As noted by Matthew Sheffield and Tim Graham, elements of the left run a massive campaign to destroy major media figures that do not ideologically march lockstep with them. This story appeared on the April 16 edition of "The O’Reilly Factor" when former Los Angeles area NOW president, and self proclaimed liberal Tammy Bruce appeared to expose that agenda.
Host Bill O’Reilly noted that he is investigating with Sean Hannity how leftist distortions and smears find their way into the mainstream media. Tammy Bruce noted that elements of the left take phrases out of context to demonize not only conservatives, but anyone who is not a complete liberal ideologue and they started with a test case on Dr. Laura Schlessinger.
In the midst of the Don Imus/Rutgers women’s basketball team controversy, one would think that calling a woman a prostitute, or any similar epithet on the air, would be so inexcusable that it would meet with extraordinary media outrage.
After all, if you did a Google news search of the name Don Imus, it would generate almost 15,000 stories about the controversial radio host. The phrase "Nappy-headed hos" garnered almost 10,000 results.
Yet, when the New Black Panther Party leader Malik Shabazz called Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin a “political prostitute” on Thursday’s “O’Reilly Factor,” the media largely ignored the event. In fact, a Google news search of his name identified that only one major media outlet reported this outrageous comment, albeit at the USA Today Online Politics blog.
Regardless of the double standard, here is the disgraceful segment of this interview which coincidentally occurred within hours of Imus being fired by CBS Radio for his comments (video available here, h/t Hot Air):
Long-time New York Times and Washington Post "objective" political reporter-turned-liberal columnist E.J. Dionne on Friday wrote he suspects Fox News chairman Roger Ailes "secretly admires the bloggers and other activists working to keep Democratic presidential candidates from debating on his cable network."
Baloney. If he's secretly admiring Democrats for anything, it's for showing they're thin-skinned spoiled brats who are used to having an army of Stephanopolice reinforcing their every talking point. He's admiring how the Democrats are only building the appeal of the network to an audience of people who are looking for someone who doesn't follow along with the suffocating liberal consensus that lamely claims the mantle of "objectivity" as it throws rose petals in front of the Obamas and Rodhams.
"View" token non-liberal Elisabeth Hasselbeck appeared on the April 12 edition of "Hannity and Colmes" to announce her co-host appearance on "Fox and Friends" and to add her opinion on the Imus controversy. Hasselbeck echoed her comments on "The View" that Imus deserved at the very least a long suspension. However, she sang a very different tune when asked about her "View" colleague Rosie O’Donnell and her outrageous comments.
Co-host Sean Hannity asked Hasselbeck about Rosie’s anti-Asian remarks and inquired if Rosie should be held to the same standard. "The View" co-host responded that "that would be for Rosie to decide" and noted Rosie’s intentions "were not malicious."The transcript is below.
Update (April 13 | 10:46 EDT): The April 13 edition of Fox News Channel's "Red Eye" briefly addressed Moran's blog entry. I've added a screen capture from the program.
Leave it to a liberal journalist to bring racial tension and class warfare into a story about three men exonerated of rape allegations after a year of prosecutorial misconduct.
ABC's Terry Moran found the outpouring of sympathy for the exonerated Duke lacrosse players is a bit much because, in a nutshell, they're white guys from wealthy families who attended a private university. In fact, in an April 12 "Pushback" blog post at ABCNews.com, he suggested that in a way, they were victimized less than the Rutgers women's basketball team by Imus. Portions in bold are my emphasis. Video Clip: Real (2.7 MB) or Windows (3 MB), Plus MP3 (477 KB)
Calling the Fox News debate a "sordid event," Time magazine's Joe Klein offered Barack Obama the journalistic version of the cinematic slow clap with an April 9 post to Time's "Swampland" blog:
First, congratulations to Barack Obama for dropping out of the
Congressional Black Caucus Institute-Fox News debate. With John Edwards
already out, that means this sordid event is over...Back in 2004, I
remember raising an eyebrow or two when it was announced that Fox would
sponsor a debate in partnership with the CBC, of all groups. Roger
Ailes' strategy seemed classic:
So it seems the position of left-wing Democrats is to deal with the terrorist states of Syria and Iran -- but don't deal with Fox News because it just gives them "a platform." As noted in an earlier posting, Democratic candidate John Edwards had a fine time and voiced no complaints after participating in a pair of Fox News-sponsored debates in 2003, but now he's boycotting the highest-rated cable news network: (Updates added at the end.)
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Friday pulled out of a second debate co-hosted by Fox News Channel, saying the cable network has a conservative slant.
Not surprisingly, Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards has dropped out of another debate sponsored by the Fox News Channel. As reported by the Associated Press (emphasis added throughout):
The Edwards campaign said it will not attend the September 23 debate in Detroit hosted by Fox News and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute, but officials added that Edwards is "looking forward" to a different debate hosted by the institute and CNN in South Carolina in January 2008.
Hmmm. Canceling FNC to appear on CNN, John? Why might that be (wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more):
Barbara Walters and the folks at ABC should be very pleased with themselves, for all the recent nutty remarks by Rosie O’Donnell precipitated a discussion on Saturday’s “Forbes on Fox” about whether or not the controversial co-host of “The View” should be fired.
Though the group seemed to agree that the current “View” formula of making exceedingly shocking statements might be helping ratings, the consensus was that ABC and Disney were risking their long-term reputations by being associated with such non-stop anti-American sentiments.
As the flow of the discussion was really quite good, and host David Asman did a great job of moderating, what follows is a transcript of this segment without any interruptions or pontifications which might unnecessarily reduce your entertainment pleasure:
Simply wow, is all I can say to the segment on last night's O'Reilly Factor. Both of them lost their cool in the extreme.
O'Reilly screams that Geraldo wants "anarchy", Geraldo yells that O'Reilly wants to take illegal aliens and "do something to them" over the infuriating story of a drunk illegal who killed two teenaged girls in a Virginia Beach car accident.
(Click Image to go to video)
I have to say, in my opinion they were both wrong a little and right a little, but neither did his case any good by getting into a shouting match. O'Reilly made it solely an illegal alien issue, and Geraldo completely excused illegals of all wrongs. O'Reilly had the better point, of course, but both tried to make it a single issue discussion with Geraldo accusing O'Rielly of, in effect, being a racist and O'Reilly screaming that Geraldo might not care about his own teenage girls.
While conservatives in the nation’s capital gathered on March 29 to recognize some of the most disgraceful media performances of 2006 at the MRC’s 20th Anniversary Gala, one of the evening’s “winners” was being unceremoniously torn to shreds by Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly (two-part videos available here and here).
In fact, the host went so far as to ask his guests, Bernie Goldberg and Jane Hall, if the time had come for ABC to cut its ties with the outspoken and controversial comedienne.
Sometimes, Fox News Channel brings to the surface powerful stuff that you would never see on "60 Minutes." FNC is promoting Sunday night's edition of "Hannity's America" featuring exclusive interviews with some of the passengers who were on the plane with the Flying Imams when they got kicked off the plane in the Twin Cities last November. FNC promises they tell quite a different story about what happened than the Imams and the folks at CAIR. The passengers are so scared about CAIR's lawsuit and harm coming to their families that they would only speak to Hannity's people anonymously.
The show airs Sunday nights at 9 PM and midnight, Eastern time.
On March 18th, the New York Times published a piece titled "The Women's War". It was a feature of great length (18 pages on the Internet) centered around the plight of several female Veterans of the war in Iraq. It detailed the mistreatment they suffered by the US Military, sexual harassment they received at the hands of army officers, and their PTSDs (post traumatic distress disorders). A shocking expose is what the Times was going for, it is sure. These women certainly deserved better treatment and the story should be well publicized, of course. It might have had more impact but for the fact that the Times knew that one of the subjects featured in the article wasn't even in Iraq and that her story was a complete lie.
Worse yet, the Times published the story knowing full well that one of their subjects had lied to them. Finally, a whole week after their initial story was published on the 18th, on March 25th, the Times published a mea culpa, correcting the story.
Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly finally provided some perspective on the U.S. attorney firing story with some information the mainstream media will not report. On the March 22 edition of "The O’Reilly Factor," O’Reilly exposed much of the media spin on the situation from members of the White House press corps to several print media outlets. He then explained plausible reasons why three of the eight U.S. attorneys were fired.
The mainstream media hinted that the administration fired San Diego attorney Carol Lam for prosecuting former Republican Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. What they failed to report is that Ms. Lam did not aggressively prosecute illegal alien criminals. Her lax approach concerned even Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein. Paul Charlton was not aggressive in pursuing marijuana cases, and even the liberal "Los Angeles Times" editorialized against fired attorney Kevin Ryan.
There are a lot of conspiracy theories running through extreme left-wing circles about the attacks on 9/11. One such piece of drivel is an Internet movie called “Loose Change.”
On Thursday’s “O’Reilly Factor,” the host invited a New York City detective named Bo Dietl, and author Gerald Posner to discuss some recent developments surrounding the conspiracy theorists. O’Reilly began (video available here, h/t Hot Air):
The far-left fringe has embraced the conspiracy theory that elements of the U.S. government carried out the attacks on 9/11. It's unbelievable, but that's what they're saying. Now some mainstream individuals are buying into it. Rosie O'Donnell discussed it on her blog. And the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, billionaire Mark Cuban, may distribute a movie called "Loose Change."That piece of propaganda may be narrated by Charlie Sheen. And it says the U.S. government was criminally negligent on 9/11.
On his official Web site Fox News' Geraldo Rivera, yet again, went on a pro-illegal immigrant, anti-GOP tear. In an article entitled "GOP Immigration Extremists," Rivera declared: "The GOP was hijacked by extremists," claimed, "various hate groups have declared common cause with the Minutemen," and opined that anti-illegal immigrant Republicans, "fueled the rise of radicals like Venenzuela's Hugo Chavez."
The following is the full March 15th dated rant as it appeared on the Horizons section of Geraldo.com:
Until the last election cycle, Republicans had a reasonable chance of becoming the permanent majority party in this country. But in the lead up to the November 2006 elections, the GOP was hijacked by extremists on the immigration issue.
In Monday's Los Angeles Times, reporter James Rainey raised the issue of a conflict between political reporting and family ties: "Some of America's most prominent political journalists are, quite literally, wedded to the 2008 presidential race: Their spouses work for one of the candidates." Rainey made a short list of four of the conflicted:
There were two Iraq polls released on Sunday. One is guaranteed to be headline news. The other will likely be totally ignored.
In fact, one of the polls was already referenced by George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week,” as well as reported by USA Today and CNN.
Know what the difference is between these surveys, both of which rather compelling as they asked questions of Iraqi citizens? Well, one painted a rather dire picture of conditions in the embattled country, while the other found a very optimistic people who don’t believe their nation is in a civil war.
As the American media will likely focus all of its attention on the more pessimistic survey, here is the contrary view nobody other than Fox News is likely to cover as reported by the Sunday Times (emphasis added throughout):
A truly astounding thing happened on HBO’s “Real Time” Friday evening: a panel comprised of four liberal media members actually voiced unanimous displeasure with Democrats.
I bet you’re looking out your window to see some airborne swine right about now.
As shocking and unlikely as such a public display might seem, when host Bill Maher moved the discussion to the recent cancellation of a presidential debate to be hosted by Fox News, he and his guests all felt the Democrats made a mistake.
Defying the currently in vogue theory of anthropogenic global warming, hell hath begun freezing over.
Present and accounted for were former CBS anchor Dan Rather, ABC’s Martha Raddatz, and comedian Jason Alexander. What follows is a partial transcript of this shocking event (video available here courtesy of our friend Ms Underestimated):
Would you take a paycheck from an organization you consider illegitimate? Neal Gabler apparently would.
"I don't want to bite the hand that feeds me my Kool-Aid," claimed Gabler on this evening's "Fox News Watch." He then proceeded to do just that, claiming that Democrats pulled out of the Fox-sponsored presidential candidate debate in Nevada "for the same reason that Republicans would not go on Air America -- it doesn't make any political sense. Why in the world would you want to legitimize a network that spends hour after hour after hour after hour to, to."
Los Angeles Times columnist (and longtime political reporter) Ron Brownstein tackles the issue of the Nevada Democratic Party dumping Fox News Channel as a debate partner. He thinks this rejection is similar to how "conservatives deal with mainstream media organizations they consider biased against them." Put aside for a minute the odd notion that Republican Party organizations or politicians would refuse to do debates thrown by liberal networks. As if. In his March 16 column, Brownstein's peddling the old canard that Fox News is exponentially more biased than "mainstream" news organizations:
The situation isn't exactly parallel. For all the howling on the right, it's difficult to argue that mainstream news organizations operate with anything approaching Fox' partisan and ideological agenda. (E-mails: commence now.) But there's no question many conservatives feel as wronged by elements of the mainstream media as Democrats do by Fox.
Video clip: Real (3.06 MB) or Windows (2.55 MB) plus MP3 (1.19 MB) Mr. Bozell should also be on FNC's Fox & Friends Thursday morning to discuss the same topic. He's scheduled for 6:13am EDT. That's 5:13am CDT, 4:13am MDT and 3:13am PDT.
As most people are likely aware, the Democrats have pulled out of a presidential debate to be held in Nevada this August. Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly was none too pleased about this announcement, and made his feelings known Monday evening (video available here):
The dishonesty of the far left on display again…Within the Democratic party, there are two elements, moderate Dems and radical left Dems. The radical movement is funded by George Soros and Peter Lewis, who pour millions of dollars into candidates and websites like MoveOn to do their bidding. Soros and Lewis have given MoveOn at least $5 million.
That was just the beginning. I suggest you fasten your seatbelts, for O’Reilly was loaded for bear:
It’s probably not that surprising that some on the far Left were complaining that the Fox News Channel was going to host a debate between the Democratic presidential candidates in Nevada later this year. They were probably completely unaware that Fox News co-hosted (with the liberal Congressional Black Caucus Institute) two Democratic debates during the last presidential campaign.
What is surprising is that former Democratic Senator John Edwards, who smilingly participated in both of the Fox debates in 2003 (picture at left), decided that he could not participate in a debate hosted by Fox. “I said, ‘Why are we doing Fox?’ I said, ‘No, tell them no,’” Edwards told the Washington Post’s Dan Balz.
Fred Thompson, who is exploring the possibilty of a presidential candidacy, went on Fox News Sunday yesterday, strongly criticized Roe v. Wade and said the answer to it was "good judges." But on this morning's "Today," Andrea Mitchell flatly stated that Thompson doesn't want to overturn Roe. So where does Thompson stand on Roe, and how can we explain Today's depiction of his views?
For answers, let's go to the videotape. The first portion of the clip is from this morning's "Today," the second portion from Thompson's Fox News Sunday appearance yesterday.
On "Today," laying out Thompson's positions on key issues, Andrea Mitchell stated Thompson is "anti-abortion but opposes overturning Roe v. Wade." Where did she get that from? A good clue comes from the fact that just previously she had just played a clip of Thompson's appearance on yesterday's Fox News Sunday. While the clip had nothing to do with abortion [Thompson merely described his rationale for a possible run], it does demonstrate that Mitchell had watched Thompson's appearance and was likely relying on it as the latest, best evidence of his views.
So what did the former Tennessee senator tell Chris Wallace about his views on Roe? Again, have a look at the video.
Chris Wallace: "Do you want to overturn Roe v. Wade?"
Thompson: "I think Roe v. Wade was bad law and bad medical science. And the way to address that is through good judges. I don't think the court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country that's contrary to what it's been for the last 200 years. We have a process in this country to do that. Judges shouldn't be doing that. That's what happened in the that case. I think it was wrong."
As the Managing Editor of Fox News Channel's Washington, DC bureau, you might have thought Brit Hume would have taken great umbrage at John Edwards' high-profile decision to spurn a debate of Dem presidential contenders that Fox had organized for August in Nevada. The Edwards pull-out ultimately led to a cancellation of the debate by the Nevada state Democratic party. Edwards had come under pressure from liberal netroots and organizations such as Move.on, which had organized a petition drive calling for cancellation of the debate.
But in a fair-and-balanced comment reflecting an appreciation of real politik, Hume has praised Edwards' move as "shrewd" -- at least in the short run. During the panel discussion on this morning's Fox News Sunday, Hume observed:
Under pressure from radical-left activists at MoveOn.org and bloggers like the Daily Kos, the Nevada Democratic Party pulled the rug out from under the Fox News Channel on Friday, canceling a planned presidential debate that had been scheduled for August 14, Politico.com reported. MoveOn launched a petition drive that it said was signed by more than 260,000 people, arguing “Fox is a mouthpiece for the Republican Party, not a legitimate news channel. The Democratic Party of Nevada should drop Fox as its partner for the presidential primary debate.” The group's Eli Pariser also called FNC part of the "right-wing smear machine."
The decision represents a dramatic shift leftward from the presidential cycle four years ago. On September 9, 2003, all nine Democratic candidates went to Baltimore to participate in a debate sponsored by FNC and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute. Dick Gephardt and Dennis Kucinich even missed a close school-voucher House vote for the event. Brit Hume was the moderator, and the panel had three black liberals: NPR's Juan Williams, Ed Gordon (formerly of NBC and BET), and former Newsweek writer (and current NPR host) Farai Chideya. As you can see from the transcript, Hume asked no questions to the candidates, aside from asking Howard Dean what his lapel pin said.