Did GOP/Fox News Plan Fort Hood Shooting To Distract From ObamaCare Success?

Posted by Mark NC on April 3, 2014 at 1:29 pm. 7 Comments :

As the March deadline for enrollment in the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) arrived, the White House proudly revealed that it had surpassed the goal of seven million enrollments set by the Congressional Budget Office. It was a target that many thought to be out of reach following the technical glitches that plagued the program’s Internet rollout. Under ordinary circumstances, such an achievement would have dominated the news for several days. The positive glow from having succeeded when most predicted failure could have permanently altered the public perception of ObamaCare which was already trending more positively in recent polls.

The very next day there was a horrific reprise of a deadly shooting at the Fort Hood army base in Texas that has sucked up every ounce of airtime across the television dial. Coincidence?

Of course it is. To be clear, there is absolutely no chance that either the Republican Party or Fox News had any part in orchestrating the Fort Hood shooting, despite the admittedly sensational headline of this article. This has been a demonstration of how Fox News would have responded if the news about ObamaCare was negative and some other news event pushed the bad news out of the spotlight. Fox would have objected strenuously to the media giving the President a pass rather than drooling over a potential White House flop.

This is not conjecture. It is precisely how Fox News has behaved in the past when they alleged that everything from the minimum wage to Syria to immigration reform were deliberate efforts to distract the public from the health care law when it appeared to be in trouble. It seemed like it would just be a matter of time before some rightist conspiracy nut (probably Glenn Beck) would come up with an alien baby for Sarah Palin as an excuse to avoid discussing ObamaCare.

You think this is bad? There’s more where that came from!
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.

The Fort Hood shooting is a tragedy that deserves the attention of the media. However, it is usually the case that the press will fetishize a story to boost ratings, rather than to objectively inform their audience. Consequently, the uplifting success of ObamaCare will get short shrift following the Fort Hood homicides. Also bumped from the news cycle is the previous press fixation on Malaysia’s flight MH370.

One of the more interesting tangents dangling from the ObamaCare story that is now likely to be ignored, is the utter failure of right-wing critics of the law to predict the eventual outcome. Notable among them is former Bush crony and current GOP Super-PACman, Karl Rove who, when asked about the seven million sign up figure, said with complete and delusional confidence that “There is no way they’re gonna get anywhere close. It just ain’t gonna happen.” And he was not alone in mistakenly predicting failure for ObamaCare long before the numbers were in:

Investor’s Business Daily: Obama Just Guaranteed ObamaCare’s Failure
Human Events: ObamaCare’s ultimate failure
New York Times: Obamacare, Failing Ahead of Schedule
Daily Caller: New enrollment numbers suggest Obamacare is hurtling toward failure
New Republic: Obamacare Failure is a Threat to Liberalism
CNN: Opinion: Obamacare and the failure of half-baked liberalism
Townhall: Obamacare Is Failing Because The Product Sucks
Newsmax: Coburn: Obamacare is ‘A Failure Already’
Fox News: Former Gov. Sununu: ObamaCare ‘a complete failure
Fox Nation: ObamaCare: A Failure in Progress

As usual, there is no accountability for the media when they are wrong. It simply doesn’t matter how often they screw up, they will continue to enjoy a platform for their pitiful prognostications. As a result, the press gets to rant for months about what an abject failure ObamaCare is, and when all of that is proven to be bovine excrement, they pretend they never said it and hurriedly adopt a new obsession. Either that or they double down on their lies with no push-back from their pals on Fox. Even still, GOP deceivers like Sen. John Barasso go on Fox News and, without any evidence, claim that the administration is “cooking the books.” And Fox News clown-in-residence Jesse Watters alleges that Obama was “straight-up lying” about the sign-ups.

The GOP and Fox News certainly did not plan the Fort Hood shooting, but they gladly exploit it for their own partisan self-interests. So don’t expect to hear any more about the seven million ObamaCare enrollments on Fox, unless it is to claim that the numbers are fake. Ultimately this will leave Fox viewers in the dark again when everyone but them knows the truth about ObamaCare and everything else that actually happens in this world.

The GOP Alienates Another Key Constituent Group: Seniors

Posted by Mark NC on July 1, 2013 at 8:36 pm. 7 Comments :

The Republican Party seems to be on a frantic mission to destroy their reputation with every constituency of voters in America, other than the Taliban wing of the Tea Party Christianists.

The GOP is currently engaged in nationwide battles to give government control over women’s bodies. They are exploiting every opportunity to suppress voting rights for African-Americans and other minorities. They oppose immigration reform that would eventually offer a path to legalized status for Latinos, some of whom have lived their whole lives in the United States. They obstructed the enactment of measures that would have prevented the interest rates for student loans from doubling. And, as always, they work feverishly to protect the wealthy from paying a fair tax rate, while allowing the rates to increase for those less fortunate.

So let’s see…who did they leave out? They got women, African-Americans, Latinos, youth, the poor and middle class. Who is left for Republicans to piss off?

Well, it should come as no surprise that the masterminds running the Republican machine noticed the crack in their strategic foundation and have promptly dedicated themselves to its repair.

That’s why Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader in the senate, jumped into action to attack Hillary Clinton, a prospective candidate for president in 2016, as an old hag, thus insulting the final demographic group that may still have had some affection for the GOP. McConnell uproariously joked…

“Don’t tell me Democrats are the party of the future when their presidential ticket for 2016 is shaping up to look like a rerun of the ‘Golden Girls.'”

Let’s just set aside the fact that “The Golden Girls” was a successful and popular sitcom that ran for seven years, with a cast of mature women who had active lives professionally, socially, and romantically. America’s seniors, who already have some cause to reject the Republican agenda that has sought to dismantle Social Security and cut funding for Medicare, can’t be too thrilled with being portrayed as useless fossils who should be consigned to history’s dustbin. Now they have been directly assaulted as has-beens, in the words of Karl Rove, who said of Clinton and her peers that “we’re at the end of her generation and that it’s time for another to step forward.”

For the record, Hillary Clinton is 65, Karl Rove is 62, and Mitch McConnell is 71. In January of 2017, when the next president is inaugurated, Clinton will be a year younger than Ronald Reagan was when his term began.

McConnell had better start paying more attention to what’s in his own Depends. He is approaching his thirtieth year in office and has one of the lowest favorability ratings of any sitting senator. He is up for reelection next year and his first announced opponent is the 34 year old Kentucky Secretary of State, Alison Lundergan Grimes. Not exactly what you would call a “Golden Girl,” unless you what you meant by golden was someone with a rich set of skills, experience and support.

It’s hard to understand what the Republican Party is up to by alienating so many voters. Perhaps their plan to is expand their efforts to define corporations and fetuses as persons and give them the right to vote. But if they have to depend on Teabaggers, End-Timers, and NRA-theists, they are likely to find themselves elected only in districts dug into underground bunkers with ham radio reception that only gets Glenn Beck and Pat Robertson.

FoxBlocked: What Becomes Of The Fox News Rejects?

Posted by Mark NC on December 5, 2012 at 12:07 pm. 3 Comments :

Yesterday the news broke that Karl Rove and Dick Morris were being designated pundit-non-grata, at least temporarily, by Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. Apparently even a rabidly biased cable network known as the PR division of the GOP can tire of analysts who rarely get anything right.

I feel for the poor Fox viewers who are now going to miss out on the monumentally idiotic assessments and predictions by this pair of hacks. With important policy debates on the “fiscal cliff,” new cabinet appointments, immigration, Syria, etc., on the agenda, Fox viewers will be deprived of the insights that have made them so stupefyingly ignorant so long.

But I also wonder what will become of Rove and Morris. Their colleague, Rick Santorum, has already been reduced to joining WorldNetDaily, (aka Birther Central) as a columnist. Neither Rove nor Morris has commented publicly on the curb-stomping they just suffered. But I can’t help but feel that the worst part of this humiliation is that while Ailes dismissed them, he kept Sarah Palin and Donald Trump. How do they console themselves knowing that their commentaries were deemed unsuitable going forward, but Palin’s word salad jumbles, and Trump’s ego-soaked dementia, will continue to get broadcast? OUCH!

No doubt Rove will find a way to self-finance his media presence with funds misappropriated from his Super PAC. And Morris is still posting his vodcasts on his own web site for the willfully dumb and the aficionados of toe-sucking. But somehow, it just won’t be the same without their access to the vast audience of glassy-eyed Fox disciples (which is actually only about 1% of the population). At least we’ll still have Palin and Trump, and Limbaugh and Nugent and Hannity and, maybe, if we’re really, really good, Fox will hire Allen West and give us all something to brighten our holiday.

Fox News Kicks Karl Rove And Dick Morris To The Curb, But What About…?

Posted by Mark NC on December 4, 2012 at 9:58 pm. 15 Comments :

New York Magazine is reporting that changes are afoot at Fox News following their pitifully inept coverage of the presidential campaign. Fox spent most of the year polishing the bubble within which their viewers, and even many of their favored candidates, resided. They were so averse to reality that they refused to report the results of polls that didn’t support their fantasy worldview, even when those polls were conducted by Fox News.

The anchors and other spokespersons for the channel worked overtime on behalf of Mitt Romney and the Republican Party. They were unambiguously biased, which led to some rather embarrassing analyses and predictions. Most notable among these gaffes were the relentlessly anti-Obama/pro-Romney observations of Karl Rove and Dick Morris. And surprisingly, there are consequences for being so reliably wrong. According to Gabriel Sherman at NYMag:

“[Fox News CEO Roger] Ailes has issued a new directive to his staff: He wants the faces associated with the election off the air — for now. For Karl Rove and Dick Morris — a pair of pundits perhaps most closely aligned with Fox’s anti-Obama campaign — Ailes’s orders mean new rules. Ailes’s deputy, Fox News programming chief Bill Shine, has sent out orders mandating that producers must get permission before booking Rove or Morris.”

Well, that’s the least they can do – literally. While benching Rove and Morris makes perfect sense considering how dreadful their service to the network was, it doesn’t begin to address the problems at Fox. Bill Shine confirmed that the memo was authentic and that its purpose was to convey the message that “the election’s over.” If so, why is Fox continuing to feature a roster lousy with players who were every bit as disastrous as Rove and Morris.

Sarah Palin is a fixture on the network despite her nonsensical fear mongering about the creeping socialism of Obama and the Democratic Party. Mike Huckebee retains his Fox program even though he was an unrepentant supporter of Todd “Legitimate Rape” Akin. Both were prolific fundraisers for a raft GOP candidates who mostly lost.

Then there is John Bolton, Laura Ingram, Tucker Carlson, Monica Crowley, Bill Kristol, Michelle Malkin, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino, Greg Gutfeld, the entire cast of Fox & Friends, and Fox’s own GOP Carnival Barker, Sean Hannity. How can Fox maintain seriously that they want to move on past the election when their schedule is littered with the same political hacks who played starring roles in the biggest flop of the season?

The answer is that they have no intention of moving on. The wrist-slapping of Rove and Morris will be short-lived and the familiar partisanship at Fox will continue unabated. If anything, the month that has transpired since election day already proves that Fox is still in campaign mode with their attacks on Susan Rice, their sensationalizing of the so-called “Fiscal Cliff,” and any number of other trumped up scandals.

Oh yeah, that reminds me. There has been no mention of their sidelining the Billionaire Birther, Donald Trump. So don’t expect to see much change at Fox, other than a bit of window dressing that will all come down when the weather clears.

Fox News Audience Abandons Ship After Obama Wins

Posted by Mark NC on November 8, 2012 at 12:17 pm. 17 Comments :

As further evidence of the tunnel-vision conservatism of Fox News, the Nielsen ratings for election night show just how intolerant their audience is of any information that is undesirable or contrary to their worldview.

As the broader television audience peaked into the evening, those watching CNN and MSNBC remained attentive to breaking news and analysis throughout the night. However, those watching Fox News switched off their media feeding tube shortly after the network declared that President Obama had been reelected.

This chart reveals the precipitous relative decline in viewers that occurred only on Fox News. Some folks may speculate that Fox’s audience simply got tired and went to bed because the network skews older than the other channels and the geezers were sleepy. However, the percent decline for the total audience and the younger 25-54 year old demographic were nearly identical. Others may simply conclude that Fox’s conservative viewers just weren’t interested in anything they might have learned after the race was called. But that’s precisely the point.

Rather than be subjected to news that they found discomforting, the Fox audience turned away, even from their own partisan choice for what they think is news. The reelection of the President must have come as a something of a shock to Fox viewers because Fox had been relentlessly positive about Mitt Romney’s inevitable success, while portraying Obama as a failure who was destined to be rejected for a second term by a populace who despised him. Fox disparaged any polling that showed Obama ahead as biased and unreliable – even their own.

By shutting off Fox News early, they missed the spectacle of Fox contributor Karl Rove challenging the election analysis of his colleagues at the network. He insisted that the call on Ohio was premature and that he thought Romney would take the state. This resulted in anchor Megyn Kelly marching down to the newsroom to seek affirmations from the analysis staff of their projections. As it turned out, Rove was wrong, along with most of the partisan pundits that litter the Fox schedule.

The sharp drop-off in viewership that occurred only on Fox reveals the sensitivity that the Fox viewer has to actual, truthful information. That is something that Fox exploits eagerly as they load up their programming with false and prejudicial stories. And that accounts for why Fox viewers have been shown to be so much less informed than consumers of news from other sources. They have such an aversion to anything other than Fox’s pre-seasoned, right-wing brand of pseudo-knowledge that they won’t even stayed tuned to Fox if there is a chance they might be exposed to raw reality.

Update: On Wednesday night Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell handily beat their Fox competition (Hannity and Van Susteren) in the 25-54 demo.

Clint Eastwood’s Unpatriotic Ad For Mitt Romney

Posted by Mark NC on October 24, 2012 at 9:22 pm. 8 Comments :

What is it about desperate politicians who are afraid they are losing that makes them resort to ugly and counterproductive rhetorical assaults? In 2008 we saw Sarah Palin accuse Barack Obama of “palling around with terrorists.” Now, in 2012, Mitt Romney’s surrogates have dispatched Clint Eastwood to up the ante.

The ad featuring Eastwood (video below) was produced by Karl Rove’s American Crossroads Super PAC, which is funded by millionaires who are ashamed of disclosing their identities. Super PACs themselves are unpatriotic in that they are a perverted distortion of the democratic principle of “one person, one vote.” When millionaires are allowed to anonymously aggregate unlimited sums of money you have something more like “one dollar, one vote.”

Eastwood’s performance in this ad is a big improvement over the one he gave at the Republican convention. Of course, he had a script for this. The problem is that the script contained this bit of foolishness: “Obama’s second term would be a rerun of the first and our country just couldn’t survive that.”

Precisely how weak does Eastwood (and his handlers at American Crossroads) think this country is? Does he really believe that America will dissolve into dust if Obama is reelected? Does he think that our enemies will subdue and enslave us? What dreadful fate awaits in the second term of Obama’s presidency that would cause us not to survive? That sounds like the kind of fear mongering that is more often associated with Apocalyptic prophets or Glenn Beck’s fans. And it is a starkly different message than the one he delivered in his famous halftime ad for Chrysler when he spoke about the difficulties are nation had endured:

“But after those trials, we all rallied around what was right, and acted as one. Because that’s what we do. We find a way through tough times, and if we can’t find a way, then we’ll make one.”

Apparently Eastwood has lost that sense of optimism and now thinks that when we encounter tough times we will fold up like paper dolls and be swept away by a light breeze. Or maybe it just tells us something about the differences between a commercial trying to sell us a car and one trying to sell us a horror story about monsters from Kenya who hate freedom.

It is also curious why Eastwood thinks a rerun of Obama’s first term would be unsurvivable. Which part does he think would do us in? The part where Osama Bin Laden (and dozens of Al Qaeda leaders) was put to rest? The part where the war in Iraq was concluded? The part where the stock market doubled? The part where unemployment went from 10.1% to 7.8%? The part where a full-on depression was avoided and companies like Chrysler were rescued so they could hire actors like Eastwood to make commercials?

America survived a civil war, two world wars, a depression, presidential assassinations and corruption leading to resignation, and George W. Bush. If people like Eastwood and Rove and Romney are so pessimistic about America that they think it will not survive another four years of Obama, they have very little faith in the nation they profess to love and they should stop pretending they are patriots.

Karl Rove Inadvertantly Argues Against His Own Fundraising Machine

Posted by Mark NC on August 2, 2012 at 2:08 pm. NO Comments :

The Wall Street Journal, once a respected financial news publisher before Rupert Murdoch got his hands on it, is now the home of rabidly partisan propagandists who seek only to advance self-serving political agendas. One of those is former Bush flack, Karl Rove.

Karl Rove In an op-ed today, Rove addressed the intricacies of modern campaigning and passed along some of the lessons he has learned from a lifetime of electioneering. But in his haste to demean President Obama as a profligate spender obsessed with winning reelection, Rove ended up making a convincing case for campaign finance reform, including eliminating SuperPACS like his own Crossroads GPS.

The op-ed opened with Rove regurgitating a few well-known, and widely debunked, out-of-context misrepresentations of the President’s remarks. In rapid succession he rattled off what he called Obama’s “problematic statements:”

“You didn’t build that.” Where Obama was actually referring to roads and bridges, not private businesses.
“The private sector is doing fine.” Where Obama was correctly making a relative comparison of the private sector to the public sector.
“We tried our plan and it worked” Where Obama was referencing the success of the Clinton era policies as opposed to the failure of the GOP’s years under Bush’s policies.

The GOP is laying the entire foundation of their campaign on these deliberate lies, and it is not surprising to see Rove commence his editorial by highlighting them. What’s surprising is what comes next. Rove squeezes out some faux sympathy for the President’s exhaustive workload. He goes into some detail enumerating the stressful itinerary of a candidate for the White House.

Rove: Many people don’t fully appreciate how much of a drain it is on a candidate—involving travel, a speech or two, private meetings with particularly energetic (or obnoxious) money bundlers, and always plenty of advice. Most fundraisers also include a long photo line where the candidate grips and grins for dozens, sometimes hundreds, of photographs.

I observed first-hand how difficult it was to wedge 86 fundraisers onto President George W. Bush’s calendar over the 14.5 months from May 16, 2003 (when he filed for re-election) through July 2004.

Indeed. Raising money for a viable presidential campaign is a back-breaking endeavor that diverts the candidate’s attention from other pressing matters, whether they be communicating with voters, developing policies and campaign platforms, or fulfilling any other duties outside of the campaign, like running a country.

Unfortunately, fundraising is a fact of campaign life. No one, including Rove, would suggest that a candidate could neglect this duty and still have a chance of winning. This is more true than ever in the post-Citizens United era where corporations and wealthy individuals have been freed to make unlimited (and sometimes undisclosed) contributions to candidates. The new electioneering environment forces candidates to spend more time and effort on soliciting donations than ever before. These observations are powerful evidence for why reform is such an imperative. Corporate cash and secret bankrolls have no place in democratic elections and they only make the practice of fair elections more difficult. Thanks for pointing that out, Karl.

Ironically, Rove is a prominent advocate of Citizens United. He is also a major beneficiary of it via his network of political action committees. Rove has boasted that he intends to raise and spend hundreds of millions of dollars this election cycle. So, in effect, Rove is cashing in on a practice that he admits is detrimental and places undue burdens on office-seekers. He further admits that, despite Obama’s best efforts, he is still trailing Romney and the GOP, largely because of Rove’s own prowess at hauling in boat loads of bucks from billionaires with aspirations to buy election outcomes.

If we were to take Rove’s initial points seriously, the country would rise up against Citizens United and the flash flood of cash that it unleashed on the electoral process. Without meaning to, Rove has made an excellent case for overturning CU and restoring the democratic principle of one-man-one-vote, rather than one-dollar-one-vote. But Rove doesn’t take his own arguments seriously because he is too heavily invested in the windfall he receives both personally and for the benefit of his GOP pals. As usual, he is demonstrating the brazen hypocrisy that is typical of his species of parasite.

Karl Rove’s Super Amazing Political Funtime Analysis Happy Hour

Posted by Mark NC on June 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm. 2 Comments :

The man who used to be known as Bush’s Brain may have spent too much time with America’s foremost remedial president. Karl Rove seems to have leaked a significant amount of grey matter as evidenced by this stunningly inept observation about President Obama and the economy:

“It is fine for him to try and blame it on President Bush or a Japanese tsunami or on ATM, but it makes him look weak, and the American people are not that dumb! […] Let him keep doing that because the American people see that as a weak leader. That’s not somebody who’s in charge. That’s somebody who’s making excuses. And we do not like to elect people President of the United States who are excuse makers. We want a president to be big and bold.”

Romney - Not Stupid Got that? America wants a big, bold, non-excuse maker. And blaming Bush for the wrecked economy won’t work because the American people aren’t stupid. That’s a mantra that Romney also likes to chant. In fact, he made it into a campaign slogan. This may be the first time a candidate has ever had to go to such lengths to remind his followers that they aren’t idiots. But that argument becomes more difficult to defend when polling shows what the American people really think. A new Gallup poll says that…

“Americans continue to place more blame for the nation’s economic problems on George W. Bush than on Barack Obama, even though Bush left office more than three years ago.”

The poll shows that two-thirds of respondents (68%) still blame Bush for the state of the economy. That includes about half of the polled Republicans who also continue to hold Rove’s former boss accountable. Consequently, Obama should not be shy about hanging this economic albatross around Romney’s neck. The Romney campaign has already affirmed that their policy agenda is “Bush on steroids.”

Ironically, I have to agree with Rove about a couple of things. First, he appears to be right that the American people are not dumb. They know exactly who is responsible for where we are today and they are not likely to to want to return to the policies that got us here. Secondly, Rove’s advice that Obama continue to blame Bush is pretty sound based on the mood of the electorate.

The problem for Rove is that he’s right for all the wrong reasons. He doesn’t understand where the American people are, and he wouldn’t agree with them if he did. He’s just trying to rehabilitate his own shattered reputation because, as the political architect of the Bush administration, he’s just as responsible for the financial hole we are in as Bush is.

It’s about time that the right quit yakking about Democrats looking backwards to blame Bush. 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. They 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. 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.

And if it weren’t bad enough that Americans blame Rove and Bush for our current economic problems, they also blame Republicans in congress today for deliberately sabotaging the recovery in order to make Obama look bad. So not only are they dredging up the old Bush era policies that already failed so decisively, they are obstructing Obama’s new solutions from being enacted.

Since the day that Obama was inaugurated, the GOP has explicitly stated that their top priority is to make Obama a one-term president. That’s not a governing agenda. That’s the purest and most cynical form of self-serving, political gamesmanship imaginable.

Fox Nation vs. Reality: Obama’s War On Women

Posted by Mark NC on April 6, 2012 at 4:13 pm. 5 Comments :

Fox Nation has taken up the tactic perfected by Karl Rove of attacking head on your opponent’s strengths and accusing them of your own weaknesses. Hence we have the Fox Nationalists declaring: “Obama’s War on Women.”

Throughout this campaign cycle there have been numerous examples of conservative assaults on women. We have seen them insult a female law student, calling her a slut and a prostitute. We have seen them block the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. We have seen them oppose access to reproductive health care without first undergoing intrusive, unnecessary vaginal probes. We have seen them lobby for rolling back the availability of contraception from their own private insurance policies.

The War on Women is unquestionably being waged by conservative politicians and pundits. Therefore, consistent with the Rovian strategy, it is time for conservatives to assert that it is really the other way around and that it is Obama who is anti-woman. And in support of that mission Fox Nation has published an article sourced to the ultra-conservative Washington Free Beacon that takes the President to task for golfing and for failing to employ women amongst his senior staff and advisers.

The Beacon focuses their report on remarks by the White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney who, in a response to a reporter’s question, said that the President believes that the Augusta National Golf Club, hosts of the Masters Golf Tournament, ought to admit women as members, something it has never done. The Beacon then characterized Carney’s answer by saying that…

“The remarks were viewed by some as a conscious effort by the White House to propagate the meme of a “war on women” being waged by Republicans against the fairer sex.”

The question the Beaconese and the Fox Nationalists should answer is: What is Mitt Romney trying to propagate by announcing the exact same position? And they surely know of Romney’s stance because they reported it on their web site prior to their report on Carney’s White House briefing.

The Beacon went on to say that “The president himself, however, has a well-documented history of excluding women.” They provided no evidence whatsoever to support that statement. Some examples would have helped it to make sense considering that Obama’s cabinet is full of women in the highest positions – beginning with Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton; Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis; Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius; Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano; and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. Additionally, some of Obama’s closest personal advisers in the White House have been women, including Valerie Jarrett, Stephanie Cutter, and Samantha Power.

But the Fox Nationalists can’t let facts get in the way of their propaganda. They’ve got an audience to misinform, and when the lies are as big as these, they need to devote every bit of energy to the mission.

Merry Christmas Karl Rove, From Fox News

Posted by Mark NC on December 24, 2011 at 10:18 am. 1 Comments :

In the spirit of the holiday season, Fox News has given a Christmas gift to former George W. Bush political strategist, and current Fox employee, Karl Rove. The gift was a generous one that is worth tens of thousands of dollars, and it is exactly what Rove asked Santa Claus for: Free Advertising.

Rove’s latest attack ad bashing President Obama has received free air time on a variety of Fox News programs including Hannity, The Five and others. And the ad was not merely shown in the context of a news report, it received high praise from Fox pundits and presenters. Also, in most cases Fox never bothered to mention that the ad, which was produced by the American Crossroads PAC, was in fact Rove’s vehicle for raising millions of dollars from secret corporate donors.

This is blatant electioneering by Fox on behalf of the Republican Party. They should be required by law to report it as an in-kind contribution. It is additional evidence (as if any were necessary) that Fox’s claim to be “fair and balanced” is transparently dishonest. Can anyone imagine Fox giving the same sort of treatment to this ad by Priorities USA, a rival Democratic PAC (that coincidentally features Fox’s own Karl Rove)?

Yeah, that’ll be the day.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: