And a mess of Bam's barbecue

By Zandar 

And Fox Nation leaves this in a bag on America's doorstep, lights it on fire, rings the bell and runs (h/t Oliver Willis).

Ahh, the president's birthday celebration had black people at it and didn't create jobs! This is where we are right now, it's a brutally long campaign season, folks... and the rampant, ugly, and now massively overt racism by the GOP and their enablers is only beginning. People ask me how President Obama can put up with such drooling idiocy, and I remind them that the president is never the true audience for shock-jock racism like this.

In a sick way, you have to admire the blue-steel hatred Fox has for the man. When the dog whistles are put away and the megaphones are brought out instead, it's proof that the president's most recent maneuver has demoralized the Tea Party faithful and that it's time to throw the red meat into the pit to get some action going (which gives more "moderate" conservative pundits the chance to pretend to disavow the bomb-throwing to look "centrist and principled").

It must mean, then, that the rank-and-file Tea Party disagree with John "Orange Julius" Boehner's assessment that the GOP got 98% of what it wanted in the debt deal. Indeed, many Americans are furious at the Republicans in the wake of this week's deal and the weeks of hostage-taking that preceded it.

Time both to fire up the base and to take the higher ground at the same time while Eric Cantor blames the extension of federal unemployment benefits for causing unemployment itself, and vows to hold it hostage next.  Always onwards to the next Pyrrhic victory, our GOP friends.

Republicans who make things up and the media who let them do it

By Richard K. Barry

I know there is almost nothing that should surprise us about the extent to which Republicans will lie about President Obama, but the boldness of it still amazes me. What amazes me more, though, is that there appear to be no consequences to making shit up. They just do it, nobody says a word, and it becomes a part of the public record.

It's one thing when it happens on Fox News, because Fox's mandate is to present an alternate universe in which lies and truth are fully interchangeable. We get that. But so many other media outlets simply accepts demonstrably untrue statements as just another point of view.

Well, no!!! Some statements can be supported or refuted by evidence. When a statement can be refuted by evidence apparent to any reasonable person, that's what logicians like to call "bullshit."

And, yes, on the other hand, some statements are not of the kind that can be proven true or false, but that's what first year university logic courses are supposed to teach us - or failing that, common sense. It's a pretty simply distinction.

Here's an example of Michele Bachmann making things up on a recent appearance on Fox News as described by Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly:

Here's the issue. The president doesn't want to have to be confronted with priorities in spending because he has a lot of chutzpah. He spent a trillion dollars on the stimulus. It failed. He spent a trillion-and-a-half every year on deficits. They're his. And, also, Obamacare -- trillions of dollars. This is his spending. He's got to own it and deal with it.

We wouldn't be in this crisis right now if he wouldn't have spent that trillion on stimulus and a trillion-and-a-half more than he should have on the budget and now trillions more on Obamacare. But for those trillions in spending, Greta, we wouldn't be in this mess we're in. We'd still be in a bad spot, but nowhere near the hole. That's why -- take the shovel out of the president's hand so we don't dig any deeper. That's what will happen if we raise the debt ceiling and why I am adamant against raising the debt ceiling.

As Benen notes, "every claim Bachmann made is demonstrably false":

She was wrong about the size of the stimulus. She was wrong about the size of the deficit. She was wrong about the cost of the Affordable Care Act (it actually reduces the deficit, by a lot). She was wrong about the efficacy of the Recovery Act.

And perhaps most importantly, even if the Recovery Act and the ACA never existed, we'd still need to raise the debt ceiling. If President Bachmann were in the Oval Office right now, the need for a higher limit would be unchanged. Blaming Obama may make strange right-wing activists and their misguided leaders happy, but it doesn't make it true.

The only way we wouldn't have to raise the debt ceiling in 2011 is if George W. Bush and his Republican allies hadn't added $5 trillion to the debt and left Obama with a $1.3 trillion deficit to clean up. But it's obviously too late for that.

I guess my point is that, in this case, the facts are about numbers, the kinds of numbers for which pretty good records are kept. It doesn't matter though, because Bachmann just says shit and the shit becomes a part of the narrative.

And I really don't care about Fox, because they never have been a news organization, but I would like the news outlets that still might have some pride in their craft to stop the next Republican in his or her tracks who says something about the president's policies that is demonstrably, refutably untrue and maybe asked them to source their statement.

I know it's a radical thought, but could you do that for me? I'd consider it a personal favor.

(Cross-posted to Lippmann's Ghost.)

Will Fox News pay a price for Murdoch's fall?

By Richard K. Barry

Perhaps not surprisingly, Media Matters is paying close attention to how much or, we should say, how little coverage Fox News is giving to the News Corp. phone-hacking scandal in England.

Media Matters has for some time been doing a splendid job of monitoring the pathetically biased news coverage over at Fox, so they must have been salivating at the opportunity to track how obvious Fox would be in low-keying the scandal enveloping its parent company, News Corp., and owner, Rupert Murdoch.

According to Media Matters:

Over a nine-day period from July 4 through July 13, Fox produced 30 segments on the crisis, as opposed to 71 for MSNBC and 109 for CNN.

Okay, that's sort of interesting, but clear evidence that Fox News under-reports facts that are inconsistent with its wacky hyper-right wing world view is hardly earth-shattering. Just more of the same.

Hate to say it, but Americans, especially the right-wing variety, are just not going to pay all that much attention to what goes on on the other side of the pond. If the matter remained in England, that might have been the end of it, as least regarding Murdoch's fortunes here.

But, as they say, this story might have legs. According to CNN:

The FBI has launched an investigation into Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. after a report that employees or associates may have attempted to hack into phone conversations and voice mail of September 11 survivors, victims and their families, a federal law enforcement source told CNN Thursday.

Just to be clear, it appears that the investigation of possible hacking of 9/11 victims' and their families' phones is an extension of the Murdoch owned British newspaper scandal having to do with accusations that its reporters illegally eavesdropped on the phone messages of murder and terrorist victims, politicians and celebrities.

The accusations would appear not to involve Murdoch owned entities in the U.S.

Nonetheless, that does beg a very interesting question. What would the repercussions be, if any, for News Corp. properties like Fox News and The Wall Street Journal if it is found out that 9/11 victims had their phones tapped by employees of the Rupert Murdoch media empire?

Clearly, News of the World, which bore the brunt of the scandal in England, decided to shut down rather than die a slow death at the hands of mortified advertisers who decided that the newspaper was just too toxic.

9/11 has for so long been such an important part of the way that Fox News in particular has draped itself in the American flag, that evidence that the parent company was violating the privacy of the victims and their families in such a dramatic way might just be too difficult a fact to spin away, or ignore away (see above).

Might people start to tune out or, better yet, advertisers start to walk away?

We can only hope, but it will be interesting to see.

(Cross-posted to Lippmann's Ghost.)

Must See Nixonland TV

By J. Thomas Duffy


John Cook, over on Gawker, has a bombshell, of sorts, having unearthed documents from the Nixon Library that has Roger Ailes laying out the blueprint for Faux News, decades ahead of time.



Roger Ailes’ Secret Nixon-Era Blueprint for Fox News

Republican media strategist Roger Ailes launched Fox News Channel in 1996, ostensibly as a "fair and balanced" counterpoint to what he regarded as the liberal establishment media. But according to a remarkable document buried deep within the Richard Nixon Presidential Library, the intellectual forerunner for Fox News was a nakedly partisan 1970 plot by Ailes and other Nixon aides to circumvent the "prejudices of network news" and deliver "pro-administration" stories to heartland television viewers.

No doubt, with the dwarfs, finks, phonies and frauds of Nixonland, the corpulent liar didn't need the pikers, he just had to bid his time, and launch his own lie factory, were he was The King, and could listen to his lies bounce around, echoing all over the Right Wing Freak Show.


Go read Cook's post, it's overflowing with juicy tidbits



Bonus Riffs


The Ailes Files


Eric Hananoki - CRUISE SHIP CONFESSION: Top Fox News Executive Admits Lying On-Air About Obama


Eric Boehlert - FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”


The New Fox News Tagline


Cross posted on The Garlic: All The Cloves Fit To Peel

The Sesame Manifesto

By Capt. Fogg

(Ed. note: This is a follow-up to Fogg's post from yesterday. See the Fox News clip there or below. It's certainly enraging, but Hannity et al. are also massively stupid. It's hard to know whether to laugh or shudder. -- MJWS)

It's impossible for me to watch a Fox "panel" chew on a story without thinking of an alligator feeding frenzy or a bunch of mean dogs fighting for possession of a bit of rawhide. Actually, it's impossible for me to watch Fox News at all, but for those of a tougher breed, here's a prime example of that ruthless war on reality called Fox.

Listen carefully and you'll spot the message that Sesame Street aims at lower income, urban kids and you'll smell the racism and you'll hear the Republican anthem that the fraction of a cent per taxpayer that this show costs is "on principle" too much and especially because it tries to elevate the underclasses in direct contravention of Divine Law and Ayn Rand, whichever is the more powerful.

Does anyone really believe that Big Bird is a Communist or that Sesame Street is ruining America and the morals of its children? (Perhaps Doctor Spock fans can sigh with relief now that they've moved on to a new chew toy.)

Perhaps you do, perhaps you watch Fox anyway. Perhaps you're a malicious idiot with delusions of persecution, but here it is again:


(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Only on Fox

By Capt. Fogg 

Did you know that not only is Sesame Street "liberal," not only is Big Bird a bigot, watching it could lead to a totalitarian state and undermines morality and the destruction of the American family. It sets up an appetite for "governmental largesse" and prompts high schoolers to nominate homosexuals to host the junior prom. 

No, not only could you not make this up, you couldn't be paid millions to rave like a lunatic. It's getting to the point where you couldn't pay me to admit I'm American.

Fox News damage control of the Ailes-Palin conflict, translated

By Nicholas Wilbur

Until Fox News flipped the damage control switch, the American public had a brief window of time to ponder the potential ramifications of the cable news giant's CEO, Roger Ailes, describing Sarah "Mama Grizzly" Palin as a "stupid" "idiot" who hasn't contributed a single wink that "elevated the conservative movement."

Thankfully, the Fox News executive vice president for programming, Bill Shine, cleared everything up for those who thought Fox News might actually take a stab at providing the public with credible, fact-based news reporting.

In Shine's own shining words, with paraphrased translations of what he meant:

"I know for a fact that Roger Ailes admires and respects Sarah Palin and thinks she is smart."

Translation: Ailes admires Hitler for his eloquent and inspiring speeches and his undeniable skill in employing bigoted propaganda to cajole the brainless masses into joining a revolution aimed at shedding the earth of filth. Palin doesn't come close, but Ailes gives her an A for effort.

"He also believes many members of the left-wing media are extremely terrified and threatened by her."

Translation: A millionaire with a penchant for sniping wolves from helicopters and blaming her failures as a vice presidential nominee on the “gotcha” media tactics of a certain (lucky-to-be-alive) CBS news host who asked such tricky questions as, “What newspapers and magazines do you read?” – that doesn’t merely instill fear in “many of the left-wing media.” It instills fear in “all wings of the media,” including Ailes, hence the damage control.


"Despite a massive effort to destroy Sarah Palin, she is still on her feet and making a difference in the political world."

Translation: With a limited arsenal of comebacks for such an articulacy-challenged demagogue, we must all acknowledge that standing is an accomplishment in and of itself, particularly for a serially pregnant former Wasilla beauty queen with a talent for blowing flutes and rolling around on her back on the well-manicured campus grounds of the five colleges she attended over a six-year period during her youth. As for the “massive effort” to destroy Palin, that was me exercising irony – a word Ailes and I both know is safe against the North Star blowback of Palinocalypse (because she thinks it has something to do with straightening wrinkled clothes); the only “massive effort” to destroy Palin, of course, was Palin. As for “making a difference,” that is an inarguable understatement whose lack of a modifier (positive, negative...) to the word “difference” ought not be overlooked.

"As for the 'Republican close to Ailes' for which the incorrect Palin quote is attributed, when Roger figures out who that is, I guarantee you he or she will no longer be 'close to Ailes.'"

Translation: The quote is incorrect because anybody who knows Ailes knows that his vocabulary is limited to the word “Nazi” whenever he’s referring to someone who annoys him. Furthermore, it’s not nice to tell the media about a close friend’s personal secrets, and Ailes is going to be really, really upset about his non-public thoughts being aired to the general public – especially when it is so terribly shocking how eerily in tune with the general public his personal feelings happen to be. That is not the Fox News philosophy.

(Cross-posted at Muddy Politics.)