Good News And Bad News For News Corp

Posted by on February 6, 2009 at 6:32 pm. 2 Comments :

This is a fairly busy news day for the man who owns the news. Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp released its quarterly earnings report and is still smarting from the smack it received by the marketplace. While the economy overall is in a dismal state, and particularly media enterprises, News Corp has suffered a loss that exceeds all of their competitors. Murdoch acknowledged the significance of their record-setting $6.4 billion loss, saying the pitiful results were…

“…a direct reflection of recession that is deeper than anyone predicted. Indeed this is the worst global economics crisis we witnessed since NewsCorp was established more than 50 years ago.”

Almost every division, film studios, TV stations, Internet, and especially, newspapers, suffered steep losses. The company wrote down $3.6 billion on the Wall Street Journal alone. And going forward, News Corp advised Wall Street that income will decline another 30% for fiscal 2009. By way of explanation, Murdoch confirmed a theory that I set forth last year. He revealed that the loss of advertising revenue from auto manufacturers was the “thing that really is killing us.” That’s not surprising when you note that four of the top five advertisers are car makers. Murdoch also revealed something with which regular viewers of Fox News should be well acquainted:

“Even on [finance] terms, we have never been a company that tolerates facts.” [Some reports now say that Murdoch said “fat” not “facts”]

The good news is that the cable group was not amongst the contributors to the downside. Part of the reason may be that Fox News recently renegotiated their carriage agreements with cable operators, which likely produced a favorable comparison to the previous year’s income.

In addition, Fox News seems to be enjoying a ratings revival. For the two weeks following Barack Obama’s inauguration the network performed markedly better than the two weeks prior. However, it appears that the bulk of the improvement came from just two programs – the newly launched Glenn Beck and the reconstituted Hannity (minus Colmes). So the Fox strategy of doubling down on the neanderthal conservatism may be paying off.

I would conclude that this bump was the result of frightened and depressed right-wing viewers huddling in the warmth of the channel where they get the most comfort. It must be a lonely and harrowing experience to have witnessed the election of a Socialist Muslim who was born in Kenya and refuses to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. The red glow of the Fox “Breaking News” graphic is soothing in a way that can only otherwise be achieved with an abundance of prescription drugs. I would just like to remind the Fox Junkies that there will always be a morning after.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

In Honor Of Ronald Reagan’s Birthday

Posted by on February 6, 2009 at 2:43 pm. 2 Comments :

Ronald Reagan would be 98 years old today were he alive. So on this special occasion, I thought it would be appropriate pay tribute with an excerpt of the new book by Will Bunch, “Tear Down This Myth.”

Reagan: Tear Down This MythIt was Ronald Reagan himself who, as the spotlight faded on his presidency in 1988, tried to highlight his eight-year record by reviving a quote from John Adams, that “facts are stubborn things.” The moment became quite famous because the then-77-year-old president had botched it, and said that “facts are stupid things.” The tragedy of American politics was that just two decades later, facts were neither stubborn nor even stupid – but largely irrelevant.

Any information about Iran-Contra or how the 1979-81 hostages were released (Rudy Giuliani had falsely claimed during the 2008 race they were freed when “the Gipper” looked Iranian leaders in the eye) that didn’t fit the new official story line was being metaphorically clipped out of the newspaper and tossed down “memory hole” – the fate of any information that would have undercut Reagan’s image as an all-benevolent Big Brother still guiding the conservative movement from above.

A more factual synopsis of the Reagan presidency might read like this: That Reagan was a transformative figure in American history, but his real revolution was one of public-relations-meets-politics and not one of policy. He combined his small-town heartland upbringing with a skill for story-telling that was honed on the back lots of Hollywood into a personal narrative that resonated with a majority of voters, but only after it tapped into something darker, which was white middle class resentment of 1960s unrest.

His story arc did become more optimistic and peaked at just the right moment, when Americans were tired of the “malaise” of the Jimmy Carter years and wanted someone who promised to make the nation feel good about itself again. But his positive legacy as president today hangs on events that most historians say were to some great measure out of his control: An economic recovery that was inevitable, especially when world oil prices returned to normal levels, and an end to the Cold War that was more driven by internal events in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe than Americans want to acknowledge.

His 1981 tax cut was followed quickly by tax hikes that you rarely hear about, and Reagan’s real lasting achievement on that front was slashing marginal rates for the wealthy – even as rising payroll taxes socked the working class. His promise to shrink government was uttered so many time that many acolytes believe it really happened, but in fact Reagan expanded the federal payroll, added a new cabinet post, and created a huge debt that ultimately tripped up his handpicked successor, George H.W. Bush. What he did shrink was government regulation and oversight — linked to a series of unfortunate events from the savings-and-loan crisis of the late 1980s to the sub-prime mortgage crisis of the late 2000s.

Happy birthday you greedy, lying, war-mongering, phony, SOB.


AP Seeks Bailout From Shepard Fairey

Posted by on February 5, 2009 at 11:56 am. NO Comments :

Obama HopeIn the course of last year’s presidential campaign it was impossible to avoid an image that became irreversibly associated with Barack Obama. The work by Shepard Fairey was everywhere, distributed by the artist, the campaign, and by millions of individuals who, with Fairey’s consent, downloaded and printed the “HOPE” poster and plastered it on every available wall.

Apparently, it was impossible to avoid by everyone except the Associated Press, who seem to have just found out about it and are now seeking credit and compensation. They claim the work was derived from their copyrighted photo. In fact, Fairey admits that the photo was used as the source for his work. The question is whether it was “fair use.”

Now, there are plenty of people who would criticize Fairey for his tendency to take inspiration from the work of other artists. But in this case, the claim is beyond absurd. The derivative work was plainly an artistic representation of the original and was executed as constitutionally protected, free, political speech. And, according to Fairey, it was entirely non-commercial, with proceeds going to the Obama campaign.

This action by the AP is certain to further tarnish the reputation of the Conventional Media that is already suffering from a deficit of respect. You would have to wonder why they waited until after the campaign; after the image was globally recognized; after its inclusion in the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery; for the AP to assert its claim. Are they merely hoping to benefit from the success of the image that was achieved without any effort on their part? Are they so hard-up for cash that they have taken to suing artists to keep their struggling enterprise afloat?

Surely the AP’s legal team is aware that they will have to show that they suffered financial harm in order to claim damages. That will be a hard case to make since, more likely, Fairey’s work has enhanced the value of the AP photo beyond anything they could have accomplished on their own.

McCain NOPEBut the big question here is: Why won’t anyone sue ME? I’ve been working my ass off promoting a variation on Fairey’s theme directed at John McCain. It is derivative of both Fairey’s art and a photo (of which I no longer know the source) that was probably copyrighted, so I have a double infringement liability. Fairey is already a wealthy artist whose work is published, collected, and displayed in galleries and museums. I, on the other hand, am trying to scrape up rent money and put my artwork on bus stop benches or telephone poles or anywhere else it can be seen. I need the fucking publicity!

It must be great to be AP and let somebody else, in fact, millions of somebody elses, do their work for them and then collect after the fact.


The New Face Of The Republican Party

Posted by on February 4, 2009 at 2:03 pm. 1 Comments :

It is now all of two weeks into the administration of Barack Obama, and already the media is heralding the end of the honeymoon. Considering that on the day of the inauguration, Chris Wallace of Fox News suggested that Obama wasn’t actually president at all because of the mis-articulation of Chief Justice Roberts during the oath, I’m not certain that the honeymoon didn’t end before it ever began.

The failure of the Obama presidency should be welcome news to some of his critics. Rush Limbaugh confessed to hoping for such an outcome. That admission created something of a stir, but the result seems to be that Limbaugh has emerged as the new leader of the Republican Party. He has taken his place at the top of the Party’s hierarchy and even allows members of Congress an audience wherein they can profess their allegiance and kiss his ass ring.

Obama recently told a gathering of Congress critters that “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” Obama was criticized by some Democrats because these remarks just serve to elevate Limbaugh by taking him on. I agree with that analysis, but not that it deserves criticism. It can only help Democrats to elevate Limbaugh and make him the logo of the Republican brand.

The rest of the field isn’t much better than Limbaugh. Sarah Palin still pokes her perky head up every few days to keep her name in the news. And Joe the Plumber … er … journalist … er … political strategist just seems to keep finding new ways to embarrass himself and the Party he has come to represent.

GOP alums aren’t helping either. George Bush has moved into Dick Cheney’s secret, undisclosed location and has not been seen or heard since just after Obama’s inauguration (on second thought, maybe that’s how he’s helping). Cheney, on the other hand, has emerged from his lair wearing a sandwich board that says “REPENT! The end is NEAR!”

And, as always, Fox News remains the Public Relations arm of the Republican Party. Glenn Beck has arrived and is settling in comfortably with daily derision directed at Obama and his still forming team. Bill O’Reilly has declared war on the New York Times, presumably because he can’t keep waging his war on Christmas in February – and he must have a war raging at all times. And Chris Wallace, given a brief ten minutes with the President, uses part of it to ask if he is too thin-skinned because he told a joke about Fox News. Obama responded by stating the obvious:

“I think it’s fair to say that I don’t always get my most favorable coverage on Fox, but that’s part of how a democracy is supposed to work. We’re not all supposed to be in lock step here.”

The rightist echo chamber has already seized on these remarks asserting that Obama has insinuated that all of the media, other than Fox News, are in lock-step with the White House. Of course that is not what he said at all, and just watching the various news networks would reveal how shallow that analysis is. What is inescapable is the fact that Fox alone has a lock-step ideology. Despite false claims of liberal bias, other networks have much more diverse programming and personalities. CNN has Lou Dobbs, MSNBC has Joe Scarborough.

Only Fox has a 100% ideologically pure schedule. And it is Fox that is home to the Limbaughs, Palins, Wurzlebachers, Becks, Hannitys, O’Reillys, etc., who, due to the absence of real political leadership, are the new faces of the Republican Party.


The Fox News Conservative Book Promotion Channel

Posted by on February 3, 2009 at 2:42 am. 3 Comments :

Anyone who watches Fox News with any frequency is painfully aware that it is little more than a marketplace for rightist propaganda and rancor. But lately, I noticed another kind of hucksterism that is rampant on the network. Several of their regular anchors and contributors are identified as authors in the graphics at the bottom of the screen. This happens often enough that I began to wonder just how widespread this practice of co-promotion of TV and publishing was. As it turns out, it is pretty damn widespread. If you were to populate your library with books by Fox News personalities, you would have to purchase all of these – to start:

Bill O’Reilly
A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity
Culture Warrior
The O’Reilly Factor
Kids Are Americans Too
The O’Reilly Factor for Kids
Who’s Looking Out for You?
The No Spin Zone

Dick Morris
Fleeced
Outrage
Rewriting History
Power Plays: Win or Lose
Because He Could
Off with Their Heads
Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race

Michele Malkin
Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild
In Defense of Internment
Invasion

Mike Straka
Grrr! Celebrities Are Ruining Our Country

Sean Hannity
Deliver Us from Evil
Let Freedom Ring

Glenn Beck
The Christmas Sweater
An Inconvenient Book
The Real America

John Gibson
The War on Christmas
Hating America
In Defense of Religion

Laura Ingraham
Power to the People
Shut Up and Sing
The Hillary Trap

Major Garrett
The Enduring Revolution: The Inside Story of the Republican Ascendancy and Why It Will Continue
The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics

Ann Coulter
Guilty
Slander
Godless
Treason
If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans
How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)
High Crimes and Misdemeanors

Bernie Goldberg
A Slobbering Love Affair
Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right
110 People Who Are Screwing Up America
Bias
Arrogance

James Rosen
The Strong Man

Greta Van Susteren
My Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Updated to add:
Fox News Washington, D.C., deputy managing editor, Bill Sammon
At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election
Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the White House
Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, Media Bias and the Bush Haters
Strategery: How George W. Bush Is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats, and Confounding the Mainstream Media.
The Evangelical President: George Bush’s Struggle to Spread a Moral Democracy Throughout the World

This a wholly unprecedented marketing partnership between a so-called news organization and a right-wing political crusade. The books being plugged by the Fox spokesmodels are hardcore partisan tracts that all reflect the same regressive ideology. They have implemented a campaign that blankets their airwaves with pitches for published opinion pieces that are mostly dishonest, manipulative, and overtly hostile.

So where is the other side in this debate? Of course there are no anchors or hosts that lean even modestly left on the “fair and balanced” network. But even amongst their pseudo-liberal commentators like Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, or the recently departed Alan Colmes, you would be hard pressed to turn up a handful of literary works. Even so, I have never seen any of their limited line advertised on the air. Conversely, grousers like O’Reilly hawk their books on every broadcast. And you’ll find that appearances from the Coulters and Goldbergs increase coincident with the release of each new product. As for the other networks, there are a few authors scattered about, like Lou Dobbs, but the shelf space they would consume would be a mere fraction of the Fox Book Club.

The truly astonishing thing about all of this is that anyone would want to read (or watch) any of these pathetic characters to begin with. They represent a collection of the world’s most ill informed, logic deprived, truth averse losers in modern media. Bernie Goldberg, the fired CBS alum, is an unrepentant propagandist who writes books about media bias. Well, I guess he should know. Major Garrett, Fox’s White House correspondent, presciently penned a tome with the subtitle of “The Inside Story of the Republican Ascendancy and Why It Will Continue.” That was published just prior to the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006, followed up in 2008 with additional congressional gains and an historic White House victory. Good call, Major

But my favorite is the Clown Prince of Fox, Dick Morris. His 2006 book, “Condi vs. Hillary,” predicts the prospects for the commencing presidential election. Here is a sample of his astute analysis 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. He got the Republican nominee wrong. And the Republican who Morris said could win if he were nominated actually lost. It is on the strength of this sort of analysis that Morris gets asked back to provide additional insights.

The truth is, it doesn’t matter on Fox (or almost any of the TV news nets) if you’re wrong. The only thing that matters is that you faithfully regurgitate the conservative dogma and talking points. If you do, then you will have a job for life, and your books, web sites, and other media spew will become part of the marketing machine that props up conservatism. It’s an elegantly parasitic relationship. TV exposure begets propaganda which begets book deals which begets TV exposure which begets propaganda, ad infinitum.

And at the center of it all is Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., a vertically integrated media empire that channels disinformation throughout it’s layers of television, radio, newspapers, magazine and book publishers, and the Internet. This complex web of entanglements insures multimedia distribution of the right wing’s political philosophy. Each props up the other to produce an architecture of lies in support of their lust for power and their Utopian dream for social Darwinism. Goebbels would have been proud.


A Stimulus Bill For The Arts

Posted by on February 2, 2009 at 4:43 pm. NO Comments :

As the economy continues to wobble, and Americans face the bleakness of a looming depression, Washington is cobbling together a stimulus package designed to restore the economy and create jobs. The overwhelming majority of the $850 billion proposal is allocated to infrastructure spending and the rescue and reform of financial institutions and the manufacturing base.

Setting aside the merits of the bill as a whole, which reasonable people can debate, the political response to it is shaping up as just another partisan dogfight. Republicans are flailing away at anything they think they can disparage as wasteful, whether or not it actually is.

One example of this, that is close to my heart, is a $50 million grant to the National Endowment for the Arts. That amounts to about 0.006 of one percent of the total bill. That hasn’t stopped Republicans like Mike Pence from trying to use it to torpedo the whole package. But this minuscule appropriation actually has a valid purpose and can produce value that far exceeds its cost. While it’s easy for Dark Agists in Washington to target the arts for political gain, the truth is that art in our communities and schools is essential to both our economic and mental health.

In our efforts to get America working again, it should be remembered that artists are being hurt by the present economic slump along with everyone else. Perhaps more so, in that they are often the first to be cast off by belt-tightening employers and consumers. As such, they are no less deserving of a place in the recovery.

In the last depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt created the Works Progress Administration which, amongst other things, created work for 40,000 American artists. Those jobs resulted in projects that lifted the economic prospects of their communities by making them more livable and promoting trade and tourism. And they also contributed to a cultural Renaissance by documenting society’s pain, struggles, and victories. In addition there was an emphasis on arts education, which produced a generation of more well-rounded and literate citizens with an appreciation for the arts and the solace and inspiration they invoke.

Support for the arts is a critical part of our nation’s recovery and its character. It is what defines and preserves our history and our spirit. It propels us forward in good times and consoles us when hardships weigh us down. It is our essence, our connection to one another, to our ancestors, and to our heirs.

John Cavanagh of the Institute for Policy Studies is spearheading a campaign to advance government support for the arts. He is calling for more funding as well as a cabinet-level Secretary of Arts and Culture. The online petition for this movement already has over 4,600 signatures. You can add yours here: One Percent for the Arts

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Bill O’Reilly Fears Machines Destroying Our Children

Posted by on January 31, 2009 at 2:19 pm. 4 Comments :

A few days ago I wrote an article revealing that Bill O’Reilly Is Scared Out Of His Mind. Well, he is still trembling with fright, this time over the rampaging demons that have possessed our computers and the Internet – and are coming after our kids. In his latest column he warns that…

“…the lives of younger Americans are changing drastically because of machines.”

Oh no! It’s the revenge of the machines. According to O’Reilly, kids don’t play sports anymore. There is no more softball or soccer or tennis. Just the dreaded machines from which they can experience “the thrill of victory without getting sweaty or bloody.” What’s the world coming to when we can’t see our children bleed?

O’Reilly contrasts this to his formative years when he grew up in a neighborhood that consisted of jocks and hoods. That sounds like a pretty stupid neighborhood. Apparently there were no scholars or artists like there were in my neighborhood. We also had jocks and hoods, but nobody cool wanted anything to do with them. O’Reilly goes on to describe how he hung out with the jocks, most of whom became prosperous adults, while the dope smoking hoods “bottomed out” or died. He must have forgotten about the “the former hippies running the crazy left media,” about whom he complained so bitterly just a few days ago. I presume that running the media is a fairly prosperous enterprise (just ask O’Reilly’s boss, Rupert Murdoch).

Fast forward to the present and you’ll catch O’Reilly comparing computer use to narcotics, and assigning all manner of contemporary ills to the scourge of electronica:

“I believe the long-term ramifications of cyberspace are enormous for the USA and for the world. You can see it in the current recession. Many folks are stunned when they lose their jobs. They simply don’t know what to do. A few days ago, a fired worker in Los Angeles murdered his wife and five kids before killing himself. Instead of starting over, the guy flipped out.”

That’s right – the recession and mass murder are somehow the fault of cyberspace. As proof that this is a problem unique to this modern age, O’Reilly compares it to the Great Depression when, in O’Reilly’s mind, there were no murders or other social maladies. One wonders how that economic collapse occurred at all, 75 years before there even was an Internet to bring down society. In the old days people loved poverty and behaved themselves. They were just a bunch of happy poor folks who played touch football in their former farmlands. Maybe that’s what they meant by the Dust Bowl. It’s only now that, as O’Reilly says:

“…kids and many adults are becoming hypnotized by a technological world that requires little accountability and massive escape possibilities.”

It’s funny that he doesn’t include television in that cabal of hypnotic evil. No one was ever bewitched by the Siren’s call of the cathode ray tube, were they? TV was never accused of sedating the population and promoting a trance-like ignorance, was it? It’s even funnier that he goes on to complain that people today are overly concerned with “individual pursuits” and have forsaken “civic responsibility.”

Wait a minute. Did I hear that right? Bill O’Reilly is preaching that we should be less concerned about the individual and more involved with the welfare of our neighbors. Or put another way, he’s advocating socialism and community organizing, just like the rest of the radical leftist loons who control the media. Who’da thought?


George W. Bush Kept Us Safe

Posted by on January 27, 2009 at 3:18 pm. 7 Comments :

Bush SuperheroSeptember 11, 2001, was the sort of milestone that no one wants in their collection. Aside from the obvious and tragic loss of life, it opened up a vein of fear and a recognition that none of us are impervious to grievous harm in a dangerous world.

Thank God, then, for George W. Bush. He kept us safe – well, except for that one time on 9/11. But after that he was a like brave centurion shielding his weak and whimpering wards. That’s why Brit Hume of Fox News, on the day of Barack Obama’s inauguration, marveled…

“That this country would pass into a new presidency eight years later with not a single attack? i certainly didn’t believe that. I woke up every morning for six months wondering whether we’d been attacked again.”

I’m not sure what’s going on at the Hume household, but maybe a little Thorazine would have helped. In the long run, though, Hume and innumerable rightist pundits and politicos, are quite correct in their legacy building efforts on behalf of the beleaguered Bush, who is already regarded as America’s worst president ever. The call has gone out to the Republican Establishment Media that it is only through Bush’s vigilance that any of us are alive today. Just take a look at the record:

  • No terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. Bush kept us safe from terrorists.
  • No hurricanes in New Orleans since Katrina. Bush kept us safe from nature.
  • No comets have hit Earth since Tunguska, 100 years ago. Bush kept us safe from celestial collisions.
  • No #1 albums from Creed since Weathered (2001). Bush kept us safe from Power Ballads.
  • No reanimation of serial murderer and cannibal, Jeffrey Dahmer. Bush kept us safe brain-devouring zombies.
  • No sightings of the Four Horsemen on the Interstate. Bush kept us safe from the Apocalypse.

When you think about all of things that didn’t happen during the Bush years, you can’t help but be grateful for the omnipotent scope of his protective embrace. Along with all of the miracles enumerated above, Bush alone is directly responsible for our not having been consumed by a black hole, or our undergoing an epidemic of projectile vomiting, or the return of the Macarena. Since none of those things happened, then, just like the absence of another terrorist attack, Bush gets all the credit.

Sure, he also ignored intelligence warnings prior to 9/11 that, had they been heeded, might have prevented it. And his crony-infested federal emergency response apparatus resulted in needless death and suffering after Katrina. And his job creation record is the worst since Hoover. And trillions of dollars were lost from retirement and pension funds. And 47 million Americans have no health insurance. And our Constitutional liberties were revoked. But at least our cities have not been overrun by marauding herds of Bigfoots (Bigfeet?). And everyone knows that anything that didn’t happen since 9/11 was directly the result of Bush’s leadership. Well, except for the failure to capture Osama Bin Laden. That was Keith Olbermann’s fault.

So thank you, George W. Bush. And goodbye.


[Hat tip to Bill O’Reilly for alerting me to this video that he regards as child abuse]


Chris Wallace Agrees With Sean Hannity

Posted by on January 27, 2009 at 12:28 pm. 2 Comments :

Just for the record, it needs to be noted who Chris Wallace, the host of Fox News Sunday, and contributor to Fox News, turns to for political advice and analysis. This exchange took place in an interview with Improper Bostonian (pdf) magazine:

Improper Bostonian: Can you truly say that you’re proud to work alongside Sean Hannity?

Chris Wallace: I respect him. We do different things, and he’s very valuable to the network. I generally agree with him, even if I don’t always agree with his approach.

Wallace is fond of asserting that there is a difference between the opinionated Fox News programs hosted by Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, et al, but now the truth comes out. It’s hard to maintain that you have a substantive difference with someone with whom you “generally agree.”


Bill O’Reilly Is Scared Out Of His Mind

Posted by on January 23, 2009 at 2:15 pm. 2 Comments :

All the symptoms are present. The shameless self-glorification. The lashing out at perceived enemies. The mangling of reality. The desperate grasping for affirmation. Bill O’Reilly is scared out of his mind. To be a little more accurate, I should break that sentence apart: Bill O’Reilly is scared – and – Bill O’Reilly is out of his mind.

His latest journey into bombast is titled, “The Collapse of the Left-Wing Press.” In it he makes claims that illustrate the severity of his tunnel-blindness. As evidence of this imagined collapse, O’Reilly cites the financial misfortunes of newspapers like the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Never mind the fact that the entire newspaper business has been hit by a perfect storm of a declining economy, an anemic advertising environment, and competition from the Internet, O’Reilly also ignores the troubles of conservative publications like the bankrupt Tribune Company. And he predictably attacks NBC/GE. They are a favorite target of his due to Keith Olbermann, who has challenged the Factor on the air and in the ratings. O’Reilly’s dementia produced this babble:

“General Electric, which owns NBC, has taken a sharp turn to the left in its corporate philosophy, while at the same time it watched its stock price decline from about 50 dollars a share to around $13. The fact that CEO Jeffrey Immelt still has his job ranks up there with the miracle of the US Airways water landing.”

First of all, GE is the largest defense contractor in the world. The notion that its corporate philosophy has turned sharply left is simply delusional. It is the sort of multinational conglomerate that benefits most from rightist politics and policies. What’s more, it’s the sort of patriotic institution that O’Reilly would ordinarily praise for supplying our soldiers with arms and equipment. All it takes for O’Reilly to turn on them is a cable network pundit mockingly calling him the “Worst Person in the World.”

Now, let’s take a look at the stock performance of News Corp, the parent of O’Reilly’s employer, Fox News. It has suffered an almost identical percentage decline from about $25 dollars a share to around $7. By O’Reilly’s own standard it is a miracle that Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes still have their jobs.

Next O’Reilly seeks to explain why America voted for Barack Obama and Democrats in congress. Essentially he boils it down to the economy, but hastens to add that the country is actually more conservative, the election results notwithstanding:

“Despite the power shift in Washington, America remains a traditional country that largely rejects big government and radical social change. The former hippies running the crazy left media will never get that.”

So the people didn’t really vote for change. It was just some sort of mass hysteria brought on by the reefer madness emanating from “Abbie Hoffman wannabes” in the press. O’Reilly’s Talking Points Memo last night went even further, asserting that the far-left media advocates a socialist economy and is filled with hate:

“And the hate the far-left media traffics in has alienated many folks. I mean, the disrespect shown to President Bush is disgraceful, and most decent people know it.”

Apparently O’Reilly doesn’t read Foxnews.com – or News Corpse. Yesterday I documented some repulsive comments on the Fox web site that called Obama the anti-Christ and wished for his family to be burned alive. O’Reilly doesn’t seem to care about that disgraceful show of disrespect. And he has no claim to decency when he himself has said that law-abiding citizens exercising their First Amendment rights are worse than Nazis and the KKK.

All of this suggests that O’Reilly is desperately afraid. Why else would he feel the need to repeatedly fluff himself and his ratings? Why else would he need to maliciously attack the lurking enemies he imagines around every corner? Why would he find it necessary to construct false and misleading arguments against those shadows that torment him? It is fear that has consumed him and is now his most profound motivation. It’s a fear that has clouded a mind that wasn’t all that sharp to begin with. And now that mind is MIA.

The truly sad epilogue to this story is that he is not alone. It seems that the entirety of the Republican establishment media has decided on a strategy of shock and awe aimed at the new administration. There has been a concerted and coordinated effort launched before the echos of the inauguration speech have faded from the Capitol Mall. It’s purpose is to discredit and diminish Obama and his team prior to their having even done anything. As usual, Jon Stewart of the Daily Show has encapsulated this development perfectly.