Megyn Kelly Spins Fox News Poll Out Of Control

Posted by on August 2, 2010 at 4:17 pm. 4 Comments :

A couple of weeks ago I wrote that Megyn Kelly was arguably as bad as her Fox News colleague Glenn Beck. Today she added weight to that theory.

In a discussion with Stuart Varney, Kelly introduced the results of a Fox News Opinion Dynamics poll to argue that Democrats are defying the will of the people by advocating the expiration of Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy. Kelly displayed this graphic from the poll:

In her discussion with Varney, both of them asserted that these poll results revealed the public’s opposition to letting the the tax cuts expire. However, the poll actually says the exact opposite. While 44% did say to keep all the tax cuts, a plurality of respondents (50%) said to let them expire either entirely (14%) or at least for those earning more than $250,000 (36%). So, contrary to Kelly’s distortion of the facts, respondents actually favor taxing the rich more by a 6 point margin.

Kelly was forced to mischaracterize the results of this poll even though Fox News made a valiant effort to skew the poll in order to return numbers that favored her bias. The question asked (pdf) by the pollsters inquired as to whether the respondent would…

  • 1. Continue the tax cuts for everyone.
  • 2. Continue the tax cuts for everyone except families earning more than $250,000 dollars a year.
  • 3. Allow the tax cuts to expire and let taxes go back up to their previous level.

The first problem with this construction is that it divides, and thus dilutes, the responses of those favoring expiration of the tax cuts. But more egregious is the phrasing. The first two choices offer options to “continue the tax cuts.” The third option inexplicably changes to allowing the tax cuts “to expire” and prejudicially adds “let taxes go back up.” A fair and balanced poll would have maintained a consistent tone and left out the commentary.

Of course, we know that Fox News has never really been interested in fairness or balance. But no matter how often I see it, it is still astonishing to watch these propagandists assert conclusions that are diametrically opposed to reality, even when the truth is right there on their own screen.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

WHCA Gives Fox News The Jeff Gannon Seat

Posted by on August 1, 2010 at 2:22 pm. 3 Comments :

Despite the overwhelming evidence, the White House Correspondent’s Association still suffers under the delusion that Fox News has something to do with news. They just released their decision of who would get the seat in the White House Briefing Room that was previously occupied by Helen Thomas. The decision:

The board of the White House Correspondents Association has agreed, by consensus, to move the Associated Press to the front row, center seat in the James S. Brady Briefing Room.

The board further agreed to move Fox News to the front row seat previously occupied by AP, and relocate NPR into the second row seat previously held by Fox, next to Bloomberg News.

It was a very difficult decision. The board received requests from Bloomberg and NPR in addition to Fox for relocation to the front row and felt all three made compelling cases. But the board ultimately was persuaded by Fox’s length of service and commitment to the White House television pool.

The board could not plausibly have been persuaded by length of service because NPR has been on the White House beat for 40 years compared to 14 for Fox News. So the “commitment to the White House television pool” must have been the deciding factor. That sounds like a financial decision to me, and not one based on merit.

This is a disappointing, albeit minor, development. Just because the WHCA moves Fox up a row doesn’t mean that Robert Gibbs has to call on them. And that’s where the battle shifts to now. Gibbs must be reminded every day that Fox News is NOT news. They have no more right to be in the that room than Jeff Gannon did.


The Breitbart Saga Whines On (And On)

Posted by on August 1, 2010 at 10:28 am. 16 Comments :

Poor Breitbart
Cowardly Andrew BreitbartThe chronically choleric Andrew Breitbart now sees himself as the aggrieved party in the Shirley Sherrod affair that he instigated. This pathetic attempt to curry sympathy is uncharacteristic of Breitbart who ordinarily blusters his way through criticism and fiercely attacks his critics. Why the change in behavior? Could he be worried about Sherrod’s forthcoming lawsuit? This is what he told Newsweek:

Newsweek: Can you understand how this has been difficult for her to get caught up in that?
Breitbart: As difficult as it probably was for her, it’s been difficult for me as well, especially to hear her hurl an accusation of racism at me, when my motivation is absolutely pure and is driven by a desire for this country to move beyond its horrid racist past.

Was his motivation “absolutely pure” when he posted a deceptively edited video and portrayed Sherrod as a racist? Breitbart also admitted to Newsweek that the video took Sherrod out of context, and given two separate opportunities to apologize, Breitbart declined and made excuses instead. That didn’t stop him from expressing his desire to meet with Sherrod in private. If she takes him up on that she had better go wired for sound and video. I bet she could get some juicy clips.

The Wall Street Jackal
It’s interesting that Sherrod’s announcement the she intends to sue Breitbart has not been reported as a news item on Fox News, so far as I have been able to determine (if someone has evidence of such a report, please pass it along). But what Fox may be trying to sweep under the rug, the Wall Street Journal has taken on in the form of a defensive editorial by the editor of their online op-ed pages, James Taranto.

Taranto begins by surmising that Sherrod’s lawsuit would probably fail. His reasoning centered on his assertion that she was a public official and involved claims about the performance of her public duties. Sherrod was indeed an employee of the Department of Agriculture. That may make her a public official of sorts, but she was clearly not a public figure. By Taranto’s logic anyone working for the Post Office would be exempt from protection against defamation. Furthermore, Taranto was wrong in stating the the incident involved claims about the performance of her public duties. There was nothing of the sort in Sherrod’s speech before the NAACP. She was relating events that occurred 24 years earlier, before her employment with the USDA.

Finally, Taranto implied that it would be difficult for Sherrod to prove malicious intent on Breitbart’s part. It seems to me that Breitbart’s malice is fairly evident. By his own account, he had the video for months but never attempted to ascertain its validity or acquire an unedited version before posting it. Plus, he confessed to Newsweek that he knew it was out of context. Add to that his lack of remorse and his defiance in the face of evidence that his actions were defamatory, and you have a pretty good case for malice.

Taranto found it strange that Sherrod “issued this threat” of litigation before the National Association of Black Journalists. But Sherrod did not issue a threat. She answered a question. Taranto continued to be confused by the applause Sherrod received when she indicated her intention to sue Breitbart. This spurred Taranto to ask…

What kind of journalist would applaud the threat of a defamation lawsuit?

How about a journalist who takes pride in his work and is offended by pseudo-journalists who tarnish the profession? Taranto went on to make this absurd claim:

Journalists have an institutional interest in maximizing the scope of First Amendment protections, and that means keeping it as hard as possible for plaintiffs to sue for defamation.

I have no idea where he came up with that bit of lunacy. Reputable journalists who refrain from defaming people have no problem with defamation suits. It is part of the process of keeping them honest. Taranto’s argument would have gun owners opposed to laws against murder. But just as most gun owners support laws against murder, most journalists support laws against defamation.

Steele Interrupted
A scheduled fundraising event by Michael Steele’s Republican National Committee that was to feature Breibart has been “postponed.” The event was to be held at the swanky Beverly-Wilshire Hotel in Beverly Hills in just two weeks. This last-minute cancellation is curious considering the complex logistics in putting together a high-profile affair like this. It may or may not have had anything to do with Breitbart’s participation and the embarrassment that may entail, but when you also know that Steele backed out of an appearance before the same convention of black journalists that Sherrod attended, it does raise suspicions.

Uni-Tea: More Like Whi-Tea
Breitbart was a featured speaker at the Uni-Tea rally in Philly yesterday. The event was designed to promote the racial and ethnic diversity within of Tea Party. They did manage to assemble a pretty diverse roster of speakers, but reports from the field say that the crowd, which was far smaller than expected, contained few people of color. Thus, Breitbart spent twenty minutes assuring the predominately white Tea Baggers that they weren’t racists. I’m sure they feel better now.

Coming Attractions
Look for Breitbart’s highly anticipated appearance at the National Tea Party Unity Convention in Las Vegas in October. This event was originally scheduled for mid July, but was postponed due to lameness. Also appearing will be Sharron Angle, Lou Dobbs and Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily. This lineup up just screams unity.

Following that, Breitbart is amongst the seafarers embarking on a three-hour eight day post-election cruise sponsored by the National Review. If you ever dreamed of being shipmates with Breitbart, as well as Karl Rove, Phyllis Schlafly, Jonah Goldberg, Tony Blankley, Scott Rasmussen, Thurston Howell III, and more, then you probably awoke mopping up sweat. By the way, isn’t Rasmussen supposed to be a non-partisan pollster?

FYI: Here is a composite view of the National Review Cruise’s itinerary and the path of the Gulf oil spill:

Looks like they’re taking the scenic route.


White House May Cancel Wall Street Journal

Posted by on July 30, 2010 at 6:13 pm. 1 Comments :

Rupert Murdoch has been constructing his pay walls as a means to squeeze more revenue from his newspapers. By most accounts it is failing as viewership declines on the web sites of his newspaper properties.

In response to this failure Murdoch has doubled-down on greed by jacking up the price for news clipping services, including the one used by the White House. Politico reports that the Wall Street Journal will raise its fees by half a million dollars. The White House responded by saying…

“Obviously, we’re not paying $500,000. This is taxpayer money,” the official said. “We have no idea how we’re going to handle this. We may have to drop [The Journal].”

Considering the fact that anyone in the White House could subscribe to the Journal for $140.00 a year, this seems like a remarkably shortsighted and stupid policy. What’s more, it could motivate the White House to favor other news outlets, for interviews and other media releases, whose bundled clippings they can receive at a reasonable rate. Why would they want to deal with the Journal if their access to the stories was more difficult to obtain and dissemination might be restricted?

There is a stench of desperation about this. Murdoch has not made a successful business decision in years. The Fox Business Network is floundering; MySpace is almost invisible; the pay wall has not been adopted by peers; even the Wall Street Journal purchase resulted in staggering losses. Without Avatar and Fox News, News Corp would be a basket case. And Fox News has been losing viewers as well.

Now that the Journal is writing off some major clients like the President, it may just be a matter of time before they fall of their own bloated weight. I wonder where people like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity would go if there were no Fox News to coddle them?


Fox News Has Not Earned A Front Row Seat

Posted by on July 30, 2010 at 10:25 am. 8 Comments :

The White House Correspondent’s Association is deciding this weekend what news agency will get the seat in the White House Press Briefing Room that was vacated by Helen Thomas. One of those seeking the seat is Fox News.

The timing of this could not be more significant. Coming on the heels of Fox’s disgraceful promotion of Andrew Breitbart’s phony video that accused an honorable woman of being a racist, how could the WHCA even entertain the notion of giving a front row seat of honor to Fox? This latest embarrassment just serves to remind people of past disgraceful acts on the part of Fox News: the smearing of Van Jones; the lies about ACORN; the fabricated controversy over the New Black Panthers; the list goes on.

Fox News is NOT news. It is a blatantly partisan operation that promotes the interests of the Republican Party and conservative ideology. Giving this seat to Fox after they have so recently demonstrated how undeserving they are would be a slap in the face to journalists who work hard to uphold the ethics that their profession requires.

Credo has a petition to the WHCA urging them to give the seat to National Public Radio. NPR has been working this beat for 40 years (compared to 14 for Fox), and they serve an audience that is almost 14 times larger than Fox. Please sign the petition ASAP and let the WHCA know that we do not want Fox to be rewarded for their dishonesty.


Glenn Beck Uncovers Homer Simpson’s Clandestine Plot

Posted by on July 30, 2010 at 3:08 am. 7 Comments :

Comrade Homer SimpsonWith the myriad enemies that America is facing in this tumultuous age of terrorism, leave it to Glenn Beck to investigate and unveil one of the most dastardly schemes ever perpetrated on our unsuspecting nation. Only someone with the delusional paranoia of Beck could have discovered this lurking danger. Thank God for Beck’s dementia, for without it we would all be doomed.

Beck: Before the 1960s, these were the shows on television. This was Father Knows Best. Can you even imagine a show named that? This is My Three Sons. Ward Cleaver, Leave It To Beaver. The role of father was strong, but now — I mean, I hate to be my grandfather and say, “We didn’t even have Rice Krispies back then” — but look at the difference.

This was before these guys [the Weather Underground] showed up. Now look at our culture. [The Simpsons] is the funniest show ever written on television. I love this show. But dad’s a schlub.

That’s right! The Weather Underground conspired to turn dads into schlubs. Never mind the fact that on programs like Father Knows Best and Leave it to Beaver the dad, just as likely as not, was portrayed as dense or over-reacting to some family crisis. He was frequently bailed out by the mom or some innocent revelation of the child. And set aside Beck’s inability to come up with program names that reflect the strength (i.e. dominance) of the father figure, like maybe King of Queens or My Wife and Kids.

All of that is just a distraction from the hidden truth of the Weather Underground’s blueprint for destroying the family unit and demeaning fatherhood. For half a century this cabal has laid dormant, waiting for an opportunity to pounce. At the center of this sleeper cell is the craven visage of Homer Simpson, a villain thrust upon us by the execrable Rupert Murdoch and Fox. Thanks to Beck we can now see that this deceptively lovable goofball is actually a treacherously effective functionary of a secular-socialist revolution that aims to impose a brutal dictatorship and enslave us all.

However, Comrade Homer didn’t count on Beck exposing his plan. And now that the veil has been lifted, there is still time resist the looming tyranny. So rise up America. Rise up and cast off the shackles that Homer and his legion of Marxists would bind unto you. Reject tyranny. Reject Fox and Murdoch. Live free or eat my shorts!

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation Is SHOCKED By Hostile Rhetoric

Posted by on July 29, 2010 at 7:20 pm. 4 Comments :

Fox NationThe Fox Nationalists are just livid over an article that invokes what they regard as hostile language. Never mind that their own community is populated by rhetorical thugs and assassins. What they discovered on a blog about disappearing plankton has them in a full faint. And they attached a headline that fully expresses their dismay: Daily Kos: Climate Skeptics Should Be Euthanized.

The article Fox Nation links to is on the blog for the book “Green Hell.” The book purports to reveal “how environmentalists plan to control your life” (oh my) and was written by Fox News’ “Junk Science” columnist and Global Warming denier, Steve Milloy. Before becoming an apologist for polluters, Milloy was an apologist for tobacco companies. He’s made a career of attempting to persuade people that poison is good for you. In this case Milloy’s ire was raised by a column written by Steven Andrew at the The Examiner.com under the ominous title “Studies show dramatic decrease in plankton.” Scared yet?

Let’s take a look at all the things Milloy got wrong. First of all, he repeatedly refers to Steven Andrew as Steven Alexander. Secondly, Andrew was writing this column for The Examiner and not for Daily Kos, so it can hardly be attributed to Daily Kos, as both Fox Nation and Milloy did. Thirdly, Milloy falsely claimed that the posting was removed. In fact, it was just edited to satisfy Milloy’s tender sensitivities. Fourthly, Andrew never advocated either euthanasia or suicide for Milloy or anyone else. He merely invoked a humorous reference to the iconic film Soylent Green. It was a reference directed at the befouled state of the environment in the science fiction film with an ironic aside:

“If only the Soylent Corporation were publicly traded, or better still, if only Milloy and his buddies could check into one of the company’s lovely medical suites for a short nature movie and a glass of wine.”

This is really no more objectionable than someone suggesting that Rush Limbaugh eat some shrimp caught in the Gulf Coast after Limbaugh declared that the oil spill there was no big deal. The point would be simply to embarrass Limbaugh by challenging him to stand by his ridiculous assertions, not to poison him.

Milloy described Andrew’s remarks as “intolerance” and said that it is the reason he fights so vigorously against the “greenshirts.” But if he is so concerned about intolerance, why hasn’t ever ever condemned Bill O’Reilly for wanting to strangle journalists, or Glenn Beck for fantasizing about choking Michael Moore to death?

The answer, of course, is that Milloy is hypocrite who couldn’t care less about the rhetoric he is pretending to be offended by. For him, and for Fox Nation, this is just an opportunity to bash an opponent and to spread more of their anti-climate propaganda. It doesn’t take a astrophysicist to figure that out.


Shirley Sherrod To Sue Cowardly Andrew Breitbart

Posted by on July 29, 2010 at 4:43 pm. 13 Comments :

Cowardly Andrew BreitbartShirley Sherrod spoke today at a convention for the National Association of Black Journalists. Andrew Breitbart was also invited to speak. He initially accepted the invitation but later rescinded his acceptance. Perhaps he chickened out after he heard that Sherrod would be there.

Breitbart has good reason to be afraid. During her remarks Sherrod noted that she would “definitely” sue Breitbart for posting a grossly deceptive video that implied that Sherrod was a racist. She added that “He had to know that he was targeting me.” She further noted that Breitbart has not apologized and that, at this point, she’s not interested. She is clearly a women who knows her own mind and knows racism when she sees it:

“I saw it in what they did, in what Fox did and in what Breitbart did. I knew it was racism when it happened to me, and no one had to tell me that.”

It’s interesting that Bill O’Reilly saw fit to apologize to Sherrod. Fox News Sr. VP Michael Clemente even acknowledged a “breakdown” within his news operation. But Breitbart said that he has nothing for which to apologize. And Breitbart crony Brent Bozell of the uber-conservative Media Research Center said that Sherrod should apologize to Breitbart and Fox. These people are seriously ill.

Contrast that with the comments by President Obama today in a speech before the National Urban League (which was carried live by CNN and MSNBC, but not by Fox News):

“Now, last week, I had the chance to talk to Shirley Sherrod, an exemplary woman whose experiences mark both the challenges we have faced and the progress that we’ve made. She deserves better than what happened last week when a bogus controversy based on selective and deceiving excerpts of a speech led her led to her forced resignation.

Now, many are to blame for the reaction and overreaction that followed these comments, including my own administration. And what I said to Shirley was that the full story she was trying to tell, a story about overcoming our own biases and recognizing ourselves in folks who, on the surface, seem different, is exactly the kind of story we need to hear in America.”

Why is the right so incapable of exhibiting the slightest bit of decency, humility, or honor? Sherrod was clearly defamed and she deserves her day in court. In fact, it wouldn’t be so bad if the case was expanded to a class action against Breitbart and Fox News with the addition of Van Jones and ACORN as complainants. They were every bit as much victims of Breitbart and Fox. And if Sherrod creates a legal defense fund I will be happy to donate and to promote it.


Iowa GOP Seeks To Strip Ronald Reagan Of US Citizenship

Posted by on July 29, 2010 at 11:14 am. 5 Comments :

In a Declaration from “We the People” of Iowa the Iowa Republican Party declares that…

“…the federal government has grown too large, too intrusive and too oppressive to the point that government now stifles the productivity, the freedom, the ingenuity and the very spirit of the American people. We declare that all three branches of government have been governing outside their well-defined bounds as stated in Articles I, II, and III of the Constitution of the United States.”

Consequently, they demand that…

“…the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government return to govern within their constraints clearly defined by the Constitution given to us by the founders in 1787 and further refined by the Bill of Rights in 1789.”

Notice that they did not demand a return to any of the amendments other than those in the Bill of Rights. So under their restoration of the original intent of the Founders, slavery would still be legal and women could not vote.

But what elevates this declaration from curiosity to idiocy, and beyond that to absurdity, is this charming little provision tucked away in the platform:

“7.19 – We call for the reintroduction and ratification of the original 13th Amendment, not the 13th Amendment in today’s Constitution.”

Th 13th Amendment to which they refer is not the one presently in the Constitution that abolishes slavery. There was a 13th Amendment introduced prior to that that was never ratified. It proposed that…

“If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”

The purpose of including this plank in the platform was to make a statement regarding President Obama having won the Nobel Peace Prize. Setting aside for the moment that the Nobel is not awarded by a “foreign power” and thus would not have triggered the provision, if it were applicable it would mean that every American Nobel winner (scientists, writers, etc.) would have had their citizenship revoked as well. What’s more, it would strip the citizenship of Americans honored by the British Crown with honorary knighthoods, including Bill Gates, Rudy Giuliani, Steven Spielberg, and the sainted Ronald Reagan.

Since these crackpots haven’t been able to prove that Obama isn’t a citizen because he wasn’t born in the U.S., they are now trying to revoke his citizenship, and that of hundreds of other dignified Americans, including many that are their heroes.

Just how crazy are these lunatics? Let’s take a look at a couple of other planks in their platform. Section 4.26 says that “We oppose teaching multicultural based curriculum.” Section 7.10 says that “We affirm that desecrating the American or state flags is not constitutionally protected free speech, and should be punished accordingly.” That was immediately followed by Section 7.11 that says “We oppose any regulation or law that would restrict the freedom of speech.”

And if you need any further evidence of the madness in the Iowa GOP, the platform declaration also contains an enumeration of values that were taken straight from Glenn Beck’s web site for the 912 Project. Eleven of the twelve values on Beck’s site are in the Iowa GOP platform. The missing one is “charity,” which the Iowans replaced with “common sense.” That is a telling substitution. Six of nine of Beck’s principles are in the platform as well.

With the Iowa GOP deciding who can and cannot be a citizen, and Beck providing divine inspiration and spiritual guidance, there are, as Beck would say, “dark days ahead” for the Republican Party.


Is The GOP Ashamed Of Its Tea Party Base?

Posted by on July 28, 2010 at 9:06 am. 5 Comments :

This morning the Fox Nation has placed as its top story an article on the Democrats’ new campaign to tie Tea Partyists to Republicans. Is that supposed to be a criticism? I thought the GOP and the Tea Baggers were best buddies. Republican candidates across the nation have embraced the Tea Party and enthusiastically sought their support. Tea Party candidates like Sharron Angle in Nevada and Paul Rand in Kentucky have been lauded as heroes within the GOP. Now, all of a sudden, they are complaining that Democrats are calling attention to the affection these conservative comrades have for one another.

When did the Republicans come to view the Tea Party as a liability? Why would this ad rattle them? Recent polling shows that 79% of Tea Partyists identified themselves as Republicans. And some of the top Republicans have been pandering to the Baggers in the most overt manner possible:

John Boehner, House Minority Leader: There really is no difference between what Republicans believe in and what the tea party activists believe in.

Sarah Palin, 1/2-term governor/Fox News contributor: The Republican Party would be really smart to start trying to absorb as much of the Tea Party movement as possible because this is the future of our country. The Tea Party movement is the future of politics.

Sen. Jim DeMint, GOP Chair Michael Steele, Newt Gingrich, and more, share these sentiments. However, the Fox Nationalists seemed to be worried about the association with extremist elements of the Tea Bagging faction. The posting links to an article on The Daily Caller that goes into more detail about this troublesome trend. But the article doesn’t support the contention that it is the Tea Party that worries them. The Caller asserts that the Democratic effort is…

“…a swipe at House Republicans for not offering more specifics of how they would govern if they retake the House. But it’s also an attempt to force the GOP to own proposals by Rep. Paul Ryan.”

Are they worried about the Tea Party or their own Republican agenda? Paul Ryan may be a Tea Party sympathizer, but he is also a Republican leader and the ranking member of the House Budget Committee. Why would the GOP need to be “forced” to adopt the budget proposals of their own budget committee chief? Why are they ashamed to endorse their own platform and people? That’s all the Democrats are putting forth in their video and on the web site dedicated to the Republican Tea Party Contract on America. The site is a summary of the Republican agenda as stated by Republicans, and is fully annotated to document their positions.

While Fox Nation is serving the interests of the Republican Party by seeking to mock the Democrats’ campaign, the Fox Nationalist citizens of the web site (which hilariously just added the words “All Opinions Welcome” to their logo) are not as anxious to distance themselves from the Tea Bagging contingent. Here is a sampling of comments from these completely sane and reasonable folks:

Wolverine Oathkeeper: I do not think it is necessary to puke the reasons why I am not voting for ANY DemonRats especially Obama “The man from Kenya who scammed our country”. My core thought is that they do not represent “One Nation under God, Indivisible With Liberty and Justice For All”

Judgment: Decent People have the common sense to know that the Democratic party has become a Servant of Satan and is using all his favorite ‘tools’ of lies and deception to decieve the people.

Muslim socialist democrats …….taking lying to a whole nother level !: These muslim socialist democrats are runnin scared…………….There is no antidote for the socialist policies of the muslim moron ! America is fed up with these morons and there is nothing the muslim socialist democratic party can do !

WHITE&PROUD2: Hey Liberals, who gives a f–k what you do? Your time is up and you are irrelevant!!

s-t-g: I like the ad. I wish the republican party was more conservative and would enact much of what the tea party stands for.

Exactly! This ad is not the least bit derogatory from the perspective of the Tea Bagger. It is a documentary exposition of the current state of the Tea-publican establishment. No Tea Partyist would find this ad objectionable. So the question is…why do the Republicans and their media mouthpieces?

Update: House Minority Whip Eric Cantor is ashamed. He announced today that he would not be joining the Tea Party caucus in Congress recently founded by Michelle Bachmann (R-TP).