Posts Tagged ‘bias’

I read the following comment from Fr. Michael Pfleger, who has been targeted by far-right conservatives like Fox News commentator (not fair and balanced journalist or journalist at all for that matter) Bill O’Reilly because he can be somewhat used as a way of attack President Obama. First off, none of these conservatives gave much of a rat’s tail about Pfleger or Rev. Jeremiah Wright until they saw them as ways of attacking Barack Obama during his candidacy to become president of the United States.

Anyway, fast forward to the present, the time since the historic election of 2008, and right wingers like O’Reilly continue to target Pfleger, Wright and Minister Louis Farrakhan as ways of attacking black people or portraying blacks as being racist (note: yes, I do realize that Pfleger is a white man, but not a lot of conservatives see him in that way).

I found this quote from Pfleger at News Hounds: “O’Reilly doesn’t want to hear the truth we speak,” Father Pfleger said, ” . . . I’ll hang around Wright and Farrakhan any day rather than O’Reilly.”

Who Pfleger chooses to hang with is his business (in no way, shape or form do I subscribe to the theories that Pfleger or Wright are anywhere close to racist as people), but, the underlying message in his quote is an important one. O’Reilly doesn’t want to hear the truth about issues regarding race. He, like many conservatives, live in this laughable utopia where all people of all races are equal, the battle for civil rights was one and it’s a completely level playing field.

Sure, these right wingers will utter the customary, “sure racism still exists,” but every example you give of racism they deny it is racially motivated.

Right wing extremist Ann Coulter, who like so many others of her kind finds a home on Fox News, attempted to come to the rescue of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. In her botched rescue event, however, Coulter ended up looking like even more of a nut when she attempted to push her foolish point that Palin (a two-term governor who quit on her beloved state to sell books, make money and work on Fox News) is 20 million times more qualified than Vice President Joe Biden, a long-time former U.S. senator.

COULTER: How about comparing Joe Biden with Sarah Palin? She’s twenty million times more qualified than he is.

GERALDO RIVERA: How do you say that? A two-year governor against a long Senate career. Anyway –

COULTER: How long are we gonna pretend Biden is not just some drunken Irishman embarrassing Obama?

There’s all the evidence you need of how much of an irrational nut Ann Coulter is and how she seems to fit in so nicely at Fox News.

Then, in the end, she shows how much of a hater she is with a vicious stereotype used to attack Vice President Biden.

Another quality Fox News personality.

First and foremost, I don’t think I will ever be able to understand how someone who is supposed to be analyzing bias in the media brings on biased partisans to discuss bias.

Yet, it seems every Sunday on CNN’s Reliable Sources, host Howard Kurtz routinely brings on biased analysts to discuss bias in the media.

But, that is just my regular beef with Kurtz.

Media Matters for America has another topic about Howard Kurtz that caught my attention.

Kurtz is either too afraid to strongly and consistently call out Fox News for its pro-conservative bias or he too is a closet conservative masquerading as nonpartisan.

Here is what Media Matters posted:

Howard Kurtz suggests Fox’s “news programming” is balanced and the Washington Post‘s editorial page is liberal:

Knoxville, Tenn.: Why do so many media outlets, when mentioning “Fox News”, say “which some say has conservative views”? This seems to be the equivalent of saying “The Washington Post, which some say is a newspaper…”

Why is the rest of the press corp afraid to call a spade a spade, particularly when (as in this case) it is so virulently blatant?

Howard Kurtz: Because some say a distinction must be made between Fox’s opinion shows (O’Reilly, Beck, Hannity) and its news programming. Just as you have to make a distinction between The Post’s news pages and its left-leaning editorial page.

Even if we buy what Kurtz is selling right there it still is ridiculous. He suggests we should distinguish between the news content and commentary content of Fox News (with respect to bias). But, even the commentary is all far-right commentary when you look at Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity (all far to the right of the political mainstream). Throw in Greta Van Susteren, Fox and Friends, Greg Gutfeld, etc. … and you see the pattern that becomes all too clear. Where is the balance there?

Also, as Media Matters points out, it is insulting of Kurtz to think that we’re too stupid to see the well-documented instances of Fox News bias from its news programming (cheerleading Tea Party protests, openly promoting Republican Scott Brown in his candidacy for U.S. Senate and more).

Check out the Media Matters for America article to see the full depth and breadth of how Kurtz seems to think we’re too stupid to see the bias of Fox News that runs almost 24/7 (nevermind the garbage on Fox Nation).

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201001250017

According to an article in POLITICO, Republicans are attempting to use President Obama as a weapon in the upcoming 2010 elections against Democratic rivals.

This strategy is no big secret. In fact, this is merely Republicans being slow to the punch with a strategy Democrats used (successfully) against George W. Bush during the previous eight years. But, this is more than just the politics of President Obama at play. Many of these political haters had already solidified their feelings for Barack Obama before he was even elected president. Make no mistake about it: the racial angle is difficult to ignore. From a pure political standpoint, it is the gift that keeps on giving for the most hardcore of conservatives. This is not about health care, budget deficits or wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (all of which were problems long before Barack Obama was elected president a little less than 14 months ago). Face it, a significant number of were (and still are) quite a bit uncomfortable with a black president. This secret strategy, from far-right conservatives, seeks to exploit that feeling (on top of the usual politics that are to be expected with any president).

This strategy helps fire up that highly conservative base by plastering images of President Obama all across TV sets and print publications.

There are other factors. Included in the other factors is payback. Republicans and conservatives seethed as they felt President Bush was attacked over and over again (he was attacked quite a bit) in the twilight of his presidency. Like a football game, the hardcore Republicans and conservatives were on defense against a juggernaut of an offensive attack strengthened by the momentum of the game. Now, they have the ball and they are on offense. The right wing now has the ball, but it has little game plan (beyond anger and fear).

Anger and fear will not win elections and will not help Republicans as this country increasingly becomes multicultural.

Check out this comment from the POLITICO article:

“For candidates who are running in Republican gubernatorial primaries, it would be a mistake not to contrast their ideology vis-à-vis the president,” said Brad Todd, a GOP ad man who is a veteran of governor’s races. “We are begging for a national election. It will benefit Republicans in every race where that nationalized dynamic is in place.”

Again, this is the old strategy used against the second President Bush. In general, this national strategy will not work as President Obama still enjoys pretty strong ratings. But, in some isolated pockets of the country, such a strategy will work effectively (as it did during the election of 2008). Many pockets of this country still exist where the men and women continue to hate Barack Obama (some even more so) as they did the minute he became the Democrat frontrunner in the primary in 2008.

POLITICO:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31128.html

I’ve taken an opportunity to reexamine the controversial comments of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. And, as a result of taking another look at his words, I’ve changed my mind and I think he was pretty much on target with what he said (even if it may come at a bit of a political cost). Reid is right when he speaks of the obstructionists who are akin to those who barked against women’s rights, the Civil Rights Movement, the movement to abolish slavery and the movement for fundamental fairness for GLBTs (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender). We hear the same words: slow down, lets take it slow, lets take a closer look, we’re moving too fast, it’s too soon, be patient, things will work out … blah, blah, blah.

The Senate Majority Leader is right as you read the comments he made that has pushed him into the spotlight.

“Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, ‘slow down, stop everything, let’s start over.’ If you think you’ve heard these same excuses before, you’re right,” Reid said Monday. “When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said ‘slow down, it’s too early, things aren’t bad enough.’”  

He continued: “When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn’t quite right.  

“When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today.”

Note that conservatives latched onto the race aspect of what Reid said and all but ignored the full context of what he said when he talked about the rights of women as well? You can believe this is no accident. Once again, the diversity-lacking Republicans are trying to use race as a way of attacking black people and fueling resentment in the hearts of some whites who might be predisposed with the election of Barack Obama.

In what is an almost balanced story (that is saying something for Fox News) comes an interesting comment that puts it all in perspective:

Richard Harpootlian, former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said the comparison was a sign of “silly season in Washington.” 

“We see Harry Reid saying silly things on one side, we see Republicans talking about killing grandma on the other — wake up, Washington,” he said. 

So true in some ways, but in other ways I can understand where Sen. Reid is coming from with his statement.

Harpootlian does have a point in that the rhetoric is getting wild.

Fox News takes a story about the small drop in in the jobless rate and spins in the worst possible way with this irresponsible headline that screams: RIGHT-WING BIAS.

This is the kind of bias and prejudice that makes Fox News look like a second-rate tabloid magazine.

Join me for a moment of laughter and take note of the phony-ass Fox News slogan: Fair & Balanced.

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the darling of the right-wing, is back at it again – this time giving comfort to the nutty birthers who continue to attack President Obama. Governor Palin, who cried about the media and people coming after her as she resigned from her position in governor’s office in Alaska, now is continuing to advance the pathetic mission of the birthers. During a segment on the show of a right-ring radio talker named Rusty Humphries, it was Palin who went out of her way to provide a soothing hand of comfort to the birther morons who just can’t seem to come to grips with the president of the United States of America being a black man. That’s right, I said it. I do believe that this birther movement largely is motivated by a strong prejudice.

As documented by Think Progress:

Yesterday while appearing on the right-wing radio show of Rusty Humphries, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin expressed her allegiance with the birther movement. She asserted that it was a “fair question” to ask whether President Obama was born in the U.S. “I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue,” she said. “I don’t have a problem with that.”

She doesn’t have a problem with it because she is a right-wing extremist, who has a bias against the president and you have to wonder if it is just a political and philosophical bias.

Think Progress then added her response:

After the media picked up her comments, Palin went on her Facebook page at 1:16 a.m. and criticized reporters for calling her a birther and pushing “stupid conspiracies”:

Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask… which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.

And, as Think Progress later pointed out, it was Palin who left the position of governor of Alaska crying about how the media and people were advancing all of these attacks on her. Then, she turns around and helps push an attack on President Obama that was long ago refuted. She cried about how the media, politicians and political operatives were attacking her and making it so difficult for her to conduct business (she was being dogged by allegations of ethics violations). Then she turns around and contributes to the same thing against President Obama.

Sarah Palin feels the “politics of personal destruction” are OK as long as they are directed at President Obama or some other Democrat and not directed at her.

Sarah Palin believes questions  from idiot birthers in regard to where President Obama was born are OK, but questions raised about potential ethics violations against her are part of the “politics of personal destruction.”

Sarah Palin is a hypocrite.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/12/04/palin-birthers-conspiracies/

This is a letter ColorofChange is having people send to Rupert Murdoch and others in power at Fox News to demand they stop the race-baiting crap on our airwaves.

Dear Mr. Murdoch:

On November 6th, you clearly stated that you believed Glenn Beck was “right” when he called President Obama a “racist.” Then, on November 10th, through a spokesperson, you stated that you don’t share the same opinion as Beck, or believe that President Obama is a racist.

Which is it, Mr. Murdoch?

Fox News, under your leadership, has had a long, deep history of engaging in inflammatory racial rhetoric: attacking black leaders, black culture, and black institutions. Now you’ve been caught defending the words and behavior of Glenn Beck, the worst of the worst when it comes to race-baiting, whom more than 80 advertisers have abandoned–because of the very comments you endorsed.

Mr. Murdoch, more and more it appears that Fox’s problem with race starts at the top, with you. If you support Beck and others on Fox News using race-baiting, say so. If you have a problem with their tactics, tell us what you’re going to do to make them stop. You can’t have it both ways.

People must stand up against the garbage coming from Beck, Murdoch and many others at Fox News and throughout the Murdoch empire.

ColorofChange petition:
http://colorofchange.org/murdoch/

President Obama spoke out strongly against the tragedy that took place at Fort Hood, Texas and expressed sympathy for the victims and families of the victims of this violent and terrible crime that has shaken our nation at its core. But, as I read an opinion piece posted through the Fox News Web site, I quickly realized that political opportunists who are haters of the president will let no opportunity to attack the president pass unexploited.

Dan Gainor, who is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture, also is a contributor to Fox News with regard to opinion pieces. It is crystal clear, however, that his latest entry to the Fox News right-wing effort is a desperate attempt to exploit the Fort Hood tragedy as an opportunity to attack President Obama utilizing the weakest and most flimsy of material imaginable.

The headline reads, “Obama on Ft. Hood — Not Even ‘Shocked’” to get things started. Then, the sub headline reads,  ”While President Obama called the murders at Ft. Hood  ”horrible” and a “tragedy” and urged “prayers,” the response seemed understated compared to the other incidents.” So, it is not enough that he called the murders at Fort Hood “horrible” and a “tragedy” as far as some right-wing nuts are concerned. Because he did not specifically use the word “shocked” it seems he now is again being attacked.

Here is how hater Dan gets started:

How a president responds to a crisis defines him. President Obama has shown how upset he was after the murder of abortion Dr. George Tiller and after the attack on the Holocaust Museum. But when it came to the Ft. Hood shootings, the president twice gave the incident a limited response …devoting little more than 4 minutes over two separate appearances to the 13 dead and 30 wounded.

In the Tiller case, the president was “shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning.” In the case of the museum attack, Obama was “shocked and saddened by today’s shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.”

But when it came to the horrendous Ft. Hood shootings, the term “shocked” was nowhere to be found. Instead, the initial response was shoehorned into comments he made opening the White House Tribal Nations Conference. First there were a couple applause lines to Native Americans and Obama’s “shout out to that Congressional Medal of Honor winner,” who appears not to have won the medal. (Joe Medicine Crow won the Medal of Freedom — the nation’s highest civilian honor.)

What is striking about Gainor’s comment is he (in true right wing form) comes back to one of their key issues (taking away the reproductive freedom of women … abortion). It shows the obsession on the part of many conservatives with the issue of abortion and how upset a large number of right wingers were that the president and others were outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller.

Gainor is actually counting the minutes devoting to the president’s responses to different tragedies. That is just weak, silly and insulting to the victims of all the aforementioned crimes to use it as a tool to launch a politically-motivated attack.

If President Obama had held a press conference to express his feelings he probably would have been accused of exploiting the tragedy to put himself in the spotlight.

Actually, Gainor goes on to attack President Obama anyway for putting himself into the spotlight.

Then the president addressed the shooting. While he called the incident “horrible” and a “tragedy” and urged “prayers,” the response seemed understated compared to the other incidents. Then, in true Obama fashion, he did manage to make the shootings at least in part about him. “I want all of you to know that as commander in chief, that there’s no greater honor but also no greater responsibility for me than to make sure that the extraordinary men and women in uniform are properly cared for and that their safety and security when they are at home is provided for us.”

To some, that statement is taking responsibility, but two a right-wing political bigot it is about putting yourself in the spotlight. The writer ignores the positive as President Obama salutes the brave men and women who fight for our country and instead chooses to politicize the statement to portray the president in a negative light. Many conservatives have attacked President Obama for not saluting the troops enough, but when he does many of these same conservatives essentially accusing him of grandstanding.

How pathetic can it get from Gainor?

He busts out the stopwatch again.

Two minutes and 39 seconds later he was done and without even taking a breath back to talking about the Native American event. Nowhere in his speech or his remarks the next day did he even acknowledge that the attacker was a Muslim. In his statement after the museum attack, he correctly criticized “anti-Semitism and prejudice” but made no mention of religion in the latest incident.

The Nov. 6 appearance took up just 1 minute 30 seconds and this time it was paired with his remarks on the bad unemployment numbers. In all, he spent 4 minutes 9 seconds to address the attack on 43 Americans …less than 6 seconds per person.

This is beyond childish.

Then, notice the bigotry reveals itself again as Gainor bashes the president for not acknowledging that the accused attacker in the Fort Hood massacre was a Muslim.

Fox News has, as I have pointed out countless times on this blog, has blurred the line between news and its right-wing opinion with its coverage. Since the historic election of President Obama, a Democrat, Fox News has gone head first off the deep end of fairness in its leaning to the far right of the political mainstream. While the network tries to portray people as not being able to distinguish between its far-right opinion shows and its right-wing news coverage, the two have become indistinguishable  and more so since the presidential election of 2008 that swept Barack Obama in as president and Joe Biden in as vice president.

Cleverly, these right-wing talking points pop up on right-wing shoes hosted by Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity and then find themselves on so-called news shows hosted by Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, Bill Hemmer, Megyn Kelly and others.

As Eric Burns of Media Matters for America is right … (Fox News) has morphed itself this year into a 24/7 political operation.

Burns is right on the money.

The right-wing nuts, led by Fox News has been on the attack against White House communications director Anita Dunn due to her strongly-worded criticism of the conservative network for its obvious right-wing bias (that includes both opinion and news content that leans heavily to the right). The righties have been working hard to falsely portray her as an admirer of former Chinese communist leader Mao Tse-tung and now the latest is a disgraceful and sloppy attempt (a “Hail Mary” to borrow a football analogy) by Fox News to grossly mischaracterize Dunn’s comments about the campaign strategy of Team Obama during the presidential election of 2008.

Media Matters has been leading the charge to correct Fox News misinformation on this issue:

DUNN: A huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to, you know, why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was, that we — we had a huge premium both on message discipline, on people in the campaign not leaking to reporters and people in the campaign not discussing our strategy, and also on making the press cover what we were saying.

So we, you know, one of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters; we just put that out there and make them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it.

That is what Dunn said, but here is how Fox News mischaracterized her comments to put them in the most negative light possible (remember that this is coming from a “legitimate news organization”) in an ongoing retaliation effort:

The Obama campaign’s press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on “making” the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute “control” over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this year.

In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama’s highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

“Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” Dunn said, admitting that the strategy “did not always make us popular in the press.”

This is, of course, a gross and irresponsible mischaracterization of what Dunn said. Fox misleads readers into thinking that Dunn was saying that the Obama campaign controlled the media which is false and irresponsible on the part of people at Fox News.

Notice how Fox takes single words quotations and frames them based on their own right-wing bias (an effort that is even more powerful considering its ongoing vendetta against Anita Dunn).

Here is how Media Matters boiled it down:

WorldNetDaily, followed by the Drudge Report and Fox Nation, falsely claimed that during a January 12 speech, White House communications director Anita Dunn boasted about the White House’s “control” over the media. In fact, Dunn was discussing the Obama campaign’s strategy for controlling the campaign’s message, not the media; moreover, her comments were made before Obama had taken office and before she became communications director.

So, the campaign was not controlling the media, but making sure its own message was controlled and consistent. This distortion by Fox News is done purposely and, I believe, maliciously simply to attack Anita Dunn in retaliation for her strong comments about what she perceives as bias on the part of Fox News.

Fox News, of course, responds like an elementary-school child would … with attacks, lies, gossip and essentially name calling.

Check out the Media Matters research to see the depth and breadth of the lies coming from the far right in a desperate attempt to attack Anita Dunn.

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn called out Fox News for what it is: a conservative media outlet with a far-right agenda.

But, is this really anything new? This is kind of old news, but it is refreshing to see the White House call out Fox News for its right-wing bias (which extends beyond its prime-time lineup of opinionated hate).

Here are some of the comments highlighted by Sam Stein of The Huffington Post with the video to follow:

“If we went back a year ago to the fall of 2008, to the campaign, that was a time this country was in two wars that we had a financial collapse probably more significant than any financial collapse since the Great Depression. If you were a Fox News viewer in the fall election what you would have seen were that the biggest stories and the biggest threats facing America were a guy named Bill Ayers and a something called ACORN.”

“The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological… what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party.”

Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again… when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition.”

“[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that’s fine. But let’s not pretend they’re a news organization like CNN is.”

Good for Dunn and the White House to fight back against Fox News which is playing the role of media relations firm for the Republicans.

The right-wing bias on Fox News is not just in its evening programming with conservatives like Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. It includes others masquerading as liberals (Greta Van Susteren and to a lesser extent Juan Williams) or disguising themselves as objective “reporters” or analysts (The dreadful Fox and Friends crew, Chris Wallace, Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly, etc.).

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/11/anita-dunn-fox-news-an-ou_n_316691.html

This is a reach by even the low Fox News standards for objectivity.

Fox News on-air personalities have been whining about President Obama not coming to them and kissing their butts when he made appearances on major television networks, but skipped Fox (which has skipped out on him during a few of his speeches and meetings when other networks covered them). Was that a case of putting financial gain before country? (If Fox can ask these kind of loaded questions then I guess others can, too). But, perhaps part of the reason the president has avoided Fox News is its ongoing campaign to demonize him and hint that he may somehow be anti-American or that supporters of him may be anti-American. The latest from Fox News is a video it has plastered all over its homepage of young school students from B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., singing songs about the messages they’ve heard from President Obama. But, instead of looking at it as students learning about the presidency and the messages of equality they were actually singing about, Fox News takes it and turns it into the most negative interpretation possible.

Here is the image it put on the Web and (below it) how Fox News described the video:

092409_newobamasong_20090924_103338

Here is how Fox News describes the video of those evil messages such as lending a hand, making the country strong, equal work means equal pay and being fair.

Video shows little kids at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., being taught to sing Obama’s praises — have they already learned the Star Spangled Banner, America the Beautiful and God Bless America?
VIDEO: School Kids’ Song Praises Obama

The messages below the Fox headline don’t match. The kids, based on those lyrics were not singing the president’s praises, but rather singing about his messages that all good people should embrace. A large majority of the people who are angry are those who just can’t stand that a black man is in such a prominent position and can’t handle the historical significance of his presidency, with positive messages and that people are listening and being moved. None of these people cared about this kind of stuff when Bush was in office or even when President Clinton was in office.

Where were these conservatives when President Bush was going to schools hyping No Child Left Behind and drawing praise from school children?

Now, notice the part where Fox asks if the children have already learned the Star Spangled Banner, America the Beautiful and God Bless America? This is of course done to again raise the idea of the president and those who support him being anti-American or not having the best interest of the country first and foremost. This is yet another case of Fox News injecting its right-wing bias into what should have been a fair and balanced news story. But, as we know, Fox is neither fair nor balanced its news and is especially unfair and unbalanced when it is reporting on almost anything it feels can portray Barack Obama in a negative light.

I bet none of the right wingers at Fox cared about praise from school children toward President George W. Bush when he was in office or since he has been out of office. No, the bigotry of Fox News is on display only in matters related to President Obama.

Watch the video for yourself. The video is completely innocent. I did stuff like this when I was in elementary school where we talked about national leaders, historical figures and others.

This is just stupid, far-right political hate from conservatives , such as those we see from morning to evening on Fox News, who didn’t (and still don’t) care about praise school kids have given to previous presidents.

Angry right wingers, such as the people who run Fox News, are in full-blown attack mode as they go at President Obama and we still are not even a year removed from Election Day 2008.

This one is weak even by far-right standards (on the YouTube page some nut compares President Obama to Kim Jong il, Fidel Castro, Adolph Hitler and others). These right wingers are overflowing with hate. My goodness, well-known people who speak to elementary school students often are praised with songs or get handmade drawings, paintings or handwritten thank yous. This is weak.

A couple of things:

Oh yea, Fox News also had this bullet underneath the video as more evidence of fear and smear politics:
Is Obama’s ‘Safe Schools Czar’ Unsafe for Schools?

Bush visits George W. Bush Elementary (remember when conservatives had a fit when an elementary school was about to be named for President Obama?):
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/10/03/bush-visits-george-w-bush-elementary/

Where are the good and strong conservatives who are going to stand up against the race baiting from extremists to the far right like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh? A few brave souls, ones rejecting this racial antagonism, have begun to speak up and demand their voices be heard. Clearly, it’s not easy, but a few of these conservatives are trying to regain control of a Republican party that has been hijacked by the extremists on the far right who are plenty comfortable with a party that not only lacks significant diversity, but oftentimes seems to be running away from it while screaming in fear.

Fox News, home to right-wing news and opinion, recently sent out a memo to its people with “standards” in the subject line. As many of you know, Fox has effectively carved out a nice spot for itself in the media as the voice for the conservatives of this country and as media leader of the forces loudly opposing pretty much anything that is proposed by President Obama. But, Fox News is increasingly taking heat for its blatant activism for the causes for people far to the right of the political mainstream. Recently, after being busted leading cheers at what was in essence an anti-Obama rally (packed with tea baggers), the network apparently decided to issue a memo (one that is nothing short of ironic and laughable) to its employees.

From: Sammon, Bill
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 2:25 PM
To: 005 -Washington
Subject: standards

For those of us who have only been at Fox for a relatively short period of time, it’s useful to remind ourselves that, as journalists, we must always be careful to cover the story without becoming part of the story. At news events, we’re supposed to function as dispassionate observers, not active participants. We are there to chronicle the news, not create it.

That means we ask questions in a fair, impartial manner. When approaching interviewees, we identify ourselves, by both name and news organization, up front. We seek out a variety of voices and views. We take note of the scene in order to bring color and context to our viewers.

We do not cheerlead for one cause or another. We do not rile up a crowd. If a crowd happens to be boisterous when we show it on TV, so be it. If it happens to be quiet, that’s fine, too. It’s not our job to affect the crowd’s behavior one way or the other. Again, we’re journalists, not participants — and certainly not performers.

Indeed, any effort to affect the crowd’s behavior only serves to undermine our legitimate journalistic role as detached eyewitnesses. Remember, our viewers are counting on us to be honest brokers when it comes to reporting — not altering –the important events of the day. That is nothing less than a sacred trust. We must always take pains to preserve that trust.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please stop by.

Uh, we have a lot of questions, but we expect few meaningful answers and thus see little reason to stop by.

This is completely and utterly laughable as Fox News regularly spits on these hollow standards Sammon is talking about.

Blogger Kate Sheppard has an interesting take on the manufactured controversy (led by far-right Fox News nut Glenn Beck) over Van Jones. As many of you know, the right has been attempting for more than a year now to try and portray Barack Obama as some kind of an angry black radical (almost exclusively through people he is connected to – so-called “associations”). The latest person targeted by Beck is Jones (although Beck has been dishonest about not admitting that there appears to be another motivation behind his all-out assault on a relatively low-level member of President Obama’s administration in a role few people would otherwise care about).

But, is Jones more powerful in the Obama administration or out of it?

Here is a part of Sheppard’s take:

Those fears have, to some extent, panned out. Jones’s most public appearance in the past few months may have been when he stood up at a White House press conference to ask the gathered reporters to silence their cell phones (he had no further remarks to make). Instead of playing a leading role in drumming up support for clean-energy polices—something he was extremely effective at—he’s now a relatively low-level bureaucrat trying to steer stimulus funding toward green-job programs. In all honesty, Glenn Beck may have more to worry about with Jones outside the White House than in it.

There may be some truth to that last sentence. Maybe Beck’s efforts (if successful) could turn Jones into something of a political martyr who could be a greater factor outside the Obama administration.

But, Beck’s motives seem to be more about: (1) smearing Barack Obama and portraying him as an angry black radical and (2) marginalizing the somewhat successful ColorOfChange boycott against him by smearing someone who helped start the group.

Here is a nice catch by News Hounds that helps illustrate the hypocrisy of Fox News in terms of how it treats President Obama. Fox News, whining about mild criticism (depending on whether or not the following comments are put into context) from President Obama in isolated comments he has made about the media. Fox has been working hard to be the network of opposition and obstruction to President Obama and this current duly-elected administration that is leading the United States of America.

Here is an excerpt from the News Hounds blog about an exchange between Greta Van Susteren and Rick Santorum as Santorum compares President Obama to Venezuela President Hugo Chavez:

The segment began with Van Susteren playing a montage of Obama’s comments about cable news. Each clip was from a different setting:

- Referring to media coverage after Sarah Palin’s nomination for vice president in 2008, Obama said, “Cable was 24 hours a day (saying) Obama’s lost his mojo.”

- Speaking to his supporters, Obama said, “Instead of being preoccupied with the polls and with the pundits and with the cable chatter, what you guys consistently did was you just kept on working.”

- “They don’t want to be constructive, they just want to get in the usual political fights back and forth. And sometimes that’s fed by all the cable chatter on the media.”

- “I’ve got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration… That’s a pretty big megaphone.”

- “I don’t find most of the cable chatter very persuasive… It feels like WWF wrestling. Everybody’s got their role to play.”

Santorum reacted by saying, “This is an attack on Fox. This reminds me of what Hugo Chavez is doing down in Venezuela, trying to shut down the voice of opposition in the media. This is not good.”

Santorum took the president’s comment about Fox News out of context.

This is all old news, but naturally host Van Susteren (who is no liberal as proven by her spectator status in regard to the smear) and hardcore right-wing extremist Rick Santorum leave on the table no opportunity (large or small) to attack President Obama. And, as you might expect, he is once again compared to a leader (who is considered a dictator) from a foreign country. It fits right into the theme of the far right to paint President Obama as extremist, as socialist, as not one of us, as different, as exotic … so on and so forth.

The work of Fox News, to mischaracterize and demonize our president and commander-in-chief continues.

Perhaps only the far-right nuts in our society could possibly bring themselves to qualify a gay Jewish man (Rep. Barney Frank) and a biracial man (President Obama) as Nazis.

Thanks to Jon Stewart for pointing that out and giving us a glimpse of what the less-than-stellar Fox News person Griff Jenkins is all about.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/20/jon-sterwart-gives-props_n_263878.html