Fox News And Breitbart Smear O’Keefe Prosecutor

Posted by on February 2, 2010 at 10:53 am. 2 Comments :

In a report that is jam-packed with falsehoods, Fox News casts sinister aspersions on the motives of the U.S. Attorney who brought the case against pimp/journalist James O’Keefe for his alleged felonious activities in the office of Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu.

The first paragraph of the article, titled “U.S. Attorney Steps Down From O’Keefe Case,” has nothing whatsoever to do with the story as headlined. Instead, it appears to be no more than an attempt to set up an allegation that the U.S. Attorney’s office deliberately filed false charges against O’Keefe and his accomplices.

“James O’Keefe, accused of trying to tamper with the phones of Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, was ‘framed’ by the media and the U.S. attorney’s office, Andrew Breitbart, publisher of BigGovernment.com, told Fox News Monday.”

The second paragraph of the article eventually gets around to the point of the story, but only after asserting a series of additional falsehoods dispensed by ultra-conservative propagandist, Andrew Breitbart.

“The same day the man who first published James O’Keefe’s explosive videos exposing wrongdoing at community organizer ACORN came to his defense Monday, claiming the conservative filmmaker ‘sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney’ while the prosecutor made his case to the media, the U.S. attorney involved stepped down.”

Let’s just set aside the fact that no wrongdoing on the part of ACORN has ever been proven; and that there is no evidence that O’Keefe was denied or delayed access to an attorney, or even an allegation of that by O’Keefe; and that the prosecutor did not make a case to the media while O’Keefe was being held. The first reports in the press didn’t come out until after he was released. Now we can deal with the real issue.

In this article, ostensibly about U.S. Attorney Jim Letten recusing himself from the O’Keefe case, Fox News went to great lengths to juxtapose that news with allegations of wrongdoing from Breitbart. Those allegations were featured in the lede and repeated in the following paragraph that explicitly tied Breitbart’s charges to the recusal. The Fox News version of events was that Letten stepped down the same day Breitbart issued his defense of O’Keefe. The clear implication being that those two events had something to do with one another. Fox News is plainly and irresponsibly insinuating that Letton stepped aside because of some impropriety.

The same implied correlation occurred in the very next paragraph wherein the charge that O’Keefe was framed was repeated, followed by Fox News again connecting that to Letten’s recusal by saying that it took place “hours later.” For the record, the New Orleans Times-Picayune (in an act of actual journalism) has confirmed that Letten asked to be recused a week ago, long before the smear by Breitbart and Fox. The remainder of the article was a virtually uninterrupted platform for Breitbart’s wholly unsupported defense of O’Keefe. Breitbart was quoted extensively making allegations for which he had no foundation.

“James O’Keefe sat in jail for 28 hours without access to an attorney, while the U.S. attorney leaked the information about his arrest, helping the media frame it as ‘Watergate Junior.'”

“The panty bomber on Christmas was given — you know, this guy’s from Al Qaeda, and he’s not even an American citizen, and he’s given access to an attorney right away. I believe that this was a concerted effort, this is just my opinion, to allow for the media to frame the issue to put James O’Keefe in a very bad position.”

“It [O’Keefe’s arrest] is tied to the Justice Department. And we’ve been very aggressive in asking Eric Holder to investigate what’s seen on these ACORN tapes and he’s ignored it.”

Fox News made no attempt to verify any of these remarks, nor did they attempt to interview anyone who might have rebutted them. They let them stand unchallenged as if they were settled facts. However, they did reprint O’Keefe’s prior statement in defense of himself. A statement that had already been demonstrated to be untrue.

“The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Sen. Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their senator.”

Of course, were that the case, why did he leave Landrieu’s office and try to gain access to the telephone wiring closet at another location? Fox News didn’t ask that question. Sean Hannity didn’t get an answer to that either in his exclusive fluffing interview with O’Keefe yesterday. In fact the whole interview was staged to permit O’Keefe to declare his innocence while refusing to answer substantive queries.

So who is U.S. Attorney Jim Letten whom Breitbart has accused of framing O’Keefe; of manipulating the press; of participating in a DOJ revenge plot against Breitbart?

Letten was a George W. Bush appointee who has served as U.S. Attorney since April of 2001. He is well known for his successful prosecution of former Democratic Louisiana Governor, Edwin Edwards. He has bipartisan support as a federal prosecutor with both Landrieu (a Democrat) and Sen. David Vitter (a Republican) backing his reappointment to the post by the Obama administration. In fact, Vitter was so determined to see Letten reappointed that he held up the nominations of other prosecutors until he had an assurance from Attorney General Holder that Letten would remain on the job.

Is that the profile of a man that would engage in the mischief that Breitbart alleges? Is that someone whom Fox News ought to be insinuating recused himself from a case due to some malfeasance?

To make matters worse, Fox News exploits the confidential nature of recusals to bolster their innuendos about Letten. While they tie the recusal to Breitbart’s attacks, they never entertain the notion that Letten stepped aside for legitimate reasons. For instance, he may know one of the suspects, or his family, personally. One of O’Keefe’s accomplices, Robert Flanagan, is the son of Letten’s fellow Louisiana federal prosecutor, William Flanagan.

This illustrates the lengths to which Breitbart, and his patron Fox News, will go to defame anyone they deem to be obstructing their mission to dispense disinformation and to contribute to the ignorance of their audience. The article from Fox News is so transparently biased as to be bordering on libel. It is without question knowingly malicious and false. And it is a product of Fox’s “news” division, not the primetime TV opinion mongers upon whom Fox usually likes to blame their deliberately deficient reporting.

For Fox, there is no escaping the reality that this is inexcusably unprofessional and prejudicial. And sadly, it is business as usual at Fox.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Paranoia Strikes Deep: The Right’s Irrational Fear Goes Into Orbit

Posted by on February 1, 2010 at 6:23 pm. 1 Comments :

If you thought that Glenn Beck was a fount of surreal conspiracy theories that make Charles Manson look like the Dalai Lama, well, you’re right. But that’s another story. These days the virus infecting Beck is spreading rapidly throughout his community of wing nuts. There are raving rightists railing about fearsome fantasies everywhere you turn.

Senator Jim DeMint, who famously called health care Obama’s Waterloo, now has not only backed away from that statement, but he believes that the media misrepresented it. Even worse, he told a reporter that…

“…the version played over and over on cable news networks was slowed down ‘so it would sound more sinister.’“

I think DeMint saying that stopping Obama on health care “will be his Waterloo. It will break him,” is pretty sinister at any speed.

Then we have radio talker Roger Hedgecock penning a column for WorldNetDaily that could serve as the basis for a sequel to “The Sixth Sense.” Hedgecock’s version would have a kid who sees fatalities from faulty automobiles, except in a surprise ending Barack Obama is a terrorist plotting against a foreign manufacturer.

“But is government ‘greed’ a factor here? As a co-owner of Toyota rivals GM and Chrysler, is the Obama administration and its jihad against Toyota ‘consumer protection’ or revenge against a successful, non-union, red state based rival?

Never mind that Toyota acknowledged and apologized for the problem and the recall. If you look hard enough (and you’re not entirely sane) you can see the government ghosts slandering Toyota on behalf of GM.

And you can’t have an article about paranoia without Andrew Breitbart. The Godfather of pimps is now afraid that the Attorney General and his justice thugs held James O’Keefe incommunicado and leaked information to damage his reputation (as if that were possible). Furthermore, Breitbart believes that the DOJ is out to get him because…

“Well, it’s tied to the Justice Department. And we’ve been very aggressive in asking Eric Holder to investigate what’s seen on the ACORN tapes, and he’s ignored it.”

I can hear it now. O’Keefe was picked up in New Orleans and the call went out to the AG’s office with the White House and the CIA on conference. The whole national security apparatus was fired up as they concocted a scenario to take down a fake investigative journalist and his propaganda baron mentor.

Finally, the master, Beck himself, steps up to spin another of his horror filled tales of doom. In this episode Beck is convinced that some dastardly secret purpose is embedded in the dark recesses of health care or energy reform or education or even college football. The topic doesn’t really matter, Beck will find the evil in it. And it will be something about which he has warned you before:

“I told you for months: Do not allow anything to pass from this congress or this administration. Because they are building something. I don’t know what they’re building but they are putting pieces of whatever it is they are building in all of these bills and we don’t know it.”

I wonder how he knows that they are doing this if he doesn’t know it. And I wonder what he’s afraid of if he doesn’t know what it is. But just to be on the safe side he insists that nothing be passed for another three years, maybe seven. And this isn’t the first time that Beck raised fears of some ambiguous construction project. It’s a good thing we have Beck to cast out the demons of the world, people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom Beck believes is planning some monstrous assault on humanity in the next couple of weeks. We can depend on Beck to stand strong as a righteous defender of virtue:

“[L]iberalism and Marxism would have crushed all human dignity in their power-seeking and money-grubbing claws. Nothing would have remained of human and spiritual principles.”

My apology. That last quote was actually Ahmadinejad. Sometimes it’s hard to tell these prophets of paranoia apart.


Fox Nation Inadvertantly Bashes Sarah Palin

Posted by on February 1, 2010 at 12:41 pm. 4 Comments :

There may be no better source for comedy than the comments posted on Fox Nation. They appear to be a nation of town idiots. Even when the subject is something trivial, they manage to elevate their foolishness. This was the case after last Saturday night’s Miss America pageant.

In a lighthearted reference to her fellow Alaskan, Sarah Palin, this year’s Miss Alaska, Sydnee Waggoner, introduced herself by joking that, “No, I can’t see Russia from my house.”

That impudent offense directed at the sainted Queen of the Tea Baggers was all it took to set off the crowd at Fox Nation. However, their ire hilariously ricocheted off of Waggoner and smacked Palin right across her face. The Fox Nationalists began by calling Waggoner a “big mistake,” a “dumb broad,” and a “stupid twit.” Then it really got funny.

Dickn52: “What’s to say. She’s an airhead beauty pageant contestant who hopes to ‘score’ on her looks.”

Liar-berals are Going Down: “Another airhead beauty pageant contestant. Just exactly what has she done? Stupid women are always good for a laugh.”

Um…..Do we really need to remind these geniuses that Palin was an airhead beauty pageant contestant, and Miss Alaska runner-up, hoping to score on her looks and who still hasn’t done anything? Nah, let’s let them wallow in their ignorance.

FYI: This year’s Miss America winner, Caressa Cameron, was asked her views on gay marriage during the the Miss Virginia pageant last year. She said that due to her religious beliefs, her personal opinion was that marriage should be between one man and one woman, but that she opposed laws prohibiting gays from marrying. I wonder if that played into the decision of pageant judge, Rush Limbaugh.


What Is Roger Ailes Doing On ABC’s This Week?

Posted by on January 31, 2010 at 12:34 pm. 12 Comments :

For some reason ABC News saw fit to invite Roger Ailes, CEO of Fox News, onto ABC’s This Week to participate in the panel discussion. I wonder what Barbara Walters and the show’s producers thought Ailes would contribute. I wonder if they knew, when they sent the invitation, that Ailes would spend most of his time lying. I wonder if they ever gave consideration to inviting Michael Moore or Keith Olbermann. And I wonder if, in retrospect, they think the segment contributed to honest discourse and served to inform their viewers.

It may be unprecedented to have a CEO of a news network appearing on air as an advocate for the Republican Party. Just imagine the outrage that would ensue if the NBC or CBS chief took to the airwaves espousing Democratic politics. Ailes must have studied hard for his appearance because it shows in the quantity of grade A lies he produced (Media Matters has video). For instance:

Ailes said that the White House tried to ban Fox News from the media pool. That never happened. Fox failed to submit a request in time, so they were left off a list. As soon as they notified the White House, they were put back on by communications director Anita Dunn.

Ailes endorsed Glenn Beck’s accuracy but for “one unfortunate thing which he apologized for.” That was presumably in reference to Beck calling the president a racist who “has a deep-seated hatred for white people.” Beck has never apologized for that. In fact he affirmed it on his radio show the following day. He has subsequently lost more than 80 advertisers.

Ailes reviewed the State of the Union speech as “pretty good” except that the President “did some dumb things like take on the Supreme Court. But the media saved him by blaming it all on Alito.” Maybe, if by media he means Fox News. It was his own network that repeatedly replayed Alito calling the the President a liar (ala Joe Wilson). And they weren’t doing it to blame Alito for anything, but to agree with him and to attack the President. Furthermore, it wasn’t dumb to criticize the Court for a disastrous ruling that gives corporations even more power to influence elections.

This appearance on ABC may reveal why Ailes is so rarely seen on TV. He is neither compelling nor persuasive. Even worse, he is laughably illogical. In one segment he said about Obama…

“He is enormously likable and I think despite what everybody says, people would like him to succeed. But he came in with a belief that the radical change he wanted, or what some people say is the radical change he wanted, would be widely accepted.”

First of all, to preface his remarks by saying “despite what everybody says…” Ailes is asserting that everybody is saying that they don’t want the President to succeed. That may be true for him and for “everybody” on his network, but not for the rest of the nation. The way Ailes puts it, people want Obama to succeed despite saying that they don’t. Secondly, Ailes is promulgating the falsehood that Obama has a “radical” agenda. That’s right out of Beck’s playbook. And finally, if Obama does advocate radical change, and people find him likable and want him to succeed, then isn’t that a mandate for radical change? Ailes’ logic is working against his argument.

There were a couple of enjoyable exchanges. In one, Paul Krugman flustered Ailes with a classic example of Fox News’ “deliberate disinformation.” During the campaign Obama addressed a question about health care by prefacing it with his own question, “Why don’t we have a European style health care system?” Then Obama explained why we do not, and should not, and went on to describe his own plan. But Fox News just played the truncated clip implying that Obama favored the European system. Ailes’ response to that was to change the subject.

In another segment, Walters brought up the newest Fox News contributor, Sarah Palin:

Walters: Do you think she has the qualifications to be president?
Ailes: Fox News is fair and balanced. We had Geraldine Ferraro on for ten years as the only woman the Democrats ever nominated. Now we have the only woman that the Republicans ever nominated. I’m not in politics. I’m in ratings. We’re winning.

Hmmm. What’s missing from that answer? Oh yeah. Whether or not Palin has the qualifications to be president. I suspect he dodged this one because he must remain fair and balanced toward the four potential Republican presidential candidates who are on his payroll: Palin, Huckabee, Santorum, and Gingrich.

As much as I would like to castigate ABC for giving Ailes a platform on their political panel, I can’t help thinking that it might actually serve the country better to have him on TV even more. There aren’t too many less appealing spokespeople for conservative hogwash than Ailes. However, if they are going to host him and his kind, they need to do a lot better job of balancing his propaganda and self-congratulatory bluster with serious liberals who can disinfect the studio with some truth.


James O’Keefe Issues Lie-Riddled Defense For Landrieu Affair

Posted by on January 29, 2010 at 2:54 pm. 7 Comments :

O'Keefe, Giles, BoratJames O’Keefe, the ersatz “pimp” famous for pestering ACORN, has published an amusing defense of his most recent criminal adventure. The statement was fittingly posted on Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment web site, as Breitbart is O’Keefe’s mentor and protector, despite having disavowed himself of any connection to little Jimmy’s felonious conduct.

O’Keefe begins his defense by stating that…

“The government has now confirmed what has always been clear: No one tried to wiretap or bug Senator Landrieu’s office. Nor did we try to cut or shut down her phone lines. Reports to this effect over the past 48 hours are inaccurate and false.”

However, nowhere is there any statement from the government that says any such thing. In fact, the only government statement is the release from the FBI that says O’Keefe and company…

“…were charged in a criminal complaint with entering federal property under false pretenses for the purpose of committing a felony.”

O’Keefe’s goes on to make an assertion that is patently false.

“As an investigative journalist, my goal is to expose corruption and lack of concern for citizens by government and other institutions, as I did last year when our investigations revealed the massive corruption and fraud perpetrated by ACORN.”

First of all, O’Keefe’s characterization of himself as a journalist is an insult to journalists. He brazenly violates the code of ethics as enumerated by the Society of Professional Journalists. Secondly, his goal has never been to expose corruption, but to harass liberals, as he freely admits:

“If you use their rules against them, you can really just tease them and mock them and really destroy them.”

And finally, he revealed no corruption or fraud, massive or otherwise, on the part of ACORN. Subsequent to the release of his videos there have been two independent investigations that concluded that there was no unlawful activity on the part ACORN and there have never been any findings of guilt or even charges brought. Well, except for the charges brought against O’Keefe for unlawful videotaping.

Then we come to O’Keefe’s ludicrous and illogical self-defense.

“In investigating this matter, we decided to visit Senator Landrieu’s district office – the people’s office – to ask the staff if their phones were working.”

That assertion is false on its face. By his own admission to the FBI, he and his associates did much more than ask if the phones were working. They “manipulated the telephone system” in the Senator’s office. They sought access to the main wiring facility at another location and went to that location where they tried unsuccessfully to get in. O’Keefe’s attempt to diminish this by portraying it as an innocent effort to question the Senator’s staff is just plain dishonest. If, as he says, his “sole intent” was to ascertain whether the Senator “was purposely trying to avoid constituents,” then why did he need to go off-site to the wiring facility?

My favorite part of this whitewash was O’Keefe’s reconsideration of this idiotic escapade.

“On reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation, particularly given the sensitivities that people understandably have about security in a federal building.”

“On reflection?” I suppose a night in the slammer presents an ideal opportunity to reflect on one’s imbecility. And the prospect of ten years in prison and a quarter million dollar fine might inspire some serious self-appraisal as well. But I suspect that most of his time in lockup O’Keefe spent concocting these lame excuses. Apparently he needed more time behind bars to come up with something that didn’t blow copious chunks, because the single night was obviously not long enough.

The rest of O’Keefe’s anti-apologia was an extended whine about how the mainstream media is so mean to him. On that note – Be sure to catch James O’Keefe Monday on “Hannity” – Only on Fox News.. That’s right, The nation’s #1 cable news network (is that mainstream enough for you?), Fox News and Sean Hannity somehow scored this exclusive interview. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence. Much like the fact that Fox Nation officially exonerated O’Keefe. It was just a “stunt” according to the Fox Nationalists. Nevertheless, it is still a felony. Good luck with that stunt defense, Jim.


Bachmann, Blackburn Out Of Tea Party Conference. Is Palin Next?

Posted by on January 28, 2010 at 2:56 pm. 3 Comments :

The upcoming Tea Party National Conference has been reeling from reports of infighting amongst the rival Tea Bagger groups. Much of the controversy concerns the convention’s steep ($549.00) entry fee and allegations of financial improprieties on the part of the organizers. The convention has already lost a number of sponsors.

Well now their problems are multiplying as two of their featured speakers have canceled on them. Reps. Marsha Blackburn and Michele Bachmann have advised the Tea Party Nation, who are organizing the event, that they will be unable to attend. According to a press release from the Tea Party Nationalists, the cancellation was precipitated by congressional ethics rules:

“Due to a review of the for profit status of the event, the [ethics] committee could not authorize them to speak as the use of any proceeds from the event had not yet been established.”

That explanation is suspicious at best. First of all, the assertion that the Ethics Committee “could not authorize” the appearance doesn’t jibe with the committee’s function. It sounds more like the representatives are laying off blame on the committee to evade their own responsibility for ducking out of a shady booking. Secondly, a GOP aide cited last week’s Supreme Court decision in Citizen’s United vs. FEC as the reason for ditching the affair. That’s patently absurd. If anything, the decision broadened the ability to associate with groups that contribute to campaigns, but in truth, the decision didn’t even address groups like the Tea Party Nation. So it appears the their actual reasons for canceling are likely different than their official ones.

With the departure of Blackburn and Bachmann, Sarah Palin is the convention’s only star attraction (unless you count the editor of WorldNetDaily or Judge Roy “Ten Commandments” Moore). And her participation is perhaps tenuous as well. Some Tea Party activists are unhappy with her role in the dubious affair and are calling on her quit (the one thing she’s good at). There is a very real fear that Palin will speak before a sparsely populated house. In fact, the Tea Party Nation web site currently has this announcement posted in all caps:

THE FIRST NATIONAL TEA PARTY CONVENTION IS SOLD OUT BUT TICKETS TO THE BANQUET WITH GOV. PALIN ARE STILL AVAILABLE!!!!!

Apparently Palin isn’t the draw that her public relations agency would have us believe. Faced with the embarrassing prospect of a low turnout, combined with the pressure from fellow Tea Baggers to withdraw, Palin may come down with a bad cold next week. That would leave the organizers in a bit of bind. And since Palin was forced to promise that her reported $100,000.00 speaking fee would not benefit her personally, forgoing it wouldn’t hurt her and wouldn’t dissuade her from walking away.

Assuming the gig goes off as planned, Andrew Breitbart is scheduled to introducing Palin. The timing couldn’t be better for planting the Godfather of pimp and possible felon, James O’Keefe, on the stage with the Queen Tea Bagger. Breitbart has also been approached as a replacement for Blackburn.

All in all, this seems like an event that is not to be missed – that is if you can’t get tickets to the Blue Collar Comedy Tour. Hey, maybe they could get Larry the Cable Guy to fill in for Palin.

Palin Responds: Greta Van Susteren asked Palin if she still intends to speak at the Tea Party Conference.

“Oh, you betcha I’m going to be there. I’m going to speak there because there are people traveling from many miles away to hear what that tea party movement is all about and what that message is that should be received by our politicians in Washington. I’m honored to get to be there.”

And the hundred grand doesn’t hurt either.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

SOTU: Cue The Silly Arguments And Sound Bites

Posted by on January 27, 2010 at 11:27 pm. NO Comments :

Tonight the President delivered a rather typical State of the Union speech. That is not a judgment as to its content, but recognition that most State of the Union speeches have the same political goals. The President covered the territory that he regards as his priorities and exhibited the requisite measure of empathy for the difficulties many Americans are enduring. He also balanced his resolve to continue fighting for his health care and jobs programs, with a nod to his trademark (and pointless) affinity for bipartisanship.

But this is the part that stood out for me:

“Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions – our corporations, our media, and yes, our government – still reflect these same values. […] The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates into silly arguments, and big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away. No wonder there’s so much cynicism out there. No wonder there’s so much disappointment.”

And with that the silly arguments and sound bites ensued. It hardly mattered what the President said because the reactions from the TV pundits were as predictable as the sunrise. Charles Krauthammer didn’t think the speech was presidential. Chris Matthews forgot for an hour that the President was black. And Sarah Palin – oh hell, I couldn’t really figure out what she was trying to say. Her run-on gibberish mentioned something about him being condescending toward Republicans, but it was impossible to translate into English.

I can, however, empathize with the President’s frustration with the media. But it may be naive to expect much to change. Fox News is not likely to abandon their mission now that they have successfully created the world’s first Pavlovian network. Their viewers have been carefully trained to salivate when the bell rings. Just this afternoon Glenn Beck exhorted his audience to avoid the speech altogether:

“You don’t even have to watch the State of the Union. I’ll watch it for you.”

See how easy it is to understand the world when you have people like Glenn Beck to do all the messy work of actually having to be conscious? And talk about your silly arguments…Beck’s certainly got that covered.


Poor Andrew Breitbart. His Sleaze Is Showing.

Posted by on January 27, 2010 at 4:49 pm. 1 Comments :

ACORN: Pimp, Prostitute & BoratWith the arrest of the Fox News’ “pimp,” Andrew Breitbart, the pimp’s Godfather, is struggling to distance himself from his own Frankenstein monster. He created James O’Keefe and now his creation has gotten loose and is terrorizing the countryside.

For his part, Breitbart wants nothing more to do with O’Keefe. He is disclaiming any knowledge of him or the activities that got him busted in New Orleans. O’Keefe told reporters, as he slipped into a cab leaving the jailhouse that “Truth will set me free.” I believe this was a reference to Truth Bail Bonds of Louisiana. He also released this statement from prison directly addressing Breitbart:

“Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.” ~Snark

Dare I say it is a scandal of biblical proportions. But O’Keefe’s prophecy was right on the mark. Breitbart issued his denial on all three of his “Big” web sites (Government, Journalism, and Hollywood). But he did not throw O’Keefe entirely under the bus. Breitbart left room for some legal squirming to insinuate that nothing dastardly actually took place.

“But there is absolutely no allegation in the criminal complaint that ‘wiretapping’ or ‘bugging’ is any part of this case, just the charge that O’Keefe and the others entered Sen. Landrieu’s office in New Orleans ‘for the purpose of interfering with the office’s telephone system.'”

That’s right. The perpetrators merely entered the Senator’s office dressed as telephone repairmen, fiddled with the phones, and sought access to the central wiring facility. What about that would lead anyone to believe there was intent to tap the lines?

Breitbart argues fiercely that judgement should be withheld until all of the facts are in. That’s an interesting position from someone who has never been especially enamored of facts. Nor has he ever shown an interest in reserving judgment. His assaults against ACORN were unambiguously accusatory. Even though ACORN was never found guilty of any crime. They weren’t even charged with any crime. And they were exonerated by an independent investigation as well as a non-partisan Congressional probe. Now, all of a sudden, Breitbart is advocating restraint.

But the piece de resistance came when Breitbert was interviewed on the Hugh Hewitt radio program. He continued his chorus of denial as Hewitt engaged in a friendly interrogation designed to setup Breitbart’s foes as slanderers, or so he thought. However, one part of the exchange was particularly notable as Hewitt inquired what Breitbart would have done if he had known what O’Keefe was up to:

Hewitt: Would you have told him don’t do that, if he had asked you?
Breitbart: No, I have nothing to do with what James O’Keefe does. James O’Keefe is an independent filmmaker.

So if O’Keefe had told Breitbart that he was on his way to New Orleans to bug Sen Landrieu’s phones, Breitbart would have said nothing to dissuade O’Keefe from his felonious mission. Even though O’Keefe was, at that very time, on Breitbart’s payroll, which Breitbart admitted during the Hewitt interview.

This is an outstanding display of the ethical deficiencies at work in Breitbart’s sphere. He is unrepentantly slanderous towards others. He has a sociopath’s sense of loyalty and self-preservation. And he has no problem with people he pays engaging in felonious conduct. Look for Fox News to make him their next managing editor. What a perfect fit.


Go Back To Sleep. Glenn Beck Will Watch Out For You.

Posted by on January 27, 2010 at 2:59 pm. 2 Comments :

I am so sorry but I JUST HAVE TO SCREAM!!!

I’m watching Glenn Beck (don’t ask) and he’s talking about how whatever Obama is going to say tonight it is a lie (© Joe Wilson) – even though he hasn’t said anything yet.

Then Beck says this:

“You don’t even have to watch the State of the Union. I’ll watch it for you.”

NO THANKS, Glenn!

This is exactly the sort of mindless, groupthink that results in Fox viewers’ blind loyalty to the network and its cult-driven ratings. To think that he would be so brazen as to advise his disciples to wallow in ignorance and to just let him interpret everything for them is astonishing, even for Beck.

This is the last step in a progression toward total hypnotic control by fascist media. Television really is the opiate of the masses, and now it is prepared to take over all of your remaining cognitive capability. Just tune out everything but Fox News. They will let you know if anything important happens and what it means.

Ignoramus Uber Alles!


State Of The Union: Are We Fundamentally Transformed Yet?

Posted by on January 27, 2010 at 8:50 am. 1 Comments :

Even before President Obama delivers his State of the Union message, the rumblings of partisans can be heard rattling the media timbers. Democrats are putting the finishing touches on their heartfelt endorsements of the raw honesty of the speech and the bold agenda it laid out for America’s future. Republicans are polishing their spontaneous reactions to the flaccid presentation and counting every occurrence of keywords like “terror” or “deficit” as if the number of times you say them has an impact on their destiny. The post-game on these events is so thoroughly predictable it hardly requires a spoiler alert.

These ceremonies never really describe the state in which we find our union. It is more like a confessional wherein our shortcomings are enumerated and our commitment to dispatch them is renewed On both of those measures the President has much for which to answer. A little more than a year ago, just days before the election, he told a cheering audience of supporters that…

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

That was 453 days ago. I’m not sure that he can make a case that the U.S. has been fundamentally transformed yet. It was a stirring promise that was received with overwhelming enthusiasm at the time. But after a year of Town Howlers, Tea Baggers, and pusillanimous pundits praying for failure and openly weeping, that moment of inspiration has been twisted into an ominous threat. Glenn Beck repeatedly plays video of the sound bite with a sneering implication that the transformation Obama had in mind was one from an American fable of perpetual prosperity and freedom, to a hellish realm of impoverishment and tyranny. Never mind that many politicians invoke the vision of transformational change. Even Beck himself in his announcement for his contrived and disingenuous 9/12 Project:

Beck, 3/17/2009: We’ve got to fundamentally change. We’ve got to be involved.

Dick Cheney, 3/20/2008: There has been a huge fundamental change and transformation for the better.

Mitt Romney, 9/21/2007: [W]e’re going to have to take fundamental change in Washington.

Newt Gingrich, 2/7/2008: [A]nything less than fundamental change will lead ultimately to a weaker and more vulnerable America.

See? Everybody wants change. It’s a universal trait of humanity. Except for those who fear change. Which, ironically, is just as universal. Nonetheless, the hope and change that many were led to believe was just a new president away still eludes us. There is a laundry list of aspirations that remain unfulfilled. In fact, much of the current landscape looks eerily like the one we thought we had escaped.

  • Iraq
  • Afghanistan
  • Gitmo
  • Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
  • Rendition and Enhanced Interrogation
  • Patriot Act
  • Wall Street Bailouts
  • Massive Deficits
  • Record Foreclosures
  • Crippling Unemployment
  • Global Warming
  • Health Care

Even worse, the appetite for change, and for the agenda articulated in the campaign, has seemed to wither. It appears that all of the momentum today is for regression to the last decade’s legacy of war, greed, and the bliss that so famously accompanies ignorance. How else can you explain the once unimaginable yearning for a return to the shallow austerity of George W. Bush’s America? Could anyone have ever seriously predicted this:

No, I do not miss him. I do not miss the smirking arrogance, the corruption, the cronies, the incompetence, or the bull-headed insistence on selling our nation out to corporations and masters of war. But I do miss the hope that I held for a resurrection from the morbid state in which Bush left the union. I miss having faith that the goals to which our nation aspired were closer than ever to our grasp. I miss believing that we, as a country, were coming to our senses.

Many of the President’s defenders make the legitimate point that a year is not nearly long enough to erase the fiasco of the previous eight. But it would be nice to have the sense that we were a little farther down that road. With the disheartening compromise and collapse of the health care legislation, and the recent electoral debacles, and the enduring economic and job slump, and the persistent rise of right-wing media, it is getting harder to remain optimistic.

None of these issues will be resolved this evening when the President gives his speech. I don’t expect him to leave the podium with legislative victories in hand. Nor do I expect unemployment to decline tomorrow morning. And it appears unlikely that our troops will be returning from the Middle East any time soon. The only thing I would ask of the President from this address is that he return to the message that got him elected in the first place. I ask that he rediscover in himself the ambition to serve the poor and working-class Americans who worked their hearts out so that he could assume this high office and be their representative.

That’s all I ask. Just a simple request for a return to genuine compassion, fairness, and justice. Is that too much to hope for?