More Hypocrisy By Fox Nation: Flag Desecration

The Fox Nationalists are appalled at what they are calling flag desecration by the protesters on Wall Street:

Fox Nation

There is no information or context in the photo above that reveals anything about the incident and, therefore, it is impossible to ascribe motive or responsibility. It could be a reporter, or an opponent of the protesters, or a kid looking for a place to sit down. It could be that in the crowded park there is simply no place to walk and that someone might not have even seen the flag as they were trying to get from one place to another. However, here is another photo where it is unmistakable what is taking place and by whom:

Bush Flag Desecration

Fox was never the least bit disturbed by this overt disrespect for the flag by a sitting president. What’s more, at the link above Bush can also be seen signing a flag, which is also regarded as desecration. Sarah Palin has done that as well at her rallies.

The real desecration here is that done to journalism by an overtly dishonest “news” enterprise whose only purpose is to deceive and divide the American people. The folks at Fox must be so proud of their success in that endeavor.

Fox News Gives Bush Credit For . . . Everything

A few days ago President Obama announced to the nation that Osama Bin Laden had been killed in a raid on his compound in Pakistan. Rather than congratulating the administration for having achieved a goal that had evaded the previous administration for seven years, the GOP went on the attack accusing Obama of everything from conducting the mission for political gain to making up the whole thing. Some critics even alleged that Obama had opposed the mission and the military acted in defiance of his orders which, of course, would be a treasonous act punishable by death.

It’s clear that the President’s opponents are simply unwilling to grant him the slightest bit of praise no matter what he does. They are there only to viciously attack him. These are the same people who ridiculed America’s leader being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and who celebrated when the U.S. was not awarded the prestige and economic benefit of the Olympic Games. They take pleasure in seeing the country embarrassed or harmed so long as they can blame it on Obama.

Conversely, they have a severely abnormal obsession with assigning credit to George W. Bush for things he wasn’t remotely involved in. With regard to Bin Laden, Bush famously said that “I don’t know where Bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important.”

Nevertheless, the right is trying mightily to persuade their feeble-minded flock that it was Bush who brought Bin Laden to justice and that Obama was a mere bit player, or worse, an obstacle. This isn’t anything new. Here are a couple of examples of revisionist right-wingisms as envisioned by Fox News:


So while Bush and his cronies drove the nation into the worst economic decline in decades, Fox tried to credit Bush for the recovery that Obama presided over. And when Obama executed his policy to draw down our engagement in Iraq, Fox tried to give Bush credit for that as well. In short, if something bad happens it doesn’t matter how early in his term it is, Obama is the owner and the cause of it. If something good happens it wouldn’t matter if it were the last days of his second term, he is merely a lucky bystander.

This sort of cynical dishonesty would be bad enough if partaken by a partisan politician or pundit, but when it is presented by a so-called “news” organization as fair and balanced reporting it escalates to obscenity. It is proof that when Rush Limbaugh said that he hopes the President (and therefore the country) fails, he meant it, and many of his ideological comrades are feverishly hoping the same thing.

In Defense Of The Pre-9/11 Mindset: Reprise II

On September 11, 2006, I wrote an essay about how the American perception of its place in the world supposedly shifted after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. I reprinted it in 2008 because it seemed that so little had changed.

I am reprinting it again today because it addresses some recent occurrences that I could not have anticipated, but apparently did. Most notable the creation of Glenn Beck’s ludicrous 9/12 Project. It’s purpose, according to Beck, was to remind us all of how we felt on the day after the World Trade Center attack. He describes his recollection as one that was full of unity and hope. Was he still on drugs?

My recollection is below. Suffice it to say that it is infused with more fear, confusion, and disgust, at what just occurred. If Beck had named his project after 9/22 or 10/3, after we had some time to compose ourselves and shape a forward vision, it might have made more sense. But on 9/12 most Americans were shocked, trembling, and seeking answers. It is not a day to which they would want to return.

And so…my defense of the Pre-9/11 mindset:

In September of 2004, Vice President Dick Cheney, in a sinister demonization of Democrats, warned that…

“if we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we’ll get hit again, and we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States, and it will fall back into the pre-9/11 mindset, if you will, that in fact, these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts and that we’re not really at war.”

The Pre-9/11 Mindset is much maligned as mindsets go. Disdain is heaped upon it as if it were a discarded hypothesis. There is now a stigma associated with a worldview that was perfectly acceptable 24 hours prior. And a cadre of power hungry fear merchants is restlessly hawking the notion that everything we thought we knew has withered into irrelevance. The Post-9/11ers propose that an imaginary line has been drawn that illuminates the moral and intellectual differences between those who stand on one side or the other. So what exactly does it mean to be 9/10ish?

I remember clearly what was on my mind. I was still upset that a pretend cowboy, whose intellectual marbles rattled around vacantly in his 2 gallon hat, had gotten away with stealing an election. I was recalling, with renewed appreciation, an era of domestic surplus and international cooperation. Or as The Onion headline put it when Bush was first elected, “Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over.”

9/11 was undoubtedly an unwelcome milestone in American history. But the idea that everything changed on that day is shallow and puerile. The history of human civilization reveals that we simply do not change that much from one century to the next. And the events that actually do precipitate change are rarely the ones we presume them to be. There was terrorism before 9/11. There were birthdays and funerals and parking tickets and snow cones and life’s everyday extraordinary spectrum of pleasure no matter how painful.

What changed was that a nation that was once perceived to be inviolable and courageous was now seen as vulnerable and afraid. Like a child lost in a crowd, America was searching for a guardian, but what we got was no angel. As President Bush took to the mound of rubble for his megaphone moment, he was not alone. He was accompanied by a media that sought to construct a hero where none stood. I must admit that it was an ambitious undertaking considering the weakness of the raw material. They took an inarticulate, persistently mediocre, dynastic runt, who on September tenth was considered by many to be Crawford’s lost idiot, and transformed him into a statesman overnight. The enormity of this achievement underscores the power of the media.

My Pre-9/11 Mindset was thrust into fear on that transitory day because I knew that the imbecile we were stuck with in the White House was incapable of reacting appropriately to the threat. I remember vainly trying to persuade previously reasonable people that if they thought Bush was a moron the day before, there was nothing in his breakfast that infused him with wisdom on that sad morning.

What transpired since has, regrettably, proven me right. We toppled the Taliban but let the 9/11 commander escape. Now the remnants of the Taliban are rising again and creating havoc in an unprepared and unstable Afghanistan. We were misled into an unrelated conflagration in Iraq via fear and deception. Now tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have been liberated – liberated from the confines of their physical bodies. It’s too bad that these liberated corpses will be unable to march in the parades celebrating their liberation. A world that had nothing but sympathy for us after 9/11, is now repulsed by our arrogance. At home we are paying for our adventures by burdening the next few generations with a record debt. And we pay a much greater price in the cost of lost liberties, courtesy of a despotic cabal in Washington that has more trust in fear than it does in our Constitution.

The historical revisionists that cast the Pre-9/11 Mindset as a pejorative are blind to its inherent virtue. The Pre-9/11 Mindset honors civil liberties and human rights. It recognizes real threats and inspires the courage to face them. It demands responsibility and accountability from those who manage our public affairs. It condemns preemptive warfare and torture. The Pre-9/11 Mindset is not consumed with fear, division, and domination. It is rooted in reality with its branches facing the sunrise.

The Pre-9/11 Mindset is superior in every aspect to the Post-9/11 apocalyptic nightmare that has been thrust upon us. Its adoption is, in fact, our best hope for crawling out from under the shroud that drapes our national psyche. Vice President Cheney also said that…

“Terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength. They are invited by the perception of weakness.”

If that’s true, then the terrorists must have perceived the weakness of the Bush administration and considered it an invitation to launch their attack. How do you suppose they perceive us now? They’ve seen the passage of the Patriot Act that limits long-held freedoms. They’ve seen our government listening in on our phone calls and monitoring our financial transactions. They see us lining up at airport terminals shoeless and forced to surrender our shampoo and Evian water. They see us mourning the loss of our sons and daughters who are not even engaged in battle with the 9/11 perpetrators. They see us as fearful and submissive. Is this not emboldening the terrorists for whom this perception of weakness will be seen as yet another invitation to attack?

Yes, I have a Pre-9/11 Mindset and it is not a yearning for a simpler bygone era of harmony. You could hardly call the maiden year of this century simple or harmonious. I have a Pre-9/11 Mindset because I’ve had it all along; all through the Post-9/11 defeatism and scare-mongering; through the war posturing and false bravado; through the sordid attempts to divide Americans and vilify dissenters; through the bigotry and arrogance of those who believe that their way is the right way and the world will concur as soon as we’re done beating it into them. I have a Pre-9/11 Mindset because I have not let the Post-9/11 Mindset infect my spirit with its yearning for a bygone era that more closely resembles the Dark Ages than the Renaissance.

Pre-9/11 Mindset Post-9/11 Mindset
Enduring Peace Perpetual War
Prosperity Poverty and Debt
Civil Rights The Patriot Act
Human rights Torture
Accountability Corruption
Reality Fear

I have a Pre-9/11 Mindset because I have a mind, and I use it.

Nine years later there is still a scar on our nation – both literally in the form of a vacant lot where the World Trade Center towers used to stand, and figuratively in the still smoldering biases of those who seek to divide.

The sad fact that there is a deranged preacher in Florida who can command the attention of the media and the government with an idiotic prank involving burning Qur’ans ought to make us think long and hard about whether those institutions are serving us. And the protracted debate over whether a non-mosque can be built two blocks from ground zero is just another reminder of how deeply some of our citizens are consumed by prejudice and hate. Not to mention how little regard they have for our traditional values and our Constitution.

Nine years later there is still a scar on our nation. And we still have a long way to go.

Blaming Bush For The Economy Is About The Future

Republicans, and their PR agency Fox News, are infuriated that President Obama and other Democrats continue to lay the blame for the economy on the shoulders of former President Bush. Their apoplexy centers on the notion that at some point Obama must assume some responsibility for the current state of affairs.

That would be a fair argument if sufficient time had elapsed to make a judgment about Obama’s economic policies. Most economists agree that a recovery from the sort of economic collapse that this nation just suffered takes several years to accomplish. It has only been a year and half. And even in that short time there have been notable achievements, including stemming the rate of job loss and injecting billions of dollars of stimulus funds into the economy.

But that isn’t what’s ultimately wrong with the complaints by Republicans. Blaming Bush for the economy isn’t a function of looking backward. First of all, Obama’s criticism has not been directed at Bush personally, but at his policies.

Obama: The policies that crashed the economy, that undercut the middle class, that mortgaged our future, do we really want to go back to that, or do we keep moving our country forward?

It seems inconceivable that anyone could defend the Bush plan knowing what we know today. Yet Republicans in the House and Senate are offering nothing new in the way of solutions. In fact, the only initiative they will articulate out loud is to preserve the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy that are about to expire.

Republicans are so adamant about carrying water for the rich that they appear to be willing to allow taxes to rise for the 98% of Americans who are not so privileged. What’s more, they also appear to be ready to abandon their concern for deficits since the tax cuts for the wealthy will balloon the deficit by more than $700 billion.

It is not surprising that Republicans should defend themselves and their former leaders. But the media should not be carrying their banner. The criticism of Obama for “bashing” Bush is thoroughly misplaced. If Republicans were offering a new set of solutions that deserved consideration, then they should be accommodated. But if all they are offering are the same ideas that came from the Bush administration, then the debate ought to be over. We already know what that would accomplish.

Therein lies the fallacy of the “blame Bush” complaint. Obama is not reaching backwards to assign responsibility for current conditions to the past president. He is forecasting the future consequences of repeating those mistakes. It is the Republicans who are bringing the Bush era back to the table by proposing nothing but what the Bush administration did. So the Obama administration has no choice but to rebut those proposals. That is not an attack on Bush. It is an attack on the current crop of Republicans who are parroting Bush.

Note to the media: While Obama has every right to remind the nation that the Bush policies got us where we are, that isn’t what he is focused on today. He is merely responding to Congressional Republicans who are advocating the failed Bush policies of the past. It is the Republicans who are reaching back to define a course for the future. Obama is looking forward to chart a course that avoids past mistakes and learns from them.

Fox News Fires Up Vacation-Gate

Here’s the headline from Fox News:

“Seizing on Good Week, Obama Takes Another Vacation Despite GOP Criticisms”

Another vacation? For anyone keeping track, Obama has taken about 65 vacation days since assuming office. By this point in his first term George W. Bush had taken twice as much time off (120 days). And that was in the midst of our nation still responding to 9/11.

The story Fox News ran was attributed to their own Wendell Goler and the Associated Press. Goler lifted most of the details from the AP, including the Obamas’ bike rides and stops for ice cream. However, he neglected to include the information on Bush’s vacations, which was in the AP’s article. That’s a pretty egregious failure to provide relevant context for a column whose title was so deliberately biased.

This omission cannot be explained away as an editorial decision to focus on Obama and leave former presidents out of it, because Goler did include Bush in the article by way of interviewing his former deputy press secretary, Scott Stanzel. Stanzel’s contribution to the story was to criticize Obama for taking his vacation in Maine rather than in Gulf Coast (where Obama has already been at least four times). Stanzel further defended Bush’s many excursions to Crawford, Texas, as being appropriate because he still got work done there. Although there was no similar defense of Obama who, like all presidents, is working 24/7.

Bush and McCain Eating CakeGoler also went out of his way to lie about one occasion when Bush was vacationing in Crawford and a hurricane happened to nearly destroy New Orleans. Goler said that Bush cut his vacation short, but the truth is that he extended it to play guitar with a country singer and to visit John McCain in Phoenix to celebrate his birthday.

You don’t get many better examples of deliberate bias than this. Goler based his reporting on an article from the AP that was actually pretty fair and balanced. But for Fox News it had to be altered to eliminate any context that might reflect favorably on Obama, while adding fiction that whitewashed Bush’s failures.

More proof that Fox News is the enemy of fairness and the defiler of balance.

Dana Perino And Fox News On Repressive Regimes And Propaganda

Idiot FoxEd Brayton at Science Blogs has caught a classic example of hypocrisy from a member of the class that made an art of it: the Bush administration.

Former Bush press secretary Dana Perino was on Fox News this weekend and commented on a video produced for the White House web site. She was appalled that the administration would post videos in support of its own agenda and implied that it represented some kind of affront to a free press and democracy:

[T]he White House decided through its own media — they have a robust new media shop and they’re creating their own news and they’re posting it, and all the networks said that they’re not going to show it. But creating your own news is something that happens in repressive regimes. And a democracy is — it is critical to have a good, strong free press in a democracy.

Let’s dissect the idiocy of this comment. First of all, you cannot accuse the White House of “creating your own news” in the sentence following your observation that “all the networks said that they’re not going to show it.” If no news network is showing it then it is simply an informational video available only to visitors to the White House web site.

Secondly, if anything, this affirms the strong free press Perino is lamenting. Obviously they are making up their own minds with regard to what they consider news. If they they don’t want to broadcast the President’s video, they don’t have to. And according to Perino, they aren’t.

But most importantly, Perino has deliberately withheld her own complicity with assaults on the free press as a member of Bush’s press team. It was the Bush administration that repeatedly packaged phony news reports that they distributed to television stations with the intent that they be broadcast in whole. These pseudo-news reels were produced with a fake “anchor” and were aired by many stations without disclosing that they came from the Bush propaganda studio.

Under the Bush administration, the federal government has aggressively used a well-established tool of public relations: the prepackaged, ready-to-serve news report that major corporations have long distributed to TV stations to pitch everything from headache remedies to auto insurance. In all, at least 20 federal agencies, including the Defense Department and the Census Bureau, have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years, records and interviews show. Many were subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government’s role in their production.

This sort of deception was routine in the Bush years. They were also caught paying Armstrong Williams under the table to write glowing reviews about their education policy, “No Child Left Behind.” The Bush Pentagon was entangled in a scandal wherein they paid editors of Iraqi newspapers to publish articles secretly written by American soldiers praising the war effort and the occupation of Iraq. And let’s not forget Jeff Gannon, the right-wing mole who was planted in the White House Press Corps under Bush. Or the irrepressibly corrupt Kenneth Tomlinson, who chaired the Broadcasting Board of Governors which oversees the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

SpinComThen there was what may be the worst episode of propaganda aimed directly at Americans in our nation’s history: SPINCOM. This was a program run out of Bush’s Pentagon that served up former generals to news networks as military analysts. They were trained by the Pentagon to promote the administration’s agenda and were rewarded with access and contracts for the defense companies they represented. And none of this was disclosed to viewers, or even to the networks.

The abuse of an independent and unfettered press under Perino and her bosses was unparalleled. For her to criticize the current administration for posting some videos online, while ignoring her own participation in a full-blown propaganda operation, specifically targeting the media and the American people, is the pinnacle of hypocrisy and dishonesty. Add to that the fact that she made these assertions as an employee of Fox News and it is at least evidence of the following: She and Fox are bona fide experts on repressive regimes and propaganda.

How About An Apology Mr. Rove?

Karl Rove, the former Deputy Chief of Staff, and Chief Political Adviser to President George W. Bush, has a new book coming out. “Courage and Consequence: My Life as a Conservative in the Fight,” is a memoir by the former White House aide and current Fox News contributor. The New York Times has an advance copy of the book and has published some interesting excerpts.

Chief amongst the revelations is that Rove acknowledges that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction severely damaged Bush’s presidency. He blames himself for not sufficiently countering the bad publicity generated by having started an illegitimate and illegal war. Specifically addressing the decision to invade Iraq Rove writes…

“Would the Iraq War have occurred without W.M.D.? I doubt it. Congress was very unlikely to have supported the use-of-force resolution without the W.M.D. threat. The Bush administration itself would probably have sought other ways to constrain Saddam, bring about regime change, and deal with Iraq’s horrendous human rights violations.”

Oh great! So tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of innocent Iraqis – not combatants or terrorists, but civilian men, women and children – are dead because of this brutal and unjustified assault, and the only thing for which Rove takes responsibility is a weak response to shore up Bush’s image in the press.

Rove admits that the Congressional authorization for war would not have been approved without W.M.D.’s. That certainly raises the likelihood that an administration determined to embark on this strategy would provide the Congress with what they wanted, whether or not it was true. And the administration’s determination has been well documented, even to the point of trying to pin 9/11 on Saddam Hussein two years before the Iraq war began.

Rove also admits that the administration could have developed “other ways to constrain” the Iraqi regime. So the oft-repeated insistence that war was the last resort is and was a lie. By conceding that alternatives were available, Rove makes it clear that the military solution was the only one to which they gave serious consideration.

And for all of the human costs, including more than 4,000 Americans, Rove is only sorry for not having conducted a better PR campaign. He does not apologize for the loss of life. He does not apologize for depleting our nation’s treasury. He does not apologize for soiling our reputation internationally. The only reputation he is concerned with his his own. And the thousands of grieving American families don’t enter into his consciousness – not to mention the many thousands more in Iraq.

If that isn’t enough, in another excerpt from the book Rove expresses his regret for the ill-advised fly-over of New Orleans after Katrina. Once again, his concern is for the unflattering appearance of his actions, not for the suffering of the people on the ground. His appalling egocentrism is displayed in utmost clarity when he reveals that, not withstanding the horrors of 9/11, Iraq, and Katrina, the thing that drove him to tears was when he learned that he would not be indicted by the special prosecutor in the Valerie Plame leak case.

What a despicable waste of flesh. And this is the man presently employed by Rupert Murdoch to provide insight into the public affairs of our government and social institutions. The question I have is how would Rove know anything about the human interest stories he is being asked to comment on? Wouldn’t being human be a requirement for such a job?

Greetings from The War On Christmas

Just when you thought hostilities were subsiding, Fox Nation is escalating the War on Christmas. Their new volley of seasonal aggression kicks off with insinuations questioning President Obama’s sincerity with regard to his faith:

Fox Nation Obama Christmas

So the Obama’s cards don’t mention Christmas. Well, that must mean they are secret Muslim after all. Except for…..Uh oh…..

Click to enlarge:

These are the “Holiday” cards sent out by George and Laura Bush in 2006, 2007, and 2008. None of them mention Christmas either. I wonder what religion the Bush’s belonged to secretly. I’m going to guess it’s the Snake Handlers. That would explain how they could work so closely with people like Cheney and Rove.

Bush Justice Department Harrassed Indymedia

CBS News is reporting that the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day. U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis, issued subpoenas to Indymedia.us demanding information that included e-mail and IP addresses, Social Security numbers, bank account numbers, etc. There was also a demand that Indymedia not disclose to anyone that they had received the subpoenas.

This was an unprecedented affront to both freedom of the press and the right to privacy for citizens who happened to visit a particular web site. Indymedia sought advice from the Electronic Frontier Foundation who succeeded in getting the subpoenas withdrawn. However, many questions remain. There was never any disclosure as to the criminal case that was being investigated by Justice Department. The subpoenas themselves were improper, as was the gag order, but no one in the Justice Department is commenting on that.

An amusing side note to this is that rightist media groups are framing this as an abuse of power by the Obama administration. Although this is just now coming to light, they fail to note that the investigation began during the Bush administration, months before the election in 2008. The date specified in the subpoena for the information they were seeking was June 25, 2008. The subpoena itself was issued on January 22, 2009, just two days after Obama was inaugurated. Obviously the investigation had to precede the issuance of subpoenas.

As further evidence of Obama’s culpability, it was noted that subpoenas to the media have to be approved by the Attorney General. The right-wing leaped on this factoid to accuse Obama’s AG, Eric Holder, of complicity in this outrageous act. Unfortunately for that theory, Holder was not confirmed to the position until February 2, 2009, after the subpoenas had already been sent.

So the whole affair was conducted by the Bush Department of Justice, with a Bush-appointed U.S. Attorney (Morrison), and an acting AG who was also left over from Bush’s administration. This is typical of the Bush regime’s disrespect for freedom of the press. And the response from the right is typical of their embrace of disinformation and propaganda.

Behavior like this by officials in law enforcement is unconscionable, and should not be tolerated by any administration. It appears that the Obama administration did the right thing when it was brought to their attention by withdrawing the subpoenas, but they need to go further and reveal the nature of the investigation that led to this action, and the role of Bush officials in the affair. And it would also be nice if they would make a statement disapproving of such behavior and declaring it outside the policy of this administration.

Desecrating The American Flag

Much of the right-wing blog and cable crowd is aghast at what they regard as the disrespect accorded to the American flag by a video in an online contest for health care reform ads. The contest is sponsored by the Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America.

I happen to think that’s a pretty fine video. It makes its point in a creative and compelling way. There is nothing derogatory directed at the flag because there is, in fact, no flag. It’s a painting. And the commentary affixed to it tells a story about our nation and what we can achieve.

Nevertheless, the hypersensitive panic attackers on the right are having conniptions. Sean Hannity and Michele Malkin tried desperately to twist this into a scandal. Fox Business News anchor, Jenna Lee, hosted a debate that featured Armstrong Williams calling it obscene. Gretchen Carlson and the Fox & Friends crew commiserated about what Carlson said was a movement to make the flag offensive. Bill O’Reilly wasn’t all that disturbed until his guest, Laura Ingraham got him riled up. Ingraham even talked hypothetically about how disrespectful it would be if someone were to walk on a flag.

That’s funny, she never had that problem when George W. Bush actually did walk on a flag. It goes without saying that stepping on a flag is disrespectful, and letting it touch the ground is officially regarded as desecration. So is placing any mark, insignia, letter, word, etc., on it. But that didn’t stop Bush from signing a flag.

These hypocritical pseudo-patriots just don’t know the difference between art and actual desecration. They are obsessed with exploiting non-events to promote their own twisted view of patriotism. More than anything else, they want to manufacture controversies that harm the President, Democrats or liberals in general. Fortunately, this is precisely the sort of fanatical ranting that is driving reasonable Americans farther from the Republican Party and its PR arm, Fox News.