You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1126)

PLAYS: (5215)

After Bill O'Reilly only shows the portion of The Daily Show clip where Jon Stewart curses at Bernard Goldberg rather than Stewart's entire response to Goldberg saying that "liberals don't have five kids--one of them has Down Syndrome--liberals certainly don't allow that to happen". Goldberg responded:

Who do you think is more likely to willingly and knowingly have a baby with Down Syndrome, a pro-choice woman or a pro-life woman; a woman for whom religion isn't terribly important or a woman for whom religion is important; a liberal woman or a conservative woman? The odds are that it's the pro-life, religious conservative woman that would make such a compassionate decision and the reason, the reason he's so upset is because he like most liberals think they have a monopoly on compassion and she shows that they don't.

Oh yeah, that’s entirely different Bernie. And nice hatchet job on editing the Daily Show segment O’Reilly or your audience would have known Stewart actually had a substantive response to Goldberg that made what he said tonight look just as stupid--not that it was really any different from what he said in the previous show.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (843)

PLAYS: (1919)

Sure enough, just as Nicole wondered, Juan Williams was pretty bent out of shape over Warren Ballentine's calling him out -- using black cultural lingo -- for being such a willing supplicant to the "Limbaugh is being oppressed by mean black people" meme currently popular in right-wing circles.

So who does he bring on to buttress his claim that liberals are being bigots? Why, none other than Tammy Bruce and ... the Rev. Ken Hutcherson!

Bruce is bad enough. This is the person who called Michelle Obama "trash" and opined that "President Obama has some malevolence toward this country". She's also suggested that torture is no worse than a bad day in West Hollywood. We also remember her classy tweet on learning of Ted Kennedy's death: "[He] left a woman to drown and now he's left us to drown." In other words, hardly an ideal person to be claiming a lack of civility from the left.

But Hutcherson? That's rich.

Folks outside the Seattle area may not know a lot about Hutcherson, so
they just see him as a black conservative. Which is common enough, especially on Fox. It's more genuine than being a fake liberal like Williams, at least.

But he's also one of the most prominent anti-gay bigots in the state, and for that matter on the West Coast.

This is a man who told his flock that "God hates effeminate men".

He also headed up an initiative to legalize anti-gay discrimination in Washington state. (It went down in flames.)

Of even deeper concern is his heavy involvement in promoting a virulent and violent anti-gay organization called Watchmen on the Walls. This is a global evangelical-Christian outfit that, elsewhere in the world (particularly in Eastern Europe) is associated with violent anti-gay hate crimes.

I reported on a Watchmen gathering in nearby Lynnwood a couple of years ago (photos here). I also remember his sermon very clearly:

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1239)

PLAYS: (3583)

Poor widdle Chris Wallace. That mean ol' Barack Obama won't come on his show but he's appearing on virtually every other Sunday show...including Univision, fer cryin' out loud. Univision! Oh, the humiliation of being snubbed like the ugly girl at the school dance.

Wallace goes on The O'Reilly Factor and says he just can't understand why the Obama administration would be so mean to him. In his mind, it's simply childish to refuse a spot on Fox News:

WALLACE: ...That’s exactly my position: I think Fox News Sunday is a truly fair and balanced show.

O’REILLY: You’re not an ideological show at all.

WALLACE: No. And it’s like they refuse to take “yes” for an answer. There’s a kind of childishness or pettiness about them…

O’REILLY: You know, that’s a…it’s an immaturity that if you don’t …if you don’t hold our line, we’re just gonna ice you.

Oy. The mind reels at the sheer hypocrisy of it all. Maybe the average Fox viewer has a memory that lasts no more than 10 minutes (which may explain the popularity of Glenn Beck) and thinks that the constant featuring of William "I am NEVER right about anything" Kristol constitutes being "fair and balanced", but does it seem odd to any critical thinking person why Barack Obama would choose not to legitimize the outlet that pushed the tea parties, madrassas, terrorist fist jabs, and even jokingly fantasized about killing him? And yet to widdle Chris, it's petty of the President to not want to be sandbagged as Wallace did with Bill Clinton.

Let me make it easier for you and the rest of the Fox crew, Chris. Obama has tried reaching out to you. Remember the interview he did with you over Rev. Wright? Your editorial department (read Mr. Ailes) decided that even if Obama reached out, that wouldn't stop your insinuating of his Otherness constantly. The next time you ask why Obama won't go on Fox, just have a gander at this:

'Nuff said.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (96)

PLAYS: (447)

Okay, we've had the tea baggers, the birthers, the deathers and so what do we have now? The "speechers"? Good grief. Our own Susie Madrak wrote about this in her post Wingnuts Are In Full Bloom. Obama Speaking to Schoolchildren Is Really 'Recruiting for Hitler Youth.' and Media Matters has a good run down of the collective freak out over this at Fox Noise and some of the right wing blogs as well- Conservatives on Obama's stay-in-school speech: "Indoctrination," "brainwashing," Communist China, Hitler Youth.

Never ones to go off script, Laura Ingraham and Monica Crowley continue the hysteria about Obama potentially wanting to have some sort of mind control over children by giving a speech that they should stay in school and Alan Colmes, for once, counters his right wing Fox cohorts and treats this nonsense as anyone with a functioning brain should. By mocking it.

Crowley: This guy is not over exposed enough right. So now he's going after pre-K, four and five year old kids, up to sixth grade with this message. Look, just when you think that this administration can't get any more surreal and Orwellian, here he comes to indoctrinate our children.

Colmes: Indoctrinate...

Crowley: You know that there's going to be a political message in here Laura, right? It's going to be something about the environment, green jobs...

Colmes: Where? I don't see that?

Crowley: Something is going to be embedded here because the guy cannot help it.

Colmes: Right.

Crowley: And look, there's a reason why he's only going up to the sixth grade. Because number one the older kids would be like "what is this?" And number two, he's gotta' get them young.

Colmes: (laughter)

Crowley: This is such, this is what Chairman Mao did Laura.

Colmes: Oh my god.

Crowley: This is Max Headroom. This is going into every single classroom. There is no escape from him.

Ingraham: Monica, I hate to burst your bubble, but there are also materials going out for sixth grade and high school...

Crowley: Oh! See, I knew it!

Colmes: Get 'em young! Get 'em in that tent! Get 'em in that Democratic liberal tent!

Crowley: That is the point.

Ingraham: Well first of all Alan the thing I like is that it's so micro-managed, it's so micro-managed that they even suggest the ways to make posters with Obama's notable quotes...

Colmes: It will be like this..

Ingraham: ...about past speeches. What is this?

(crosstalk)

Colmes: Next you're going to accuse them of implant chips in these kids' brains, right?... And they're going to program kids to go Obama... Obama... Obama right? That will be your next ah...

And they go on from there. Jebus, I think Ingraham and Crowley were trying to give Beck a run for his money tonight. I was glad to see Colmes looking like he had some what of a spine for once.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (83)

PLAYS: (174)

Wow. Imagine that. Someone on Fox News attacking a child, a funeral, Howard Dean, and universal health care in one fell swoop. Bravo Laura.

Transcript:

INGRAHAM: But tell me why you think it's okay for people to be up there on Capitol Hill saying do it for Teddy? Why is that okay?

SKINNER: Well, I'll tell you why. You said are they using this -- Ted Kennedy's death? Ted Kennedy himself called it, health care, the cause of his life. Okay. So it's not using it, Laura.

And here's what really bothered me during this debate over the weekend on the radio. And we were all talking about it is that you had these moving eulogies by Orrin Hatch at obviously the services, but McCain, and Mitch McConnell saying, and even FOX News, the coverage said lion of -- liberal lion crossed party lines. Everybody said how wonderful and how he crossed party lines.

Now that he's gone, they can't see how health care can get passed because he's not there to do it. That's like using him as an excuse to bury health care reform along with him. You're eulogizing him and saying he went to your mother's funeral.

INGRAHAM: Well.

SKINNER: You loved him, but you can't do what it is he's done his whole career.

INGRAHAM: Right.

SKINNER: .not a single one of his dear friends can do what he's done.

INGRAHAM: But that's - right. That's not quite accurate though because over the last several months clearly, the Democrats haven't been saying let's do it for Teddy. Let's do it for Senator Kennedy. He's struggling for his life. And let's fight for it. I didn't hear that a lot over the last several months.

So only after his death, and after the polls show that the public basically doesn't want this whole Obama care thing, do they think okay, the whole rebranding, the first two times around hasn't worked. So now we're going to try this. And let me just play -- we have a sound bite of one of the prayers at the mass on Saturday. This is the funeral mass. And this was one of the Kennedy grand kids during the prayers. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For what my grandpa called the cause of his life, as he said so often, in every part of this land that every American will have decent quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege. We pray to the Lord.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Nancy do you think that that adorable little boy came up with that on his own? It mean, it sounds like it's right out of Howard Dean's speech or something. Come on, this was politicizing the funeral.

SKINNER: But you know what? I've been -- I was there, Laura, at the convention when Ted Kennedy actually gave his last speech. And he was bed- ridden before he even gave that speech. So I'm telling you, he said this is the cause of my life. Everybody - 1960s.

INGRAHAM: Who cares?

SKINNER: .I've been working on this.

INGRAHAM: Nancy, who cares? Who cares that it's the cause of his life? It's a sixth of our economy.

SKINNER: It's not just.

INGRAHAM: It's not a tribute to one man. This is our future.

SKINNER: Right.

INGRAHAM: This is our liberty and our freedom at stake.

SKINNER: That's why he worked on it.

INGRAHAM: It's not about Ted Kennedy.

SKINNER: What the calls are for, Laura, is for bipartisanship. If he crossed the line -- for Nixon, he got Nixon's cancer institute passed. And Nixon didn't want his name on.

INGRAHAM: Right, we're going back to Nixon for the bipartisanship.

SKINNER: He's done no child left behind. He's done lots of things. It's not about ted Kennedy. This is the thing. If we're going to look at a compromise on health care, which that's what everybody is talking about now. The far left wants single pair universal. That's gone. The far right wants the status quo. Well, these people are saying.

INGRAHAM: Far right?

SKINNER: (INAUDIBLE) for the American people.

INGRAHAM: Yeah. How about 55 percent of the country? Far right? I mean, I don't think that's necessarily working now when you look at these polls. It's broad based opposition. But Nancy, we appreciate it very much.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (933)

PLAYS: (1266)

The right's favorite talking point on Thursday, with Ted Kennedy's funeral dominating the news, was to compare the event to Sen. Paul Wellstone's funeral and kvetch that Democrats were being crudely opportunistic in using Kennedy's death to help push harder for liberal health-care reform.

Laura Ingraham, filling in for O'Reilly on The Factor, was right in step, saying Dems were "playing the death card" and promising that such opportunism would cost them at the polls. Kvetch, kvetch, kvetch.

I think Amanda Marcotte has precisely the right response.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (774)

PLAYS: (1417)

You know how when someone says, "Now, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but ...", you can be certain that what will follow is them being a jerk. Same with Bill O'Reilly last night in his Talking Points Memo segment: He declares that he's "not gloating, just reporting" the fact that Fox News is knocking the socks off its cable competition in the ratings wars, but then of course proceeds to gloat by claiming that Fox's big draw is its "fair and balanced" approach:

So why is this happening? Well, a major reason is the health care debate. While the other network news broadcasts downplay the dissent and promote the government takeover of the health care industry, FOX News highlights the intense debate. When we cover the town hall meetings, we don't describe the protesters as loons. We don't denigrate people who disagree with President Obama. That's the big difference between FOX News and all the others.

Actually, Fox News does more than just "highlight" the intense debate: It outright foments it, particularly in spreading such bogus claims as the notion that health-care reform means "euthanasia" for senior citizens. That is, Fox has been deliberately injecting irrational fears into the debate and stirring up paranoia and anger.

Now, some liberals will say we intentionally glorify the protesters. That doesn't happen here. We've said there's no doubt some of the dissent is organized by people who dislike President Obama. That's a fact, and we've reported it.

That may be so at The Factor -- though in fact O'Reilly has openly pandered to the claim that universal health care will mean discarding the elderly, did so later in the same broadcast -- but it is certainly not true elsewhere at Fox.

Moreover, nowhere at Fox (or anywhere else, for that matter) has there been any reportage about the empowerment of right-wing radicals that's become part of the whole "tea party" scene.

"The Factor" also gives voice to both sides, something you will never get on NBC News. So, fair-minded Americans know our reporting is honest, while much of the other TV news media is simply in the tank for the president.

Now you'd think that liberal Americans would flock to hear their side propped up, but that's clearly not happening. For libs, conservatives and independents alike, there's really no choice. They have to watch us if they want to know what's going on. And they are in record numbers.

Actually, a more logical explanation is that liberals don't need to hear their side propped up the way conservatives do -- they know what's right and what's wrong in this debate. And there may indeed be more of them watching Fox News because they also know that this is the wellspring of the opposition -- the place where people are getting ginned up and angry enough to throw up anything that might stick as a roadblock to reform. It's important to know what's being thrown up next.

So yes, we do need to watch Fox to know what's going on -- but not the way O'Reilly thinks.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (907)

PLAYS: (2924)

Ann Coulter does her best job of cherry picking what she says were racial profiling hoaxes to basically insinuate that racial profiling never happens in the United States. She claims that "liberals" can never find a case that wasn't a hoax. I hate to tell you this Ann, but just because something isn't Al Sharpton's latest photo-op du jour or the media hasn't talked about it, it doesn't mean that it's not happening. Your argument is completely ridiculous. And Henry Gates never should have been arrested for disorderly conduct in his own home.

Ann I just don't know how all the bigots would get by without the likes of you and your other right wing hate mongers doing your best to make them feel better about themselves.

INGRAHAM: And now for the top story. What exactly is that teachable moment in all the recent racial banter? Joining us from us Florida with her provocative take as always is Ann Coulter, author of the huge bestseller "Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America."

And Ann, I have to say I watched a competing cable channel. I had it DVR'd somewhere. I watched you last night with Sharpton. Okay? And just the look on his face when you came out and said well, what racial profiling? And I'm sure African-Americans across the country were saying what is this woman talking about? Explain.

ANN COULTER, CONSERVATIVE COLUMNIST: It's not that it's never happened. I've just been watching, you know, the gusher of cliches on television about this. I mean, this -- clearly there was no racial profiling in this case in Boston unless you're talking about Professor Gates racially profiling an Irish cop and assuming he must be a racist. There was some racial profiling that way.

But you know, I write about this in "Guilty". And I only give an abbreviated list in "Guilty" although it goes on for pages and pages of all of the alleged acts of racism or racial profiling that turn out to be hoaxes.

And I mean, as far as back in our lifetime as the Tawana Brawley case there was the case with the Exeter kid. And at first, you have to read all the headlines at first. You know, why would this Exeter have mugged an undercover cop. And then, you know, all the facts come out. They got witnesses. They got - have the autopsy. Yeah actually, the Exeter honor student on his way to Stanford did mug an undercover cop and the grand jury acquitted.

You have the one with a black kid who was carrying a machete. The cop thought it was a gun. Again acquitted by the grand jury after hysterical headlines throughout "The New York Times." You got the Clermont and the kennel woman. A white woman. A lot of these times, these are whites who are.

INGRAHAM: Yeah.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (818)

PLAYS: (3571)

Bernie Goldberg has a theory about why there's been a significant controversy over Lou Dobbs' promotion of the "Birther" conspiracy theory: It's all an evil plot by the Obama White House to string the story along indefinitely so as to make his right-wing opposition look like a nuttier bunch than a PayDay bar.

Goldberg: Well, let's get the easy part out of the way first. CNN should not, repeat, not fire Lou Dobbs for talking about this. Lou Dobbs didn't say Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States, he said just the opposite! He said he was born in the United States. But then he said he should produce his birth certificate.

Now let's think about this for a second. Why wouldn't President Obama release his birth certificate? He was born in Hawaii, Hawaii last I checked is in the United States, and -- why in the world wouldn't he release his birth certificate?

O'Reilly: Can I answer that question?

Goldberg: Well, let me answer it first. OK? Let me just answer my own question first.

O'Reilly: OK, you answer it, and then I'll have the correct answer.

Goldberg: I have a theory. And the theory is this: That the Chicago Mafia inside the White House want to keep this crazy controversy going. Because the longer it goes, the better the chance that they will conflate the crazy right-wing fringe with regular conservatives and regular Republicans.

O'Reilly: That's not a bad theory. But from dealing with the Obama White House, now, for almost, more than a year, I will tell you they are, uh, as every White House I've ever experienced, they're arrogant, they're arrogant. And they're saying to themselves, 'We're not gonna let Lou Dobbs tell us what to do. We're not gonna let these cranks on talk radio tell us what to do. They want the birth certificate released? Tough. We're not going to do it, because we have the power, and we don't like that.' That's what it's all about -- it's a 'Ha ha, we're not gonna do what you say.'

Interesting theories, gentlemen. Unfortunately, they both tend to run aground on a simple fact: Obama actually released his birth certificate in June 2008. It reads, "Certification of Live Birth."

Now, as FactCheck.org's definitive piece on the certificate issue explains, this is in fact the "short form" of Obama's birth certificate, not its long form, which is filled out by the hospital and kept in its records. So why doesn't Obama release the long form? Because Hawaiian law doesn't give him that option:

The document is a "certification of birth," also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate, but their short form has enough information to be acceptable to the State Department. We tried to ask the Hawaii DOH why they only offer the short form, among other questions, but they have not given a response.

Now, if Goldberg and O'Reilly are so concerned that the public might conclude that mainstream conservatives are prone to far-right conspiracy theories and various other forms of wingnuttery, they might look in the mirror. It's the virtual definition of wingnuttery to even be asking why Obama won't release his birth certificate when he has in fact done so.

There's no Obama conspiracy keeping this garbage alive and tying it around the necks of mainstream conservatives. They're doing a very fine job of that themselves.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (946)

PLAYS: (4325)

When Laura Ingraham filled in for Bill O'Reilly on Friday's night's O'Reilly Factor, she ran a segment on abortion that was ostensibly an "investigation" into Planned Parenthood. It featured a logo that placed a red set of crosshairs -- the kind you find on a rifle scope -- over PP's logo.

I'd just like to ask one question:

What the hell were these people thinking?

Now, presumably, Ingraham herself did not order up this graphic, or if she did, it at least went through the hands of the show's regular producers and overseers. These are the same people who just went through a well-deserved round of approbation for their role -- in the form of those 28 references to Dr. George Tiller as a "baby killer" -- in the murder of Tiller by an anti-abortion fanatic.

And now they're running a graphic suggestive of what Ann Coulter calls "a procedure with a rifle" -- something, in fact, that Coulter has actually encouraged on The O'Reilly Factor.

Really, I'm serious. What are these people thinking?

Of course, we know all too well that O'Reilly and Co. did their best to disavow any culpability in the matter whatsoever -- somewhat less than convincingly. So maybe the continuing demonization of abortion providers on this program is part and parcel of that defiance.

And the same sort of anecdotal demonization that characterized O'Reilly's attacks on Tiller were similarly at play in this segment on Planned Parenthood. It essentially involved an ambush team using a youngish-seeming woman posing as a 14-year-old entering a variety of Planned Parenthood clinics and recording the responses -- most of which, as described by the fake teen here, actually fit the standard response of most properly run clinics in trying to make sure that younger patients feel at ease.

The overriding message, once again, is that these abortion providers are a pack of morally depraved sickos who deserve to be in the crosshairs. Lovely.

I can think of three possibilities here:

1. Someone just thought putting an organization in the crosshairs was the best way to represent that they were under investigation, and the other implications of such a graphic just didn't cross anybody's radar.

2. They thought about it, recognized that it might not be appropriate, but did it anyway, either out of defiance or simply not caring.

3. They did it with full intent, understanding full well that the suggestion of violence against Planned Parenthood was present, and in fact designing the graphic with that in mind.

Of the three, I think the second is the most plausible. But it's only slightly less appalling, for different reasons, than the other two.

Look, despite what the O'Reillys and Glenn Becks and Laura Ingrahams like to claim, no one is trying to "silence" them for expressing their opinions. This is about being responsible with that big media megaphone they hold. Promoting a violent mindset toward abortion providers, as we have already seen, is profoundly irresponsible. It's long past time that it stop.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (119)

PLAYS: (221)

Bill O'Reilly goes on a rampage against the ACLU and calls them the "most dangerous, anti-American organization in the country". Why? Because they support the release of the prison abuse photos and their complaint against the NYPD for racial profiling.

I swear watching this man makes my head hurt. First of all, I've watched the ACLU's Anthony Romero go on more than one show and say that the public being able to see those photos is not what matters to him. What matters to him is that there is some accountability for what's been done, and for those who ordered the torture, and to be able to prove that it was not just a few bad apples but systemic abuse that took place because it was the policy of our government to torture prisoners.

How O'Reilly makes the connection between that and the ACLU suing the NYPD for racial profiling is beyond me other than him finding any excuse to bash the ACLU and "left wing loons". Of course following this segment he brings on the hapless Marc Lamont who attempts to call out O'Reilly for saying it's alright for the police to target blacks and Latinos on the street when they've done nothing wrong but he's no match for O'Reilly's bullying and talking over him.

What's particularly disturbing here is O'Reilly's call for his viewers to "confront" the ACLU, the media, and anyone who supports the ACLU. Just what type of confrontation is O'Reilly calling for? O'Reilly seems to be continuing Fox News' shameless habit of not caring how much they rial up the fringe elements in our society and possibly incite some of the crazy ones out there to violence.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1648)

PLAYS: (3337)

Laura Ingraham, subbing for Bill O'Reilly last night on Fox, decided to bounce off reportage of the second-guessing now coming from ex-CIA chief Porter Goss, who's claiming that Obama's release of the torture memos had demoralized the agency.

So she invited on a couple of "experts," who start out by giving us the amusing prospect of Fox pundits complaining about TV-crew ambush tactics when conducted by ABC. (They may have a point, but hearing it on Fox is rich.)

One of the "experts," a New York City detective/tough guy named Bo Dietl, argues that the Obama administration's decision to eschew torture will come back and haunt them thus:

Dietl: What would happen, God forbid, if your two daughters were kidnapped by Al Qaeda, and they said they were going to do something, and we had information from people, where they were. Mister Obama, what would you like me to do? You don't want me to interrogate anybody?

Eh, sure, Bo, you can interrogate anyone you need to. But torture?

Of course, this all sounds like a lot of Jack Bauer fantasizing. Though you get a sickly feeling, watching Dietz, that torturing detainees might not just be a fantasy for him.

And why, exactly, does anyone consider Porter Goss a credible critic of the release of the memos?

Continue reading »

DOWNLOAD (68)

PLAY (98)

Laura Ingraham filled in for Bill O'Reilly last night, and demonstrated that she might actually have some of O'Reilly's chops. For instance, just like O'Reilly, she was able to look in the camera and flat-out lie with a straight face. That's quite a gift.

Indeed, she delivered her a defense of her recent unkind remarks about Meghan McCain with a certain frozen-mask bravado -- by nakedly claiming she didn't actually say what everyone can hear her saying:

Ingraham: Let the record show: I never called Meghan McCain fat! She isn't! And as I have repeatedly said on my radio show and on Fox, she is an attractive young woman. If that throwaway comic line highlighted anything, it was Hollywood's obsession with stick-figure women!

Hmmm. Well, here's the transcript from her radio show:

MCCAIN (on MSNBC): And I think there's an extreme on both parties and I hate extreme. I don't understand. I have friends that are the most radically conservative and radically liberal people possibly ever and we all get along. We can find a middle ground.

INGRAHAM (mocking): OK, I was really hoping that I was going to get that role in the Real World, but then I realized that, well, they don't like plus-sized models. They only like the women who look a certain way. And on this 50th anniversary of Barbie, I really have something to say.

It's all part of a left-wing conspiracy to silence Ingraham, you see. That's what it's about:

Ingraham: The Obama attack dogs can twist my words, engage in emotional exploitation, and distort my intentions. But they will never, ever, silence me.

Later on the program, she had on John Gibson, who plumped up her vast-liberal-media-conspiracy by assuring her that the "attacks" on her were a result of Obamabots looking for something to distract from the boss's failures. Snigger.

Along with Gibson was poor Julie Menin, the day's designated liberal pinata. (Why anyone agrees to go on these shows and face these kinds of setups is beyond me.) Ingraham goes off on her:

Menin: Listen, I think she got this spot because you targeted her weight. And you can say that it was --

Ingraham: No no no no no no no. Out of order. Out of order. You've gotta get the facts right. A lot's been distorted in the last week and I'm not gonna let it happen on this show. She wrote a column criticizing Ann Coulter, saying the Republican Party needed to go moderate to attract women. OK, that's what she did. She got invited on the Rachel Maddow Show. I then did a riff on how cable bookers are desperate for guests and just keep recycling the same guests -- taking her on Rachel Maddow. Then I did a satirical bit -- which I do a lot on talk radio. And that is what happened. This diversion about -- 'Oh, it's about her weight' -- My point was that she has no real world political experience to make the case for moderation.

Ai yi yi. That is one lame rationalization. I bet she tried the same thing with her professors when she turned in her papers late: Those damned evil liberals made her do it.

And Laura? Really, no one's trying to silence you. Honest. Please, keep talking.

DOWNLOAD (26)

PLAY (74)

From The O'Reilly Factor Dec. 22, 2008. Rove does his best job of channelling Dick Cheney.

DOWNLOAD (42)

PLAY (85)

Heather sent this clip from Thursday's O'Reilly Factor for the uncharacteristically honest aside Shepard Smith makes about Sean Hannity being in the business of electing Republicans. Frankly, anyone who has spent any time watching Fox News and listening to Fox Radio can glean that in about 1.35 seconds. Hannity makes no bones about his bias, although he will occasionally weasel out of his crossing journalistic ethical lines (like he even knows what journalistic ethics are) by alternately claiming to be a commentator rather than a journalist. Between you and me, let's just call him a propagandist and be done with it.

But what struck me as I was writing up the transcripts is Bill O'Reilly's state of mind. More specifically, Bill is apparently in a war within his own mind that bears little to do with the actual conversation he was having with Shep. He evokes this bravado of wanting to physically harm Barney Frank as a way to show empathy for Shepard Smith's recent calling out of Joe the Plumber and Ralph Nader, which is more than a little disturbing. He then launches into a strangely dissonant and (I guess in his mind) facetious slam that "the media" launches against Fox News after Smith says he was trying to champion the truth. I'm not sure who this "media" is for Billo, unless suddenly the liberal blogosphere has been elevated in his mind from guttersnipes to the mainstream media. But watch Billo in this clip...he never lets Smith finish a sentence and it's all about a conflict that exists nowhere but in his mind.

O’REILLY: Okay, but you work for the Fox News Channel, which is the most unfair channel, always trying to get the Republicans elected. So you can’t be doing this stuff, you can’t be challenging Joe the Plumber and Ralph Nader…
SMITH: Well, as you know, and thank you for the softball, that’s silly. That’s Sean …
O’REILLY: [laughs] It was a little facetious here…
SMITH: That’s Sean Hannity’s job. Sean Hannity…
O’REILLY: Well, Sean Hannity is a Republican…
SMITH: That’s what I said and the bottom…
O’REILLY: So what’s the beef?
SMITH: The beef…I have absolutely no beef …
O’REILLY: I have no beef with him. Calls him a Communist…
SMITH: Absolutely. But the bottom…But that’s labeled like an op-ed page opinion. Mine is labled news.
O’REILLY: But the media attacks on Fox News just fall apart when you watch Hume’s broadcast, you watch The Factor, we have just as many liberals as conservatives on here, but the media doesn’t really care, do they?

Maybe it's me, but I think Billo is right there on the abyss of a breakdown.

Transcripts below the fold:

Continue reading »