Barack Obama

Fox News, GOP Falling Into Obama’s Trap

Posted by on March 31, 2011 at 10:11 am. 4 Comments :

Our Kenyan, socialist, terrorist sympathizing, tele-prompted President is apparently also a devious, evil mastermind. Despite frequent assertions from the right that he is an incompetent, inexperienced, failure, he has somehow managed to lure Fox News and innumerable Republican politicians and pundits into his web of deceit, reducing them to nothing more than his unwitting lackeys.

The talk about whether or not Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States with a valid birth certificate to prove it has accelerated in recent days. Fox News anchors and guests are ratcheting up the speculation as to his eligibility to serve as president. The Birther Brigade, led by conspiratorialists at WorldNetDaily, believe that they are on a crusade to rescue America from an evil, dark-skinned, interloper, but now another leader of the white-wing suspects something even more insidious:

Karl Rove: Barack Obama wants Republicans to fall into this trap because he knows it discredits us with the vast majority of the American people when they do.

That’s right. All the talk of Obama’s birth certificate is part of an over-arching plot to bring down the Republican Party. And with the vast majority of that talk emanating from Republicans you can see the danger inherent in this brilliant scheme. Obama has GOP candidates, Fox News analysts, and much of the Tea Party effectively doing his bidding as they sabotage their own agenda. Just last night on the Bill O’Reilly program Donald Trump escalated his Birther rhetoric:

“People have birth certificates. He [Obama] doesn’t have a birth certificate. He may have one but there’s something on that, maybe religion, maybe it says he is a Muslim.”

Who knew that Republican presidential candidates could so easily be suckered into phony White House plots? Who knew that the president Rush Limbaugh refers to as a “man-child” (a synonym for “boy”) could execute such a sophisticated strategy to destroy his enemies? And who knew that so many supposedly intelligent, conservative, patriots would succumb to his scheme?

Who knew? Only the omnipotent Obama. And maybe George Soros.

Fox News And Glenn Beck: Pro Genocide?

Posted by on March 25, 2011 at 1:48 am. 8 Comments :

The latest demonstration of right-wing dementia is actually just a variation on an old theme: Whatever Obama does, they’re against it. In this instance they are coupling that with a perennial conservative favorite: Whatever it is, George Soros is behind it.

From the moment the crisis in Libya began there was an outcry from rightists that the President should intervene on behalf of the rebellious citizens whom Qaddafi was slaughtering. That is until the President did just that, at which point they were outraged by his reckless imperialism.

Now the attacks on the administration are escalating to accuse Obama of conspiring with a shadowy organization that they allege is tied to terrorists and aspires to invade Israel. The organization is the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. This ghastly, UN-backed backed group lists barbarians like former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Bishop Desmond Tutu amongst their patrons. Their mission is to enlist the international community’s cooperation to prevent genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes. What a dastardly plot!

Glenn Beck took up this argument this morning on his radio program. He was alerted to it by a caller and could barely contain his glee. For him it was another piece of the conspiratorial stew that mashed together many of his favorite demons including Soros, Muslims, and Cass Sunstein whom he calls “the most dangerous man in America.”. And somehow by becoming even more conspiratorial he insisted that this puts an end to criticism of him as a conspiracy theorist. Apparently the conspiracy theory that he is a conspiracy theorist is a conspiracy theory itself. And least that’s Beck’s theory.

It’s clear, however, that Beck’s caller got his information from either WorldNetDaily, who published an item claiming to have found “Soros’ Fingerprints on Libya Bombing,” or from one of their many conservative repeaters, including Fox Nation. The WND article was written by notorious Birther Aaron Klein and declared that…

“Philanthropist billionaire George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the global organization that promotes the military doctrine used by the Obama administration to justify the recent airstrikes targeting the regime of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya.”

Klein is a long-time Obama basher who wrote a book titled, “The Manchurian President,” that questioned Obama’s citizenship and patriotism. He has been working tirelessly to taint the President’s policy toward Libya. Just two days ago he posted an article on WND that asked…

“Could President Obama’s decision to sidestep Congress and strike Libya as part of an international coalition put the U.S. on a military collision course with Israel?”

There’s that Israel invasion thing again. You have to wonder whether these guys actually believe what they are spewing or are they just so infected with Obama Derangement Syndrome that they’ve lost the ability to process coherent thoughts?

The policy they are so feverishly flagellating is known as “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P). It was adapted from the 1948 United Nations “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” which was a response to the atrocities witnessed during the Holocaust. There was worldwide condemnation of genocide and war crimes, and agreement that it must never be permitted to happen again – even if that meant using force to defend civilians being victimized by their own government. In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) published a report that refined the policy and it was formally adopted by the UN in 2005.

That’s the policy cited by the right as justification for restraining Qaddafi. And that’s the policy that Fox News and Glenn Beck are opposing. By extension, it must be concluded that they are in favor of ethnic cleansing and other crimes against humanity that the policy prohibits. Beck even conceded that the mission of R2P sounded good until he discovered its wicked roots. He began by expanding on the U.S. plot to invade Israel on his television show today. Not surprisingly he got everything wrong. He attributed the policy to a National Security aide, explicitly asserting that it “came from Samantha Power,” not the UN.

No it didn’t. It came from the UN commissioned ICISS report while John Bolton was ambassador, and it was supported by conservatives in the Bush administration including Secretary of State, Colin Powell. Beck asserted that the UN got the idea from Soros who got it from Power’s book, “A Problem from Hell.” The only problem with that theory is that Power’s book (which, by the way, won the Pulitzer Prize) came out the year following the publication of the ICISS report so could not possibly have been the inspiration for it. Typical Beckian disinformation that can’t even make the ends meet. But that doesn’t stop him from filling his gullible disciples weakened brains with hogwash.

Now Beck and the right is closing ranks to attack this humane policy that is illustrated by sentiments like this:

“True sovereignty belongs to the people, who in turn delegate it to their governments. If governments abuse the authority entrusted to them and citizens have no opportunity to correct such abuses, outside interference is justified.”

While that sounds like it could have been uttered by anyone from Reagan to Clinton, or even to Beck, that quote was in fact from (you Tea Baggers may want to sit down), George Soros. It epitomizes the Open Society philosophy of people-powered democracy that Beck distorts as being a version of a New World Order.

I find it more and more depressing that there are people who actually buy into the fiction that Beck and Fox News promote. Granted those numbers are in decline, but it’s still a concern. It is the most delusional faction that still adheres to these lies and they can be a dangerous lot. That’s why it remains so important to continue to counter the disinformation with the truth. At least it may be possible to mitigate the damage they do.

IDIOT ALERT: Dick Morris Predicts Obama Loss In 2012

Posted by on March 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm. 5 Comments :

It is simply mind-boggling how some people continue to get attention from the media despite being consistently wrong about everything they discuss. Prostitute toe-sucker, Dick Morris, is the epitome of just such a loser. For reasons that are incomprehensible, The Hill has published an incoherent screed by Morris wherein he asks…

“Will Obama get reelected? No way! In the teeth of the economic catastrophe that is shaping up, his chances are doomed.”

Doooomed, he portends. To lead off his logic-deprived argument, Morris describes how a “consumer confidence scale,” invented by the ultra-partisan Scott Rasmussen, fluctuated from 81.7 in December, to 88.3 in January, to 84.5 in February, to 73.1 in March. According to Morris, this wild ride in a brief four month period is evidence that Obama cannot be reelected 20 months from now.

What a dolt! His own data illustrates that those numbers are unreliable projections of events far off into the future. Next month the index could be 63 or 91. And that says nothing about what it will be in six months – or twenty. He isn’t asserting a trend or taking into consideration current events now or later. Yet he still concludes that Obama is toast. Then he really goes off the rails:

“The tsunami in Japan, perhaps the greatest tragedy since 9/11, will further impede any prospect for economic growth. There will be a demand for spending to repair the devastation of the quake. But Japan is tied with China as the world’s second largest economy, generating 12 percent of the global GDP. With Japan neither producing nor buying for the foreseeable future, the drag on the global economy will be profound.”

Let’s begin with his assertion that the tsunami in Japan, with estimates of up to 10,000 casualties, is the greatest tragedy since 9/11. It is, without question, a horrific occurrence. But Morris’ diseased brain must have already forgotten the tsunami in Indonesia in 2004 (230,000 dead), the cyclone in Myanmar in 2008 (138,000 dead), and the earthquake in Haiti just last year (316,000 dead). Or maybe he thinks those weren’t great tragedies.

Then Morris, in the space of one short paragraph, contradicts his main point. He says that Japan will neither be producing nor buying, despite having said in the previous sentence that there will be a demand for spending to repair the devastation of the quake. So Japan will, in fact, be buying, and to a lesser extent producing, as they seek to rebuild. It is a sad reality that disasters can produce opportunities in reconstruction efforts. And because of the devastation at home, Japan is going to have to rely on foreign developers, including those in the U.S. So how exactly will that hurt the U.S. economy and Obama’s reelection prospects? Morris doesn’t say.

Next Morris offers his solution to America’s woes. But all it is is a reiteration of the Bush era policies that produced the financial calamities we are presently experiencing. For instance: rolling back regulations, canceling tax increases on the wealthy, reducing federal spending, repeal of ObamaCare, and of course, drill, baby, drill. Morris believes that…

“…the true legacy of the Obama years is likely to be stagflation and an entire decade wiped out by his policies, budget and programs. Long after he is gone in 2013, we will still be repairing the damage of his terrible decisions.”

So Morris is seeding the notion that even if a Republican president is elected in 2012, he will be hobbled by Obama’s mistakes for eight more years. But Morris is the same jerk who derides Obama for ever suggesting that we are still feeling the effects of Bush’s mistakes just two years hence. He accuses Obama of shifting blame to the past administration, but Morris is preemptively blaming Obama for imaginary economic troubles in 2020. He’s playing the blame game on steroids. Plus, he’s giving his prospective Republican president a pass for failing over two complete terms.

For the record, Morris also predicted that Obama would never be elected to begin with. His 2006 book, “Condi vs. Hillary,” contained his astute analysis of the upcoming election in the title. That didn’t exactly pan out for him, did it? From the introduction to the book:

[T]here is no doubt that Hillary Clinton is on a virtually uncontested trajectory to win the Democratic nomination and, very likely, the 2008 presidential election. She has no serious opposition in her party […]

The stakes are high. In 2008, no ordinary white male Republican candidate will do. Forget Bill Frist, George Allen, and George Pataki. Hillary would easily beat any of them. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain? Either of them could probably win, but neither will ever be nominated by the Republican Party.

So Morris got the Democratic nominee wrong, despite his conviction that there was “no doubt.” He also got the Republican nominee wrong, and the Republican who Morris said could win if he were nominated actually lost. Is there any way he could have been more wrong?

It is on the strength of this sort of analysis that Morris gets asked back to provide additional “insights.” That is just astonishing, and so very sad. Why would The Hill publish his irrepressibly misguided prognostications given his record? Why does Fox News feature him almost nightly? How often do you have to get things ridiculously wrong before people in the media decide to stop asking for your worthless opinions?

Unfortunately, we do not seem to have reached that threshold yet, because Morris is still getting invitations to opine on subjects about which he knows little to nothing. And the worst part is that he isn’t the only one. Isn’t anyone keeping score?

Fox Nation Is Religion And Race Baiting – Again

Posted by on March 7, 2011 at 11:38 am. 2 Comments :

If you had the stomach to visit Fox Nation this morning you would have seen some more of the repulsive prejudice that is such a staple of their brand.

Fox Nation Race BaitingLet’s start with the article on Spanish language jerseys for NBA teams. I’m not sure exactly what the Fox Nationalists have against that, other than that they think it caters to illegal alien drug smugglers and narco-terrorists. The fact that the Latino community is a huge part of the NBA market seems to be of no interest to Fox. But they go even further by asserting that “No One’s Impressed.” How they established that is anyone’s guess. There is nothing to that effect in the article to which they linked. So it appears to be nothing more than a gratuitous slur aimed at dismissing Latino consumers.

The funny thing is that Fox itself caters to the Latino market with their “Fox Latino” news web site. However, this article, which explicitly deals with news associated with a Spanish-speaking audience, is nowhere to be found on Fox Latino. Apparently it is acceptable to disparage Latinos on the Fox Nation, but be sure not to post that sort of offensive content on a site that is actually read by Latinos.

Next we have the peculiar juxtaposition of articles involving religious affairs in the White House. The Fox Nationalist editors thought it would fun to place an article alleging that President Obama ignores anti-Semitism right next to an article that notes his praise for Muslims. I’m sure it was just a coincidence.

The article about anti-Semitism (sourced to NewsMax via The Hill) addressed assertions by Republicans that the administration has not given the issue the attention it deserves and has failed to provide adequate staffing. However, unreported by Fox and NewsMax (but in The Hill’s article), Abe Foxman of the ADL said that he has “no complaints” and that “whenever there is a serious manifestation of anti-Semitism around the globe the administration is there.” Also unreported is the fact that the staffing in this administration is identical to that of the previous administration. If Obama’s response has been lacking, it is his silence with regard to the anti-Semitism displayed by Fox News in general, and Glenn Beck in particular. He really should speak out more against that.

The article about the White House praise for Muslims is linked to a story in the Associated Press reporting that Obama sent a National Security aide to “a Washington-area mosque known for its cooperation with the FBI and its rejection of the al-Qaida brand of Islam.” Heavens to Betsy, we sure we don’t wanna be praisin that, does we?

The Islamaphobes of Fox News frequently grumble that “good” Muslims don’t do enough to repudiate the extremists. That has always been a false complaint. But when there is an obvious display of unity with moderate, mainstream Muslims, Fox casts a dark cloud over it by implying some sinister motive on the part of the President.

These are just two more examples of the overt hatred that is disseminated by Fox News. And a stroll through the comments attached to these postings reveals just how harmful it is to indulge these bigots.

Mike Huckabee Channels Glenn Beck

Posted by on March 1, 2011 at 3:35 pm. 3 Comments :

One of the Fox News in-house presidential candidates, Mike Huckabee, was the guest today with radio Birther Steve Malzberg. In the course of their conversation Huckabee veered off into uncharted territory with a new and ridiculous claim that Barack Obama had grown up in Kenya.

Sure we’ve had Birthers claiming for more than two years now that Obama was born in Kenya, but even those delusional morons never said that he was raised there as well. Huckabee’s journey into Wingnutia was in response to a question from Malzberg about whether he would like to know more about Obama. Huckabee answered:

“I would love to know more. What I know is troubling enough. And one thing that I do know is his having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example, very different than the average American. […] If you think about it, his perspective as growing up in Kenya with a Kenyan father and grandfather, their view of the Mau Mau Revolution in Kenya is very different than ours because he probably grew up hearing that the British were a bunch of imperialists who persecuted his grandfather.”

Seriously? This is the caliber of the candidates who are being put forth by the Republican Party and their PR agency Fox News. And Huckabee is often held up as one of the more reasonable of the batch.

Let’s stop for a moment and analyze this nonsense. First of all, there is ample evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii, including a birth certificate authenticated by the state. Secondly, there is no evidence to support the contention that Obama has any animosity toward the British. Thirdly, Obama’s father left the family when he was two years old, hardly enough time to influence him on foreign affairs, even if Huckabee’s assertions about Obama’s family were correct. Obama was subsequently raised by his mother and her parents who were from that mysterious, alien locale known as Kansas. So Huckabee’s thesis is riddled with holes and makes no sense whatsoever.

Where on earth would Huckabee get an idea like this? There’s really only one person who could manufacture such a fancy of dementia; only one mind so diseased: Glenn Beck. It was Glenn Beck who first popularized the notion that Obama hated the British because his grandfather (whom he did not know) had been imprisoned in England for his efforts to secure Kenya’s independence from the British crown. Gee, what other country did that? By Beck’s logic every American must also hate the Brits because they fought us in a brutal and deadly war of independence.

The source for Beck’s mythology about Obama and his upbringing was “The Roots of Obama’s Rage” by Dinesh D’Souza. Beck hosted D’Souza on his show last year where they frolicked through the fantasy world of Obama’s aborning rage. But Beck’s psychoanalysis of the President reveals more of Beck’s own psychosis than anything else. On one occasion Beck dedicated a whole program to Obama’s ancestors and how it turned him into a pinko-loving Marxist bent on destroying western civilization.

Now Huckabee is picking up the crazy baton and waving it furiously for attention. Well, he has our attention. Let’s hope he uses it to announce that he will run for president in 2012, because other than a Palin/Steele ticket, I can’t think of anything more entertaining. How about Huckabee/Trump?

[Update:] Huckabee responded to this idiocy through a spokesman exactly as I expected. He said…

“Gov. Huckabee simply misspoke when he alluded to President Obama growing up in Kenya. The governor meant to say the president grew up in Indonesia.”

That is a brazen lie. In his original comments Huckabee said that Obama’s having grown up in Kenya was what shaped his view of the British who once held Kenya as a colony. That would have made no sense at all if he meant to refer to Indonesia. If you swap out Kenya for Indonesia his original statement is gibberish.

There is no way he “simply misspoke” unless he thinks the Mau Mau Revolution was an Indonesian affair and that Obama’s Kenyan grandfather was persecuted by the British for something to do with Indonesia. It’s absurd, and it’s an obvious lie.

It’s A Good Thing Bill O’Reilly’s Viewers Are Idiots

Posted by on February 8, 2011 at 12:36 am. 12 Comments :

Bill O'ReillyIf there is one thing that Bill O’Reilly (and the rest of the Fox News gang) has going for him, it’s that he doesn’t have to try very hard to slip bullshit past his viewers. They are unlikely to catch even the most obvious examples unless he deliberately points it out.

Case in point, O’Reilly went to great lengths to respond to criticism of one of his questions to President Obama during the Superbowl interview. The question he asked the President was:

“Does it disturb you that so many people hate you? It’s a serious question. They hate you.”

O’Reilly was incensed that anyone would have the effrontery to disparage his inquiry or his fairness. And he was certain that he could vanquish his critics with evidence that he asked the exact same question of former President George Bush:

“The people in the press hated you. A lot of them. Why?”

Of course, to an observer with a functioning brain stem, the questions were not really all that similar. First of all, Obama was faced with a question that presumed that he was hated by the American people. Bush was only asked to answer for why some reporters may have disliked him. That’s a profound difference. Secondly, O’Reilly’s tone toward Obama was accusatory as he demanded that the President explain why he was so damned unlikeable. But his demeanor toward Bush was one of sympathy and wonder as he sought grasp how anyone could think a negative thought about this good man.

What’s most interesting about this is that O’Reilly played both questions on his program tonight to defend himself against criticisms from Nancy Pelosi and others. He was actually convinced that this evidence would exonerate him. He put on his smarmiest expression and asserted in classic passive-aggressive tones that his critics were just manufacturing controversy and trying to make him, “your humble servant,” look bad. And, no doubt, his viewers ate it up.

And for that Bill O’Reilly must be grateful every day that his audience is so intellectually vacant that they can’t tell when he is being dishonest or disingenuous. It is a special gift that he has earned over years of deceiving the public and nurturing ignorance.

Stupor Bowl: Obama vs O’Reilly

Posted by on February 6, 2011 at 8:26 pm. 21 Comments :

This is what happens when you let a non-journalist attempt to conduct an interview with a national leader.

Bill O’Reilly opened the interview with Barack Obama by thanking him for saving the lives of a couple of Fox News reporters. That, in and of itself, is a perfectly appropriate comment. The problem is that O’Reilly is exploiting the harrowing experiences of Greg Palkot and Olaf Wiig to promote the Fox News Channel. I have yet to see Fox report on the similar experiences of CNN’s Anderson Cooper, NBC’s Richard Engle, or CBS’s Lara Logan, who was not only roughed up by thugs, but detained by Egyptian authorities. O’Reilly’s purpose was to portray Fox News as the sole network of a courageous free press.

Next O’Reilly asks Obama when Mubarak is leaving Egypt. Did he expect the President to give him a date? Then O’Reilly editorializes saying that “the longer he stays in, the more people are going to die.” Maybe so, but a real journalist wouldn’t inject his opinion into the discussion. What’s more, O’Reilly had better check with his Fox News colleagues who are clamoring for the President to support Mubarak, including their “expert” foreign policy analyst John Bolton.

O’Reilly then addresses the legal battle surrounding healthcare reform. He asked Obama about a recent Florida ruling against the bill, but ignored the fact that 12 other courts have ruled in Obama’s favor. He even ignored it after Obama pointed it out to him. To O’Reilly, the only ruling that matters is the one that serves his partisan interest.

The next question is one that tests the boundaries of satire. Somehow O’Reilly thinks it is “fair and balanced” to ask Obama to respond to a Wall Street Journal editorial that said he is “a determined man of the left whose goal is to redistribute much larger levels of income across society.” Fittingly, the President laughed at the question. The editorial was not about healthcare or taxes or the deficit. Its title is The GOP Opportunity, and it is an undisguised blueprint for Republican electoral success. And if you’re confused about the Journal’s stance on GOP victories, they clear it up in the second paragraph describing the “real source” of the Party’s “power and legitimacy” is the Tea Party. Asking Obama to respond to this is not much different than asking him to respond to Glenn Beck’s accusation that he’s a Marxist.

But O’Reilly doesn’t stop there. His next question is framed as if coming from the American people, but is really his own perspective being projected on them. He asks whether Obama is “a big government liberal who wants to intrude on their personal freedom.” Obama laughs and, quite correctly, points out that it is “a lot of folks who watch you [who] believe that.” Whereupon O’Reilly admits that “They think way worse than me.” That’s an admission that his viewers are utterly delusional and ill-informed. And apparently he doesn’t care to set them straight.

In closing, O’Reilly asked a series of questions that would have embarrassed a high school intern on Entertainment Tonight: What’s the worst part of your job? What’s the most surprising? How have you changed? Are you annoyed by people who hate you? And then there was the obligatory question on who would win the Superbowl. Even there O’Reilly could not behave professionally as he tried, unsuccessfully, to paint Obama as not knowing anything about football.

I was against the President agreeing to this interview from the moment it was announced. Not so much because I didn’t think he would comport himself well – he did. But because it gives credibility to a network that hasn’t earned any of its own. I also predicted that O’Reilly would be on his best behavior knowing that this would be an audience far larger than his measly cable news viewers. Perhaps fifty times larger. And despite his unprofessional demeanor, he didn’t do anything that could be described as scandalously controversial.

The real problem with doing an interview on Fox is that it will be sliced and diced after the fact. Fox anchors and analysts will feature every minuscule sound bite that they think they can twist into a gaffe. And they will pretend that his cogent and thoughtful responses don’t exist.

Therefore, expect the exchange regarding the Muslim Brotherhood to get marquee billing tomorrow. While Obama in no way expressed support for the group, he moderated his answer to be certain that he could not be accused of meddling in the internal affairs of the Egyptian people. His purpose was to stand up for democracy and demonstrate faith in its ability to produce a positive outcome. But the professional Obama bashers on Fox will declare that he was not sufficiently disdainful of the organization. And they will declare it over and over again.

Barack Obama on FoxIf you need any evidence of how Fox plans to report on this interview, just take a look at how Fox Nation is already framing it. Their “Pic of the Day” is a snapshot from the interview with a caption that says only “No Tie?” Apparently that’s the most important thing that the Fox Nationalists derived from the interview. O’Reilly must be so proud. And just to tie a bow around the vile community that Fox cultivates, here is what they are saying about him in the comments section:

coinguy1945: Wha a pathetic looser Omammy is an illegal nigger that need to be assaniated by a good patriot.

Bill O’Reilly is one of the biggest critics of hostile comments on blogs. He went so far as to say that Marcos Moulitsas (of DailyKos) and Arianna Huffington (of the Huffington Post) are as bad as Nazis because he found some objectionable comments on their sites. I don’t expect him to be similarly outraged by this cretin’s comment, which he was so proud of he made it twice.

Notice that the second time he even asked for “the orders” to do his dirty deed. I think he meant that for Glenn Beck.

Foxophobia: What If Fox News Finds Out?

Posted by on February 3, 2011 at 9:08 am. 1 Comments :

Last month I received a fundraising email from the Center for the Study of Political Graphics. The Center collects, preserves, and exhibits posters relating to historical and contemporary movements for social change and has a library of more than 75,000 items. The solicitation noted the importance of individual donations due to the difficulty of obtaining funding from the government agencies that administer grants to the arts and archival organizations.

One particular part of the email was jarring for what it revealed about the decision making process of this administration. In an inquiry regarding their grant application, the Center’s director, Carol Wells, sought to gauge their chances of being successful and had this exchange with an agency representative:

Just before our most recent Federal submission we again asked about the political content and were told, “as you are writing the proposal, ask yourself this question:

“What if Fox News found out that U.S. tax dollars were being used to support your project. How would it look, how would it fly?”

HypersensitiveThe notion that Fox News’ mindset should serve as the benchmark for whether prospective arts endeavors are deserving of our tax dollars is insane, and more than a little frightening. And if it is difficult to accept that there is someone presently working for a government agency who is employing that criteria, then how much more frightening would it be to learn that this malignant perspective has spread through much of the body of our government? To be sure, all administrations are sensitive to reactions from the media, the public, and political peers, but for this administration to defer to Fox News, given their history, is mind boggling.

Barack Obama has been under attack by Fox News since before he was even elected. He was the subject of delusional allegations that questioned his patriotism, his citizenship, and his faith. The absurdities Fox promoted ranged from trivial associations with a former preacher to noxious accusations of “Palling Around with Terrorists.” It was a non-stop barrage that continued throughout the campaign and into his presidency where, if you can believe it, it escalated further.

On inauguration day Fox News anchors posited that Obama was not actually president because Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts flubbed the oath of office. It went downhill from there. As president, Obama was called a “racist with a deep seated hatred of white people.” He has been castigated as a communist, a fascist, an atheist, and perhaps worst of all, an elitist. The vitriol exceeded all bounds of civility. It was the soil from which the Tea Party sprouted along with the portrayal of Obama as an enemy of the state who is seeking to deliberately destroy the country.

Early on the administration recognized the toxic environment that was being created. There was a short-lived embargo of administration officials appearing on Fox. Anita Dunn, the former White House director of communications, told Howard Kurtz on CNN that Fox News is “a wing of the Republican Party.” Both Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod correctly observed that Fox “is not a news organization.” But the courage demonstrated by these positions quickly dissipated as the White House shifted tactics from confrontation to capitulation.

In one of the first examples of the Obama team folding under pressure from Fox News, Van Jones, a White House advisor to the Council on Environmental Quality, resigned subsequent to a relentless smear campaign by Glenn Beck and others at Fox. Jones was followed out the door by Yosi Sergant, Director of Communications for the National Endowment for the Arts, who was similarly hounded by Fox.

Perhaps the most egregious moral buckling was exhibited in the administration’s disengagement from Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod. In a video originally disseminated by the terminally choleric Andrew Breitbart, Sherrod was falsely portrayed as discriminating racially against a white farmer who had sought assistance from the department. It was later revealed that the video was deceptively edited to give an impression that was diametrically opposed to reality. After being featured in various segments on Fox News and elsewhere, Sherrod was asked to resign. Sherrod told the press that there was an urgency to the request due to the fear that the controversy was “going to be on Glenn Beck tonight.”

For his part, Glenn Beck theorized that the whole affair was a premeditated plot by the White House to “destroy the credibility of Fox News?” As if that hadn’t already been accomplished by Fox News itself (and particularly Beck) without any need for help from the White House. Nevertheless, leave it to Beck to concoct a theory that borders on psychosis.

This knee-jerk Foxophobia is evident in policy as well as personnel. Fox’s harping on issues ranging from the closure of Guantanamo Bay to the inclusion of so-called “death panels” in the the health care bill, resulted in those initiatives being abandoned. Obama was often seen in retreat after Fox newsers complained about the handling of the Census, the arrest of a Harvard professor, or the non-mosque that was not at Ground Zero. At times it appeared as if Fox had a greater impact on Obama’s agenda than his cabinet – or public opinion.

By acquiescing to a de facto Fox litmus test you produce scenarios wherein Fox objects to an art exhibit at the Smithsonian Institute, followed by Congress drafting legislation to defend the Smithsonian. Or NPR terminates a correspondent for making offensive statements at his other job on Fox, and Congress moves to defund NPR. Do we really want a network that specializes in conservative tabloid sensationalism conducting political payback like this?

Now, after all of the dishonest, hyperbolic, caterwauling from Fox, Obama is rewarding that network with an exclusive interview preceding the Superbowl. And more disturbing than just the fact that Obama would sit down with this phony news network, the Fox anchor pegged to conduct the interview is not one of their supposed journalists like Bret Baier or Wendell Goler. It is Bill O’Reilly, someone even Fox doesn’t regard as a newsman. In fact, O’Reilly’s boss, Roger Ailes, said that “it’s a mistake to look at Fox News Channel’s primetime opinion shows and say they represent the channel’s journalism.” What would Fox think if Obama gave the interview to Rachel Maddow? How would that fly?

Moreover, the real mistake is for any Democrat or progressive to agree to appear on Fox News. They will only be abused while they lend their credibility to a network that hasn’t earned any of their own. Nevertheless, President Obama still sees fit to sit still for a non-journalist on a network that portrays him as an alien socialist bent on collapsing the nation’s economy and the nation itself.

This administration needs to take more seriously the threat presented by a massive, international media conglomerate that has made no secret of its disdain for the President and his agenda. And it is in its own best interest to cease kowtowing to Fox and being so concerned about what they think of his people and policies. Criticisms from Fox should be heralded by administration spokespeople. They should be embraced and repeated (and mocked) at every opportunity. They should be regarded as affirmation that you’re on the right track.

Conversely, bureaucratic flunkies like the one who quoted above, who worry about whether something will fly with Fox News, need to be rooted out and reeducated. If there is a test for whether the administration should proceed with an appointment or a policy initiative it should be based on the merits, not on what will happen when Fox News finds out.

No Wonder Glenn Beck Is So Stupid. He Hates Teachers

Posted by on January 26, 2011 at 12:06 pm. 6 Comments :

This morning Glenn Beck took to the radio to bash President Obama’s State of the Union speech. As usual, his rambling screed was littered with lies. But it wasn’t enough to merely hurl baseless insults at the president, for some reason he felt compelled to disparage teachers and come out in favor of America producing offspring who are as intellectually vacant as he is.

Glenn Beck

The President spoke at some length about the need to focus on education and the value of teachers. Beck’s response to this was to shriek “Don’t talk to me about a teacher sir. That’s indoctrination, Talk to me about parents.” He continued…

Beck: “Last night, I don’t know how many people picked it up, he said the solution came from China. They have their kids in school much longer for the year, and they also keep them in school a much longer day. And teachers are known as nation builders. And I wish we could just give them the respect they deserve.”

Where to begin. Let’s set aside Beck’s bizarre opinion that teaching is synonymous with indoctrination. Obama never said that “the solution came from China.” He merely noted that nations like China and India were devoting more resources to education than we are, which happens to be true. This is what the President actually said:

Obama: “Meanwhile, nations like China and India realized that with some changes of their own, they could compete in this new world. And so they started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science. […] Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school education. And yet, as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to ninth in the proportion of young people with a college degree.”

But don’t bother Beck with facts or aspirations to improve ourselves in a competitive world. Beck also erred when he said that it is communist China where teachers are know as “nation builders.” As was stated clearly in the President’s speech, it is actually our democratic ally, South Korea. Beck has as little regard for truth as he does for teachers, whom he seems reluctant to show any respect. But it just gets worse from there.

Beck: “I don’t know anybody that talks down about a teacher, I really don’t. I’ve never heard a teacher introduce himself and say ‘I’m just a teacher.’ I’ve never heard that. I have heard ‘Well, I’m just a mother.’ The greatest teachers are our mothers and our fathers, period.”

So Beck thinks that teachers in this society are treated with equal esteem as say, architects, or doctors, or pop stars? And he also thinks that motherhood is frowned upon? I really have to wonder what country Beck is living in. And while parents are obviously an important part of the life of any child, to say that they are our “greatest teachers” is missing the point. Of course our parents teach us values and shape our character, but how many of us learn astrophysics, or mechanical engineering, or medieval literature, or neurosurgery from our parents? That’s what the dialogue on education is about, and anyone with any sense knows that.

Finally, Beck demonstrated his own sorely deficient comprehension skills. This may explain why he is such a bad student and so ill-informed on so many subjects.

Beck: “He said last night the teacher, the one in front of the classroom, is the one that affects the child the most. Well, there’s your problem, President Obama.”

No, it’s your problem, Glenn, because he distinctly did not say that. Here is what he did say:

Obama: “That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair. […] Let’s also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom.”

Glenn Beck gets the simplest things so perversely wrong that you almost feel sorry for him. He is obviously suffering from a severe learning disability. He would have benefited immensely from the sort of teaching he now belittles. But the people for whom I feel most sorry are his listeners. They are being barraged on a daily basis by untruths and delusional analyses. And the damage that does to our society is tangible and dangerous. He is creating a congregation of frightened, hostile, idiots. That can’t end well.

[Addendum] On his TV show today Beck reprised his attack on the State of the Union speech. In doing so he provided another example of his pathological dishonesty:

What Beck Said: I actually feel bad for teachers. I mean the good ones. We should fire the bad ones. Which he wouldn’t say last night.
What Obama Said: We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones.

And there was also this charming thought:

“Last night was all about unity. I didn’t get my little ribbon, but it was all about unity.”

That little ribbon was worn in honor of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of the Tucson shootings. How nice of Beck to mock that tribute and laugh at the the suffering of others.

Fox News Attacks The Tucson Memorial

Posted by on January 13, 2011 at 11:13 am. 4 Comments :

It didn’t last 24 hours. The good feelings and hopes for unity that were universally expressed at the Tucson memorial for the victims of the shootings on January 8, were unceremoniously cast into a ditch by Fox News at their Fox Nation web site.

The featured headline on Fox Nation reads: Obama Distances Himself From Loons on the Left. The Fox Nationalists are apparently incapable of refraining from disparaging rhetoric for even a few hours. They are also incapable of noting the sick irony that their own insulting headline article began with a call for thoughtfulness and civility:

“President Barack Obama called on the nation to resist the temptation to assign blame for a shooting rampage here that may never fully be explained, but to emerge from the tragedy a more thoughtful, civil nation.”

At Fox they have emerged a more thoughtless, uncivil Fox Nation. The portrayal of the left as “loons” was an editorial invention of Fox. There was no such language in the article to which they linked. And their proclivity for animus was extended by posting five additional stories that were critical of the memorial, the left, or the President, even as most of the country was touched and inspired by the event and Obama’s speech.

They just can’t help themselves. They were born to be a repulsive purveyor of nasty propaganda, and they are living up to their mandate. Rupert Murdoch must be so proud.