Why Does Andrew Breitbart Support Child Molesters?

Posted by on March 24, 2010 at 5:55 pm. 17 Comments :

The terminally choleric Andrew Breitbart (or Boogerman as he’d prefer to be known) is featuring a story on his BigGovernment web site that illustrates a disturbing affinity for child sexual abusers.

The article is authored by Jason Mattera, who appears to be auditioning to be Bill O’Reilly’s next ambush geek. If so, he has some pretty big clown shoes to fill: Stuttering Jesse Watters and Griff Teabaggin Jenkins. But Mattera is off to a good start with a video of him pestering Rep. Alan Grayson. The video is titled: “Why would Alan Grayson want to give your money over to Native American child molesters?”

In the video Mattera is shown slyly gaining Grayson’s trust by talking about his Brooklyn upbringing. But it doesn’t take long before he reveals his psycho side – and Grayson picks it up immediately asking, in an understatement, if Mattera is a kook. But Mattera presses on undaunted in his attempt to tie Grayson to a government program that Mattera says gives money to child molesters. The source for Mattera’s allegation is this language in the recently passed health care bill that addresses…

“(2) perpetrators of child sexual abuse who are Indian or members of an Indian household.”

What Mattera leaves out is that the bill does not give any money to abusers. It funds treatment programs to prevent future incidents of abuse. In the section of the bill immediately following the one Mattera cites it explicitly describes the use of funds, including:

(5) To identify and provide behavioral health treatment to Indian perpetrators and perpetrators who are members of an Indian household–

(A) making efforts to begin offender and behavioral health treatment while the perpetrator is incarcerated or at the earliest possible date if the perpetrator is not incarcerated;
‘(B) providing treatment after the perpetrator is released, until it is determined that the perpetrator is not a threat to children.

So apparently Mattera and Breitbart are opposed to protecting children from child molesters. They are openly advocating a position wherein criminal deviants would be permitted to maintain their perversions and pose a continuing threat to kids. Perhaps Breitbart and company don’t want such treatment mandated because they might find themselves at risk of being obligated to participate in such treatment. I don’t know, I’m just asking. But it is undeniable that Breitbart is more interested in the rights of child molesters than in the child victims.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox Nation Scare Tactics: Armed IRS Agents To Enforce Obamacare

Posted by on March 23, 2010 at 3:53 pm. 16 Comments :

Fox Nation IRS ArmyIn a fit of psychotic bluster, the folks at Fox Nation have posted an article with a headline that was manufactured from whole cloth. There is nothing in their reporting, or the column to which they linked, that remotely implied the message in this headline:

“IRS Hiring Thousands of Armed Tax Agents to Enforce Obamacare.”

The source for the Fox Nationalists is a column in Tucker Carlson’s right-wing Daily Caller. You might expect that Fox could rely on Carlson to support their hallucinatory journalism. After all, Carlson is a Fox News employee. But the article in the Caller, while misleading on it’s own, doesn’t go anywhere near the Fox misinterpretation.

The Caller’s headline was somewhat less dishonest: “IRS looking to hire thousands of tax agents to enforce health care laws.” It does not make a declaration of fact that agents are actually being hired, only that the IRS is looking into it. But more importantly, there is no mention of these agents being armed. In all likelihood, any new hires are going to be accountants with calculators, not mercenaries with machine guns. That, however, didn’t stop the Caller from posting an accompanying photo of heavily armed soldiers in combat gear who have nothing whatsoever to do with the story. And, of course, Fox Nation re-posted the same photo.

The Caller’s article is filled with falsehoods. Anyone who actually bothers to read the article will notice that there is no substantiation of its claim that Democrats are working with the IRS to hire new agents. The only confirmation comes from Republicans supplying their own speculation as to staffing requirements.

It is fair to assume that expanding efforts to collect revenue would require additional personnel. However, the article notes that the new hiring is aimed at collecting taxes unrelated to the health care bill. So are Republicans and the Fox Nationalists taking the position that tax cheats should not be pursued or held accountable? Should law abiding Americans have to shoulder the burden for these deadbeats? Yes, that’s exactly their position. Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee even issued a report that criticized the administration for proposing $8 billion to fund tax compliance measures. It seems to me that an $8 billion allocation to recover an estimated $300 billion in delinquent taxes is a pretty good return on investment and an effective way to reduce budget deficits.

The content of the article in the Caller is misleading in many respects, but the Fox Nation version is delusional. It states flatly that the IRS is hiring “armed” tax agents. It states flatly that these new agents will be dispatched to “enforce Obamacare.” Neither of those statements are substantiated and they aren’t even in the linked article. Yet the Fox Nationalists post the photo of soldiers in combat attire, weapons at the ready, deployed in a search and destroy posture.

The obvious intent of Fox is to frighten their congregation of Psycho-chicken Littles into believing that the “revenuers” are advancing on them to take their money and send them to FEMA camps where they will be forced to have abortions and marry gay socialists.

After struggling for fourteen months to derail the President’s agenda, and failing, Fox is upping the ante. They want people to be so afraid that they will fortify their bunkers, stockpile weapons, hoard rations, buy gold (brought to you by Glenn Beck), and prepare for Armageddon. And the way they advance that goal is by disseminating lies like this story from the scare-meisters at Fox Nation.

Boob BombsUpdate: Fox News continues to pour on the fear mongering. They are now reprising a story originally posted at Fox Nation almost two months: Boob Bombs! Terrorists Could Use Explosives in Breast Implants to Crash Planes.

Back in February the story was sourced to the ultra-wingnut WorldNetDaily web site. This time Fox is sourcing it to The Sun, Rupert Murdoch’s UK tabloid, but, hilariously, the article quotes “terrorist expert Joseph Farah.” In fact, Farah is no terrorist expert, he is the publisher of WorldNetDaily. The propaganda comes full circle.

It seems that they are just going to repeat this story every few months until either people are sufficiently terrified of titties, or until Al Qaeda decides to give it a try. I maintain my position that this could have a devastating impact on air travel. As I said in February:

We would need to start including Scarlett Johansson in our profiling criteria. And because the same explosive devices could be inserted in the buttocks, Jennifer Lopez would have to be added to the no-fly list.

Update II: All of this is reminiscent of the hysteria Glenn Beck tried to trump up over what he said was a civilian national security force that Obama was supposedly amassing to assault him and his congregation. As it turns out it was just an initiative to expand the peace corps and similar organizations.

[Also…] FactChect.org debunked the claim of IRS hiring thousands of agents.

Stay scared America.


This Is A Big Fucking Deal?

Posted by on March 23, 2010 at 12:10 pm. 4 Comments :

President Obama signed the Senate health care bill into law this morning. While it is not the bill I would have written, it was still an historic moment that achieved something that 18 previous presidents failed to achieve.

But for much of the media, led by Fox News, the hot topic of the event was that VP Joe Biden whispered a congratulatory remark in the President’s ear:

“This is a big fucking deal.”

The President’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, reacted quickly to the growing hysteria in a tweet saying, “And yes Mr. Vice President, you’re right…” But this brewing scandal may yet overtake the frenzy surrounding the health care bill itself. I wonder if the President’s critics were just as incensed when then-VP Dick Cheney told Sen. Patrick Leahy to “Go fuck yourself.” right on the Senate floor?

And let’s not forget the time that Cheney pointed to a New York Times reporter at a campaign rally and whispered to George Bush “There’s Adam Clymer — major league asshole.” To which Bush responded, “Yeah, big time.”

My response to the media reaction to Biden’s remarks: This is a big fucking deal? Really?


Waterloo For Fox News?

Posted by on March 22, 2010 at 7:47 pm. 5 Comments :

Fourteen months. Fourteen long months of the most venal, histrionic, sensationalized, dishonest, and relentless crusade of disinformation, and what do they have to show for it?


[Purchase FreakShow stickers at Crass Commerce

Fox News has been the official campaign headquarters for opposition to health care reform. They dispatched their top personalities to headline rallies and protests. They consigned thousands of hours of valuable air time to anti-reform politicians and pundits. They converted their studios into Republican platforms for electioneering and fundraising. They adopted the Tea Party “movement” so thoroughly that they even rode along on its bus tours and branded its events as Fox enterprises.

And they lost.

Fox News is fond of reminding everyone of their ratings dominance. Although the cable news universe is comparatively tiny (Fox News has less than half the viewers of the lowest rated broadcast news program on CBS), Fox incessantly boasts that it is the leader in the space. But the fallout from the health care debate ought to demonstrate precisely how little that victory means in the macro world of politics. If the number one cable news network cannot sufficiently move public opinion to produce a legislative victory after fourteen months of persistent propaganda, it would be folly to regard them as if they were some formidable bastion of power or influence. Yet that is exactly how they are regarded by their patrons in the Republican Party (and many in the press).

Last July I wrote an article describing how “Fox News Is Killing The Republican Party”

Fox has corralled a stable of the most disreputable, unqualified, extremist, lunatics ever assembled, and is presenting them as experts, analysts, and leaders. These third-rate icons of idiocy are marketed by Fox like any other gag gift (i.e. pet rocks, plastic vomit, Sarah Palin, etc.). […]

By doubling down on crazy, Fox is driving the center of the Republican Party further down the rabid hole. They are reshaping the party into a more radicalized community of conspiracy nuts. So even as this helps Rupert Murdoch’s bottom line, it is making celebrities of political bottom-feeders. That can’t be good for the long-term prospects of the Republican Party. […]

This is a textbook example of how the extreme rises to the top. It is also fundamentally contrary to the interests of the Republican Party. The more the population at large associates Republican ideology with the agenda of Fox News, and the fringe operators residing there, the more the party will be perceived as out of touch, or even out of their minds.

See also: As Fox News Goes Up, The GOP Goes Down

Undoubtedly, Republicans will still embrace Fox News. They are not about to abandon the media megaphone that they believe is most in tune with their agenda. Consequently, they will continue to be hampered by the association with unhinged hyperbole like this:

Glenn Beck: This is the end of prosperity in America forever if this bill passes. This is the end of America as you know it.

Hannity: If we get nationalized health care, it’s over; this is socialism.

Neil Cavuto: National Healthcare: Breeding Ground For Terror?

In an inspired fit of illogic, Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard appeared on Fox News this morning to accuse Democrats of being partisan. His evidence was that 34 Democrats voted with Republicans against the health care care bill, but no Republicans voted with the Democrats in favor. Of course, that’s actually evidence that the Democrats were NOT partisan. They demonstrated some diversity in their views while Republicans all marched in lock-step against the bill. In further support of this inane argument, Hayes may have uttered the day’s funniest, and most truthful, commentary:

“If Bart Stupak was a Republican crazy he probably would’ve stuck with his original position.”

I couldn’t agree more. Sticking with his original position against the bill, would certainly have qualified Stupak as a Republican crazy. And it is generous of Hayes to admit that holding the Republican view is tantamount to being insane.

Where do you go after you’ve argued that Armageddon will be the result if your alarms are not heeded (as GOP chair Michael Steele did today) and your argument is rejected? Do you moderate your rhetoric and attempt to restore civility to the debate? Or do you accelerate into a frenzied panic and march a phalanx of livid lemmings over a cliff? My money is on the latter, so far as Fox News is concerned. They still consider it to be in their best interests to manufacture the sort of melodrama that captures television audiences.

Here it’s important to remember that the interests of a television network are worlds apart from those of a political party. So while Fox is happy to gin up the rancor in hopes of attracting more viewers stimulated by bloody conflicts, the GOP will only be further damaged by the partnership. However, unfortunately for them, they have nowhere else to go. Fox News, and a few other rightist authors and radio talkers, have become the de facto face of the Republican Party. This is a point made by conservative strategist David Frum in his discussion of health care winners and losers:

Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and they have very different imperatives from people in government.

Frum goes on to predict that the continuing, and escalating, hysteria will be a boon to right-wing media. I’m not sure that I agree with him on that point. Certainly the hardcore disciples of Beck and company will remain glued to their sets. But we might also see audiences recede out of frustration and/or fatigue. After pouring everything they had, including their sanity, into a winner-take-all death match and losing, it would surprise no one if a significant segment of the audience decided to take a vacation from the lunacy. If an effort as determined and prolonged as the one Fox just concluded could not prevail, then what would it take?

The good news from all of this is that, as abhorrent as Fox News is, it ought not to be viewed as a Goliath that will crush any opponent. They gave it their all and came up short. They huffed and they puffed, but the House stood strong (oh wait, that was a wolf). This is the clearest evidence yet that Rupert Murdoch’s empire is a paper Fox. However, that doesn’t mean that it should be neglected. It can still bark ferociously and the other members of the media pack continue to give Fox more credence than they deserve. And for these reasons we must remain vigilant and prepared to respond to the deceitful and unethical practices of this phony pseudo-news enterprise.

In the long term I continue to believe that an informed public will reject Fox’s brand of shallow and divisive disinformation. And looking back, the health care debate may one day be perceived as a turning point. It may be that this long, sordid affair will be the battle that turns the war for responsible journalism to favor reason and truth. It may be Fox News’ Waterloo.

[Update: 3/25/10] David Frum has been dismissed from his job at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. That’s what he gets for going rogue.


Jon Stewart: A Pawn Of The Insurance Lobby?

Posted by on March 19, 2010 at 5:38 pm. 4 Comments :

Last night on the Daily Show, Jon Stewart let down his guard and revealed that he is not the independent voice of reason that he would like everyone to believe. He is not the beacon of truth who slays the hypocrites and deceivers of the international media conspiracy. No, he is just another lackey of powerful corporate interests that want to take over your life. The shocking evidence of this followed a segment wherein he mocked Fox News’ CPO (Chief Paranoia Officer), Glenn Beck:

At the end of this innocuous (and hilarious) comedic skit, Stewart’s true colors were shown. As he announced that the program would be back after a commercial break, a graphic appeared on screen, accompanied by a voice-over, divulging that the Daily Show was brought to you by Progressive Insurance.

PROGRESSIVE Insurance? If you were not previously convinced of Stewart’s complicity in the clandestine plot to destroy America, well, you can no longer feign ignorance. This is an overt admission of his membership in a cabal that hates the principles that made this country great. It is a cabal that includes one-world government advocates and global industrialists like Warren Buffet and Rupert Murdoch. This covert coalition is so thoroughly ingrained in our culture that it brazenly plays both sides of the fence as it seduces and perverts our country, our neighbors, and even our children. If you think you are safe from this threat, think again. Even Glenn Beck has fallen into its web. Pay close attention to his own words:

Beck, 02/20/10: “Progressivism is the cancer in America and it is eating our Constitution. And it was designed to eat the Constitution.”

Do you hear that Jon Stewart? Progressivism was built from the ground up to be hungry for parchment made of – can you believe this? – HEMP! Progressivism just wants to get stoned by consuming the document that enumerates our great nation’s values as if it was a batch of Alice B. Stalin brownies. And after you’re shit-faced (that’s a medical term – look it up), the forces of evil are free to feed you any ludicrous notion that suits their whim, i.e. social justice:

Beck, 11/03/09: “Progressives think they know better than you and they want to control every aspect of your life. […] They like to call it “social justice” or fairness; I like to call it Marxism.”

And with that, Beck prevailed upon his disciples to abandon their corrupt churches for ministering to the poor. With regard to the progressive obsession for control, Stewart ridiculed this threat last night with obscene references to self-gratification. But this threat is all too real. Witness the remarks Beck made on the subject earlier this month:

Beck, 03/12/10: “So here is the deal, if you don’t have insurance and you need to take the government insurance, then the government has the right to regulate every aspect of your life.”

There you have it. When even Glenn Beck can declare publicly that the government has the right to rule over you like a slave master, then you know the risks are deadly serious. And notice how Beck wavers between a complaint that progressives want to regulate “every aspect of your life,” to an assertion that the government already has that right which he regards as entirely appropriate. This is all carefully designed to freak you out!

It is no accident that Jon Stewart is sponsored by Progressive Insurance. And it ought not to surprise you that Beck was once sponsored by GEICO (but they recently left him along with 100 other advertisers).

Note that GEICO, which is owned by billionaire and Illuminati lord Warren Buffet, was originally known as the “Government Employees Insurance Company.” That’s right! It was a state takeover of insurance by government union thugs. Today GEICO is supposedly engaged in fierce competition with Progressive. This may explain why Beck is so adamantly opposed to the Progressives who are sponsoring Stewart. Or maybe not. In the end they are all a part of the same congregation of villainy and much of the contentiousness may be staged to throw us off.

But whatever you do, don’t be mislead. They are coming after us. They are determined and relentless and, in addition to that, they just keep going and going (which reminds me, watch out for that cap and trade Energizer bill, and take your Avodart). And don’t let the veneer of comedy seduce you into submission. This is not about rodeo clowns and satirists. It is not about laughter and wackiness and goofballs who act like they’re crazy. Never forget these words from someone who knows what it means to be presumed to be nuts:

“I have been laughed to scorn as a prophet; for many a year my warnings and my prophecies were regarded as the illusions of a mind diseased […] I appear in the eyes of many bourgeois democrats as only a wild man.”
~ Glenn Beck Adolph Hitler, September 1936


A Disgusting New Low For Glenn Beck

Posted by on March 18, 2010 at 7:45 am. 8 Comments :

For someone who has called the President a racist, fantasized about choking Michael Moore to death, and described Hurricane Katrina victims as scumbags, it is hard to imagine how he could descend to even lower depths of depravity. But Glenn Beck, wouldn’t you know, would find a way to do it:

In this repulsive venture into psychoanalysis, Beck attempts to explain Barack Obama’s alleged radicalism. Of course, Beck has no training in psychology and no insight either. His lunatic ravings are not only entirely unconnected to Obama’s life and motivation, they are factually incorrect and utterly illogical. But then the mangling of facts and logic are Glenn Beck’s foremost qualities.

Beck starts out with an appeal to sympathy for poor Barack:

“Here’s the sad thing that I don’t think anybody will ever really say about Barack Obama, because it sounds mean and I don’t mean it to be mean. This is a truly sad, tragic story. But the only way to understand, first of all, all the people around him, his thinking. I don’t think he’s an evil man. I don’t think he’s trying to do evil things intentionally. He really does believe that Marxism is the way – is the answer. It is the future. He believes that.”

See? Beck doesn’t want to be mean. He doesn’t think Obama is evil on purpose. He just thinks that Obama is a Marxist. He still thinks that Obama is evil, but that it isn’t his fault. For months Beck has waxed idiotic about the supposed Marxists that are fluttering around the White House, but this is the first time that he has stated flatly that Obama is one of them. And Beck even has an explanation for why:

“From the moment he was born he had contact with socialists, communists, Marxists, radicals. His father abandoned him. Why? So he could go off to a Marxist school in New York. Then his father left the country to go try it out. How tragic. What kind of scar does that leave on a boy? Then his mother…I mean this is…you tell me. What scar is left when the mom leaves a son who’s been abandoned by his father for Marxism, leaves the son with his grandparents so she can pursue critical theory, which is Marxism. Both parents leave a boy for Marxism?”

Let’s set side aside the fact that Obama’s father left when he was two years old, hardly enough time to indoctrinate him in the ways of Marx, even for an exceptionally bright child like Barack. And set aside as well the fact that Obama’s father left to attend graduate school at Harvard, not some New York Marxist academy. And never mind the fact that Obama was left in his grandparents’ care because his mother was temporarily unable to care for him, not because her critical theory studies required her full attention. In short, set aside virtually everything Beck says.

Beck’s conclusion is that Obama was so traumatized by abandonment issues related to his parents’ absorption in Marxism that Obama, in retaliation, did what any child would under those circumstances — He became a Marxist. It makes perfect sense. What other choice did he have other than to adopt the philosophy of the thing that allegedly tore his family apart? It is a sad, tragic story, isn’t it?

Perhaps on tomorrow’s show Beck will tell his own sad, tragic story? The one where his mother abandoned him by killing herself. Obama’s mother went away for a while, but she came back and witnessed her son on an historic path to the presidency of the United States of America. For Beck’s mother only death was sufficient to separate her from her demon seed. What kind of scar does that leave on a boy? Well, in Beck’s case it left a scar that led to dropping out of school, to alcoholism, drug abuse, a failed marriage, a career as an AM radio shock jock, and fame as a hate-mongering conspiracy nut who contributes nothing to society but fear and division.

Contrast that with Obama who, while scarred, worked his way through school, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law, dedicated himself to helping the disenfranchised, taught law at the University of Chicago, entered public service and politics, and went all the way to the White House. So sad – so tragic.

For Glenn Beck to pretend that he can psychoanalyze anyone is truly sad. And that he gets it so very wrong is tragic. But it’s much worse than that. Beck is capitalizing on the misfortune of the President’s childhood and twisting it into some morbid fantasy that suits his political agenda. He is attacking Obama’s parents who are not alive to defend themselves. He is smearing the President with baseless accusations. And he is couching it all in a syrupy faux-sympathy that is just a facade to mask his overt and deranged hostility.

For someone whose history and family life is such a heinous disaster to plunge sanctimoniously into a dishonest judgment of the President’s psyche and family is reprehensible and is truly a disgusting new low for Glenn Beck. But on the plus side, it is not likely to be the last low that Beck will achieve. His capacity to nauseate seemingly has no lower boundary.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Does Honesty Still Mean Anything To Fox News?

Posted by on March 17, 2010 at 3:36 pm. 4 Comments :

Fox News executives and defenders have been adamant that whatever bias exists at Fox, it is clearly delineated as opinion and is separate from what they regard as their hard news reporting. Never mind that even Fox admits that the majority or their schedule is opinionated and observers notice that much of that opinion seeps into their straight “news.” Further evidence of this seepage was apparent this morning on the Fox News web site. The image posted here was today’s featured story.

What this demonstrates is that it is getting harder to recognize the difference between Fox News and the Fox Nation (or for that matter, the Republican Party and the tea bagging, birther, secessionist, militias). The editorial pages of Fox are becoming indistinguishable from what they assert is news content. And while this has been obvious for some time on the air, it is expanding precipitously online.

The story referenced here is one that Fox is busily misrepresenting. They are portraying self-executing rules in Congress as illegal, unconstitutional, “Slaughterhouse” rules. But knowledgeable analysts are aware that these rules have been used many times by both parties. Norm Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, had this to say on the subject:

“I can’t recall a level of feigned indignation nearly as great as what we are seeing now from congressional Republicans and their acolytes at the Wall Street Journal, and on blogs, talk radio, and cable news. It reached a ridiculous level of misinformation and disinformation over the use of reconciliation, and now threatens to top that level over the projected use of a self-executing rule by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the last Congress that Republicans controlled, from 2005 to 2006, Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier used the self-executing rule more than 35 times, and was no stranger to the concept of ‘deem and pass.'”

The key falsehood that Fox and their Republican patrons are peddling is that there will not be a vote on health care. The truth is that there have already been votes in both houses of Congress and the bill passed by significant majorities (in the Senate by a super-majority). And there is still a vote to be held to invoke amendments to the bill that includes the self-executing language. So any member of Congress voting “aye” on this is transparently voting in favor of the health care bill. It is not clandestine in any respect, and it is not an absence of a vote.

Nevertheless, Fox, Republicans, and conservative pundits, are castigating this routine procedure as nothing short of treasonous. Rep. Mike Pence (the #3 Republican in the House), called the rule unconstitutional, but when it was pointed out to him that he had previously voted for such a rule at least three times, he said “Yeah, sure.” So either he misspoke and the rule is constitutional, or he previously voted for a rule that he knew was not constitutional.

Conservative talk show host, Mark Levin, has threatened to take the matter to court to reverse any measure passed via this procedure. Would that mean that every bill passed in this way by Republicans would also be repealed?

Fox News legal analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano, made a nearly incoherent argument that the rule is unconstitutional but that the Supreme Court wouldn’t interfere with congressional discretion. This is a (former) judge who actually believes that the Supreme Court would let stand a law despite considering it to be a violation of the Constitution. That’s just plain nonsense. The court can issue rulings that are debatable, or even wrong, but they do not issue rulings that are contrary to what they believe.

Fox News, on the other hand, has no problem reporting things that they don’t believe. It is entirely implausible that the editors and reporters at Fox don’t know about the use of self-executing rules. Yet they misreport on them anyway. And now they even characterize them as being unconstitutional when they know that that isn’t the truth. And those false characterizations are posted on their news pages and are not differentiated as opinion. Which is why you have to wonder if honesty means anything to Fox News.


Glenn Beck Forgets To Expose His Latest White House Marxist

Posted by on March 16, 2010 at 4:11 pm. 3 Comments :

We can chalk this one down to another broken promise from Fox News’ star paranoid, Glenn Beck. On last Thursday’s program he teased his audience with news of yet another example of the cancer that was eating away our country from within:

Thursday, March 11, 2010: “And a programming note. There’s a new advisor to President Obama who fits nicely in this group. Oh, he loves Marx. I’ll introduce you to him on Monday because, see, it’s important that we know who these people are, and we know what the influences are. Otherwise we’ll be Doomed to Repeat.”

If it is so important that we know who these people are, then why did Beck break his promise to introduce us to this new White House Marxist yesterday. I even gave him the benefit of doubt and waited to see if the introduction would come today. Beck was busy defending his hatred of Jesus yesterday and exposes always come after self-interest. But there was no mention of this commie mole on today’s program either. The whole hour was just an infomercial for his upcoming American Revival tour. I can’t help wondering how much additional damage is being done by this traitor while Beck neglects to reveal his identity. I might have suspected that Beck was just trying to make sure people tuned in day after day, waiting the big scoop, but he hasn’t even spoken of it since Thursday.

The reference Beck made to being “Doomed to Repeat” was another sales pitch, this time for his “special” program this Friday. It seems that every show is now an infomercial. I’m sure Friday’s special is filled with information that is just as accurate as the title, which Beck misquoted from the famous counsel of George Santayana:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Well, you can’t expect Beck to get everything right when he’s under such pressure from religious leaders, and Fox News colleagues, and agent provocateurs inside our government, and the voices in his head. Perhaps it was those voices that distracted him from keeping his word to reveal the commie du jour.


Howard Kurtz Stumbles Into The Obvious On Glenn Beck

Posted by on March 15, 2010 at 1:17 pm. 3 Comments :

Nobody is going to mistake Howard Kurtz (CNN/Washington Post) for an insightful media analyst. His sycophantic and highly conflicted reporting barely qualifies as news on most days. And his latest column for the Post is no exception. However, it does hit on a couple of obvious truths that only Kurtz can think of as revelations:

Howard Kurtz: Beck has become a constant topic of conversation among Fox journalists, some of whom say they believe he uses distorted or inflammatory rhetoric that undermines their credibility.

Ya think?

HK: [Fox News VP Bill] Shine says that last fall a vice president was assigned “to help keep an eye on that program” and review its content in advance — a full-time job.

A full-time VP to keep an eye on Beck? I sure hope that guy had mental health insurance. Also, he didn’t do a very good job, judging by what made it to the air.

HK: Television analyst Andrew Tyndall calls Beck an “activist” and “comedian” whose incendiary style has created “a real crossroads for Fox News. […] They’re right on the cusp of losing their image as a news organization,” he declares.

What on earth would it take for Tyndall to regard them as over the cusp?

HK: When Fox covers breaking news during Beck’s hour, some journalists say, they are flooded with angry e-mail from viewers about the preemption.

And who could blame them? Beck’s viewers don’t want to be bothered with “news.” Even the sort that Fox pretends to deliver.

HK: Some staffers say they have watched rehearsals, on internal monitors, in which Beck has teared up or paused at the same moments as he later did during the show.

Because the secret of good comedy/propaganda is timing.

HK: Beck has caused such anguish at Fox that some of its journalists celebrated the failure of last week’s interview with embattled ex-congressman Eric Massa, which Beck pronounced a waste of time.

If those “journalists” want to celebrate whenever Beck’s program is a waste of time, they could celebrate every day.

Thanks Howie, for your always keen and penetrating outlook.

[Update: 3/17/10]: It appears Fox News CEO Roger Ailes was disturbed by Kurtz’ article. He hustled down to DC to dress down his staff for talking about “The Family.” In short he ordered them to shut up, fall in line, obey, or leave. And what ever they do, do not have an independent thought. That’s what the talking points are for.

Roger Ailes channels Michael Corleone:


Karl Rove Confesses: Most Of Fox News Is Unfair

Posted by on March 14, 2010 at 2:25 pm. 11 Comments :

Today on Meet the Press, Tom Brokaw (sitting in for David Gregory) interviewed Fox News contributor Karl Rove. In the course of the discussion Rove spewed the routine misrepresentations and falsehoods that one one might expect of him. But there was one exchange that was surprisingly honest:

TOM BROKAW: You’re now at Fox News. Do you think that Fox News is fair to President Obama?

KARL ROVE: I think they – on the news side, absolutely. I think that they’ve got first-rate individuals at the White House who – do their job. And in an objective, fair, and balanced way, yeah, absolutely.

Notice the qualification Rove inserts into his answer: “on the news side.” His assessment of fairness explicitly excludes those portions of the Fox schedule that are designated as opinion programs. Now recall that Michael Clemente, senior vice president of Fox News, defines the hours of 9am to 4pm, and 6pm to 8pm, as the dayparts that air straight news. So by their own calculation, that’s just nine hours of “news” programming. But the Fox & Friends morning block, plus the afternoon Cavuto/Beck double bill, plus the primetime fare (which is repeated) and the late night Red Eye, all add up to 13 hours. So the majority of their schedule is what they themselves regard as editorial content. Which means the majority of their schedule is deliberately unfair in the view of Karl Rove, who went out of his way to say so.

Taking into consideration the fact that what they do call “news” is heavily infested with opinions straight out of Beckville and Hannityland, it’s clear why Fox has zero credibility when it comes to authentic journalism. Former New York times editor Howell Raines noted this absence of objectivity in a recent op-ed. And Bill O’Reilly, never one to miss an opportunity to demonstrate the thinness of his skin, fired back back at Raines saying…

“The Factor is the signature broadcast of the Fox News Channel and we have covered the Obama-care debate carefully and with fairness, as have most of my colleagues.”

So O’Reilly is contradicting both Rove and Clemente. First he asserts that his show is fair (notwithstanding Rove’s contrary assessment). Then he describes it, not just as a “news” broadcast, but as the network’s “signature” example of one (despite not complying with Clemente’s definition).

In the end, O’Reilly’s ego confirms Rove’s confession. Fox News is utterly unfair throughout most of its broadcast day and its hired goons can’t tell the difference.