As NewsBusters reported, MSNBC's Dan Abrams pointed an accusatory finger at Fox News Monday claiming, "The Republicans have had Fox News, and O'Reilly in particular, in their pocket on the Republican talking points since 1996."
Clearly not pleased, the "Fox & Friends" crew took Abrams to task for his statements Tuesday, especially co-host Gretchen Carlson (file photo above right) who seemed to be doing her darnedest to hold back her anger.
In fact, here was her delicious retort for Abrams and Matthews (video available here courtesy our friend Johnny Dollar, relevant section begins at 0:57):
I'm here to tell you that I've never received any talking points from the Republican Party. So that's point number one that's not accurate...I take my talking points from my own head, thank you very much! Also, he said that "Chris Matthews expresses his opinions on his show which are far less predictable than any host covering politics on Fox News." Again, we receive our talking points from our own heads, and also, Chris Matthews did not say those blasphemous comments on his show. He said them at a public event where maybe he felt that nobody else was listening.
How delicious.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Watch Fox
October 9, 2007 - 12:37 ET by allanfIf Dan actually watched Fox, he'd realize that O'Reilly is not in the Republicans pocket. He is his own eclectic mix.
The accusations people make against others is often very revealing of their own behavior. Makes you wonder if they get their marching orders from moveon.org or Media Matters.
Allen
October 9, 2007 - 12:45 ET by Clear thinker"Makes you wonder if they get their marching orders from moveon.org or Media Matters."
Don't the two orgs pretty much work for the same company (Clinton inc.)
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
Projection
October 9, 2007 - 12:55 ET by kdoliverIt's called projection and I find that liberals are very good at it. It appears to to go hand in hand with emotions. Those of us that are logical aren't as guility of it.
http://thelazytriathlete.blogspot.com/
The accusations people make
October 9, 2007 - 14:00 ET by drillanwrThe accusations people make against others is often very revealing of their own behavior. Makes you wonder if they get their marching orders from moveon.org or Media Matters.
Actually, I believe it was Limbaugh himself who read on air MediaMatters initial phony soldier fabrication from their site, and then played clips re: the same story from the MSNBC talking mouths (and I believe CNN's also) and the two (MM and the media) were nearly word-for-word ...
I remember Limbaugh doing
October 9, 2007 - 15:46 ET by FishFace222I remember Limbaugh doing this after Andy Card resigned. He played clip after clip of the MSM using the phrase "re-arranging the deck chairs."
Just doing a dogpile search, the following sites came up: Washington Post, USA Today, MSNBC, CNN and many more.
Matthews, Partisan Hack
October 9, 2007 - 12:40 ET by Bighead227Why on earth Republican candidates would agree to this debate with Matthews as mediator is baffling. This guy plays "Hardball" only with conservative guests. To his kindred liberals he plays an offshoot of Softball called kissass. It’s nauseating. But this is NBC. Olberman, the wacko and Matthews the hack, The Debate Hosts. It’s part of the new Fall Lineup! I can't believe they’re hemorrhaging viewers so badly.
Didn't the Dems turn down a Fox News debate? Why? Russert is the only thing they have that half-resembles a fair newsman, we should have demanded him. Leave the sideshows at home, this is serious business.
Good For Gretchen
October 9, 2007 - 12:40 ET by MikeDGretchen went to Fox New York from Cleveland. She always struck me as an intelligent person and came across as very nice as well. Being so pretty doesn't hurt either. As much as I miss her here I wish her all the best.
Now we can all enjoy this talented lady's work.
Cleveland!
October 9, 2007 - 14:02 ET by drillanwrOh, geez! I thought she seemed familiar!
Which station was she at in Cleveland?
Gretchen
October 10, 2007 - 14:35 ET by MikeDFox 8, WJW I believe.
Fetchin' Gretchen
October 9, 2007 - 15:16 ET by NoMoreClintonsBeing so pretty doesn't hurt either
As many Fox viewers know, she was Miss America in 1989.
La Problemo esta'....
October 9, 2007 - 12:54 ET by JayTeeThe problem with the MSM, is they wouldn't recognize an American, if they saw one carrying the flag. They're wearing blue colored glasses.
The MSM can recognize an American, if said subject removes their Flag Pin.....followed by free non partisan MSM Air time to explain the in depth patriotism of Flag pin removal, and the Democrats it stands for.
Victory in Iraq, is gonna be bloody.....for the MSM and friends.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
"The Republicans have had
October 9, 2007 - 14:25 ET by MightyMouth"The Republicans have had Fox News, and O'Reilly in particular, in their pocket on the Republican talking points since 1996."
That's what this is all about, the MSM is still pissed over Fox holding Clintons feet to the fire. Their Messiah was tarnished by Fox... well damit!! they will right THAT wrong!
(btw, Gretchen is a peach, the only reason I watch F&F)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
O'Reilly says more
October 9, 2007 - 13:52 ET by SMGalbraithO'Reilly says more critical statements about the Republicans and the Bush Administration - from a political right perspective and a left perspective - in one week than Olbermann has said critical things about the Left in his entire pretend news anchor career.
Whether it is immigration/border security, spending, environmental issues, gas prices et cetera, O'Reilly repeatedly criticizes White House and Congressional Republican policies.
Who is Abrams kidding here?
The difference is that
October 9, 2007 - 14:31 ET by mgerardnThe difference is that Olbermann doesn't claim to be independent and No-Spin like O'Reilly, that's why O'Reilly is such a joke - at least admit you're a right winger, Bill...
Oh, yes. Olbermann does
October 9, 2007 - 14:53 ET by Chris NormanOh, yes. Olbermann does claim to be an independent.
uh, whatever you say.
October 9, 2007 - 15:00 ET by mgerardnuh, whatever you say.
So does Chrissy Matthews.
October 9, 2007 - 15:04 ET by MightyMouthSo does Chrissy Matthews. lol
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Not what I say. What he
October 9, 2007 - 15:28 ET by Chris NormanNot what I say. What he say. Unlike what you say.
mgerardn, Actually, it's
October 9, 2007 - 17:21 ET by hydrodynDMmgerardn,
Actually, it's what Olbermann says.
You might want to read this and get back to us on that.
Good link
October 9, 2007 - 18:00 ET by well99Bookmarked it.Have to check that out now.
Olbermann doesn't claim to
October 9, 2007 - 16:04 ET by SMGalbraithOlbermann doesn't claim to be independent and No-Spin like O'Reilly, that's why O'Reilly is such a joke - at least admit you're a right winger, Bill...
Sorry, Olbermann claims - and MSNBC does also - that he is a news anchor doing a news show. Furthermore, Olbermann has stated that he has no political agenda and that he covers politics the way that he covered sports with no interest in whatever "team" wins the contest.
In contrast, O'Reilly has always stated that he is a commentator providing analysis on the day's events and news. And if he's such a right-winger, why has he condemned the Bush Administration's evironmental policies and energy legislation? He's been scathing in criticism of the White House for not regulating the oil companies and reining in their profits.
Some right wing apologist he is.
If Olbermann wants to be a liberal O'Reilly, that's okay with me. Essentially that is what he is anyway (if one excludes having any opposing viewpoints on the program). But don't claim to be a news anchor who's only delivering the news.
Because that isn't okay with me.
SMG
SMGalbraith...Olbermann/O'Reilly
October 9, 2007 - 19:03 ET by JerOlbermann's claim that his show isn't about a particular political point of view is indeed absurd. But where have you seen or heard the representation that he is a "news anchor doing a news show". It's hard to believe anyone would make that assertion.
Regarding O'Reilly...I don't tune in to the radio "Factor", but I do regularly watch him on TV. I have heard him claim to be a "liberal" on the environment, but I have never heard him say anything to support this assertion other than some vague remarks about there "being something to that global warming thing". In fact, in the run-up to the 2004 election, he said he didn't disagree with anything that Bush had done regarding the environment.
He did make a lot of noise about the oil companies' gouging and excessive profits, but there was very little criticism of Bush for that, and certainly none of it "scathing". His major criticisms of the Bush administration have come from a "right" perspective--immigration policy (still better than the Democrats' approach), and Bush's reluctance to "go after the Clintons".
Jer
But where have you seen or
October 9, 2007 - 21:58 ET by SMGalbraithBut where have you seen or heard the representation that he is a "news anchor doing a news show". It's hard to believe anyone would make that assertion.
MSNBC describes the show as a "newcast" with Keith delivering the "news" every night.
I quote: "Countdown, a unique newscast that counts down the day's top stories with Keith's particular wit and style, telecasts weeknights, 8-9 pm ET on MSNBC".
Here's a link to podcasts of "Countdown" where MSNBC states that "Keith Olbermann delivers news every night..."
Additionally, following complaints, both Dan Abrams and Phil Griffin insisted that Olbermann keeps his opinions out of the show except for the "Special Commentary" monologue he does periodically.
Abrams on Olbermann: "His program could become a model for the newscast of the future," Abrams says. "It's a mix of straight news reporting with lighter fare and occasionally with some opinion."
"Newcast". "Straight news reporting". "Occasionally with some opinion".
Baloney. Malarkey. Flapdoodle.
Second, O'Reilly has repeatedly (radio and television, but mostly radio) criticized the Bush Administration's environmental policies stating that Bush and Cheney are "oil men" who are reluctant to take the oil companies on. He's argued that whether global warming is caused by human activity or not is secondary to the need to "get all that junk out of the air".
Third, where did O'Reilly say that "He didn't disagree with anything that Bush had done regarding the environment"? He's been critical of Bush on: CAFE standards, emissions standards, our dependence on oil, our need to switch to more ethanol, the influence of the oil companies on Washington and our inability to find alternative fuels to rid ourselves of foreign energy dependency and on and on and on...
Finally, accusing the Bush Administration, as he did, of being in the pockets of the oil companies to our detriment is, in my opinion, pretty scathing.
SMG
SMGal: Inasmuch as I
October 9, 2007 - 22:37 ET by JerSMGal: Inasmuch as I watch O'Reilly instead of Olberman, I am not entirely familiar with KO's format. But having seen clips of his Special Commentary as well as his Worst Person in the World skits, I think any implication he's a "newscaster" on a "news" show is laughable.
Maybe O'Reilly adopts a different persona on radio, but on the TV "Factor", he is, with rare exception, nothing but a Republican shill. It's the reason I find him so objectionable, since he has so often claimed to be politically neutral and equally critical of both Republicans and Democrats. That is utter nonsense.
His statement supportive of Bush's evironmental policies was made a month or two before the '04 election. I heard him say it. With respect to oil issues, as I mentioned earlier, he was hard on the oil companies, but not on Bush. I know he is in favor of Republican proposals--and against the environmentalists/Democrats--with respect to opening up the Alaskan oil fields. He also is against the Kyoto accords.
He does advocate more stringent standards for gas mileage and related issues, but, again, his criticism of Bush is exceedingly mild. [But I recall him railing against Gore in 2000 claiming Clinton/Gore had "done nothing for the environment".
O'Reilly's methods (and duplicity) are illustrated by his handling of Iraq war issues. He will relentlessly hammer Democrats as defeatists, soft on terror, being invested in America losing the war. As an aside he will acknowledge that some past mistakes were made by the administration, and then later refer to that acknowledgement as an example of his "fierce" criticism of Bush.
Baloney, indeed.
Jer
Jer: O'Reilly clearly comes
October 9, 2007 - 22:55 ET by SMGalbraithJer: O'Reilly clearly comes from a right-of-center point of view on most, nearly all, issues. A conservative or, if you insist, right wing perspective. There's no mistaking that.
But frankly, as long as he informs listeners/viewers that he is giving news analysis or commentary and is not a news anchor or host, it doesn't bother me much at all.
You're correct that on the radio he is a much less non-partisan analyst than on televison and more willing to be critical of Republicans and the White House.
I would hardly, though, call someone who has excoriated the White House and Republicans for their failure to control our borders as a "shill" for that party. Surely a "shill" would not be as critical, wouldn't you think?
Is he more critical of Democrats and than Republicans. Absolutely, on both TV and the radio. I think there's legitimate doubt about his non-partisan boasts. He's clearly a man of the Right.
But sorry, I've heard him on both radio and TV criticize Bush and Cheney for being "oil men" unwilling to take on the profits and excessive influence of the oil companies.
Granted, for every criticism of Republicans, he'll give 10 of the Democrats (if not more).
Finally, on the Iraq war, he has been extremely critical of the incompetence of this Administration in their handling of the policy. He's had several military men - Colonel Hunt - on his show talking about the military failures time-after-time. Are we watching the same show?
As to the defeatist charge: I'll agree that too often he fails to distinguish between those on the Left who do indeed wish for the US to lose in Iraq (a recent poll showed that 19% of Democrats think it would be good for the world if we lost) and mainstream Democrats who simply believe that the war is unworkable and that we need to change our policies. But he is ABSOLUTELY right that there are people in this country - on the hard left to be sure - who are defeatist and wish for us to lose.
He's right: shame on those folks.
SMG
Fair analysis, SMG, and I
October 10, 2007 - 00:01 ET by JerFair analysis, SMG, and I probably should not have used the word "shill". It's just that I have very little respect for O'Reilly, and I've been watching him regularly, almost since he first launched his show on Fox.
I likewise am not bothered by someone who appropriately labels himself (or herself) an analyst, but I am deeply bothered by someone claiming an ideological neutrality which is demonstrably untrue.
You are of course aware of O'Reilly's relentless attacks on "secular progressives" and support of "traditionalists" like himself. Yet, after alleging John Kerry came from the secular progressive wing of the Democratic Party, while Bush was a traditionalist, O'Reilly shortly thereafter made the ludicrous claim he wasn't favoring either candidate, stating "I don't have a dog in that fight."
Four years before, he asserted that Gore was a liar, thoroughy corrupt, had surrrounded himself with the most arrogant people he had ever known; and that Gore/Clinton did nothing about the environment, nothing for blacks, nothing about transportation issues, and [later] nothing about terrorism. There was virtually nothing unfavorable said about Bush--other than he wasn't being tough enough on the Clintons--and again O'Reilly claimed "he wasn't rooting for anybody."
Those are just a couple of examples of why I have a serious problem with O'Reilly's integrity.
Jer
O'Reilly does have Left leaning views
October 9, 2007 - 21:26 ET by mgerardnBut to expose them on this show would be detrimental to his ratings - the right wingers want to hear what they want to hear - Hollywood is bad, Media Matters is bad, Boulder, Colorado is bad, Michael Moore is bad. He never addresses the Environment or the Abortion stuff, because it'd turn his demographic off. When Hannity runs with his ridiculous Al Gore private plane rants, he doesn't follow suit...
""The Republicans have had
October 9, 2007 - 14:10 ET by ckc1227""The Republicans have had Fox News, and O'Reilly in particular, in their pocket on the Republican talking points since 1996."
Blah blah, didn't Dan Rather make this same empty claim? I know he has been invited by O'Reilly to come on and back up his claim, but so far, nothing. He didn't even want to talk about it when was on Cavuto recently. Wonder why?
Double dipping?
October 9, 2007 - 14:22 ET by well99Does Dan get paid monthly by Media Matters or is it by the hit piece.
Darn I missed this early
October 9, 2007 - 15:16 ET by bigtimerDarn I missed this early this morning...thanks for the report/video about what happened though...
Every word Gretchen said is true...you go gal!! (By the way she has really improved as time has gone by on the show IMO)
Abrams got where he is because of his father, the differnece is Dan has zilch for brains but an ego along with Matthews and Ubermann and all the spinmeisters on the shows that is completely uncalled for...the leftists have absolutely no clue how to run a network and make it watchable by the vast majority of people out here in the real world, but heck, they don't care it doesn't fit their rose-colored world agenda for power, which they are going to be denied...
AGAIN!
ROFLMAO!
GO GIRL!!!!
October 9, 2007 - 15:20 ET by sndrmrvGO GIRL..Pretty boy Dan needed his nose bloodied..
AM I ALONE?
October 10, 2007 - 08:38 ET by danybhoyI do find it funny that a former Ms.America is kicking his butt on air, I can't be the only one laughing at that.
As a side note, Carlson was Ms.Cottage Grove(my hometown)but she lived in Anoka on her way to becoming Ms.Minnesota, & then Ms.America. I'm wondering how you can live in one town & represent another, I don't get it. No big deal, but I don't get it.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
I really liked her on the
October 9, 2007 - 15:49 ET by msh1973I really liked her on the CBS Saturday Show, but she is awesome on Fox and Friends.