct in that Republican losers do get swept up by Fox News. Witness Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. But if he needs help remembering Republicans who jumped from positions at Fox into electoral politics, he need not look further than the current GOP presidential primaries where both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum made that leap. He might also recall that current Ohio governor John Kasich left his Fox News program to run for that post.

Going back further in time, I can’t recall a single democratic politician whose career started in the media. However, on the Republican side I can count Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson, Sonny Bono, Fred Grandy, and George Murphy. Going from politics to media there are a few from both sides. Bill Moyers and George Stephanopoulos were both presidential aides before landing at PBS and ABC respectively. Tony Snow went from Fox to the Bush White House to CNN. Diane Sawyer was a Nixon press aide who is currently the anchor of ABC’s World News Tonight.

It should be noted also that Limbaugh has a history of gratuitous attacks on Chelsea Clinton. On his failed TV show in 1993 he asked his audience, “Did you know there’s a White House dog?” Then he put up a picture of 13 year old Chelsea. At least the maturity level of the right is consistent.

I think what might be really bugging Limbaugh is not that Democrats have some imaginary entrée into the mediasphere, it’s that Republicans have such an embarrassing field of candidates by comparison. After all, most people would not view Chelsea Clinton, a graduate of Stanford and Oxford who is currently pursuing her doctorate, as unqualified for such a position. On the other hand, Bristol Palin couldn’t even make it through the season of Dancing With the Stars.

[Update] Limbaugh doubled-down this morning with another heaping pile of stupidity:

“Can you imagine Brian Williams, if one of the Bush twins, one of George W. Bush’s duaghters had been hired? [Responding to someone off mic] One of George W. Bush’s daughters is a correspondent on the Today Show? Really? I didn’t know that. That is interesting. And they haven’t undermined her yet?”

And he continues…

“You’ve got to get experience on television. You have learn how to use TV if you’re going to do anything in politics of a substantial nature. […] Chelsea…what’s her degree in? History or make-up?”

For the record, Limbaugh dropped out of Southeast Missouri State University after two semesters and one summer. According to his mother, “he flunked everything.”