Remember when Karoli wrote about this story last week? Poor dumb Dick! He confused Media Matters with the wingnut Media Research Center. I guess he's so used to wingnuts tidying up after each other, he assumed old Brent would know to censor his remarks:

There's been a remarkable amount of drama surrounding Dick Armey's departure from FreedomWorks, culminating Friday with a stunning report from Media Matters, who interviewed the former House Majority Leader directly. Armey had all kinds of interesting insights to share with the progressive group, including tidbits on pay-for-play agreements with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, and the FreedomWorks' practice of charging activists to attend free events.

Though many of Armey's revelations should probably be taken with a grain of salt -- the former GOP leader seemed confused about some of the details he shared -- there was a larger question that puzzled nearly everyone: why in the world was Dick Armey dishing dirt to Media Matters?

The Daily Caller, a conservative outlet, tracked down the answer.

Dick Armey had no idea he was speaking to the left-wing Media Matters organization during an interview last week, he told The Daily Caller Tuesday. Instead, Armey thought he was chatting with the conservative Media Research Center. [...]

[I]n a Tuesday phone interview with TheDC, Armey insisted that even though properly identified himself, it wasn't until "somebody busted my chops on Facebook" that he realized spoke to a left-wing group.... "That was a major, big screw up on my part. I thought they were somebody else."

DOWNLOADS: (531)

PLAYS: (1662)

Embed

The idea of Fox News getting high and mighty about Media Matters' DropFox campaign is, well...laughable. However, what might be even more laughable is the idea that they can start a campaign to strip Media Matters of their tax-exempt status. They should be careful what they wish for.

In this clip, viewer Dana Martin from New Orleans tells Fox and Friends why she is so convinced that Media Matters tax-exempt status must be revoked. So convinced, in fact, that she filled in a web form to send a complaint to the IRS about their tax exempt status. And guess where that web form is? On the Fox Nation web page, of course, where else?

But as I said, they should be careful what they wish for. Let's look at some other tax-exempt organizations who also undertake "campaigns" with taxpayer subsidies. There's the Media Research Center, headed by Brent Bozell, who routinely appears on Fox News as a commentator. One look at their website shows that they have some 'projects' of their own which are clearly not educational at all, but purely political.

And of course, there's the US Chamber of Commerce, also fully subsidized by taxpayers just like the Citizens United Foundation, the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. Continuing on, we can also include the Catholic, Mormon, Presbyterian and Baptist churches as tax-exempt organizations which should be carefully scrutinized as to the legitimacy of their tax exemption. And those are just ones that come to mind quickly.

This is Media Matters' mission statement:

Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.

Seems to me they're being perfectly consistent in their purpose, but this campaign put on by Fox shows just how effective they've been in actually accomplishing it. If I take a deep breath, I'm sure I can smell Roger Ailes' aggravation from here. Or stench. Or something.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (988)

PLAYS: (3853)

Embed

That popping sound you hear is the heads of NRA loyalists exploding from massive cognitive dissonance, all because of the release this week of a video showing a spokesman for Al Qaeda, Adam Gadahn, urging would-be jihadis to go out and stock up on as many guns as they can get their hands on -- through the gun-show loophole:

America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?

Of course, we've previously discussed how the gun-show loophole is an open invitation to criminals, particularly in the context of the the drug-cartel violence along the Mexico border, which is in fact being heavily fueled by guns purchased legally in the USA, many of them at gun shows.

As Chris Brown at Media Matters observes:

At gun shows buyers can purchase guns from private sellers without passing a background check. An investigation by the City of New York showed that even buyers that identified themselves as people who "probably couldn't pass a background check" were able to purchase guns at gun shows. The investigation also showed the wide variety of guns available at gun shows.

In addition, people on terrorist watch lists are not forbidden from purchasing guns and many have done just that. Gadahn's instructions come in the wake of Associated Press reporting that showed that more than 200 people with suspected terrorist ties bought guns legally in the United States last year. Following the AP report Representative Mike Quigley introduced an amendment to the Patriot Act that would give the Attorney General the authority to block gun sales to individuals on terror watch lists. The amendment was voted down.

Of course, the NRA remains adamantly opposed to closing the gun-show loophole. Indeed, they also remain opposed to bipartisan efforts to make it tougher for terrorists to buy guns.

One can only conclude that they are objectively pro-terrorist.

DOWNLOADS: (512)

PLAYS: (2499)

Embed

It sure seemed that everyone -- and I mean EVERYONE -- at Fox News was focused yesterday on beating down the horrifying idea that somehow Fox News' incendiary rhetoric might have played a significant role in fomenting Saturday's horrifying tragedy in Arizona.

Of course, Glenn Beck -- being one of the chief purveyors of said incendiary rhetoric -- was out there leading the attack, devoting his entire hour to his newfound desire to prevent political violence. Indeed, he iussed a "letter to America" yesterday containing a pledge he wants everyone else to sign decrying any attempt to connect political violence to the rhetoric that precedes it:

I hold those responsible for the violence, responsible for the violence. I denounce those who attempt to blame political opponents for the acts of madmen.

In other words: I denounce people who would like to blame me for inspiring guys like Byron Williams, who openly credit me for inspiring them!

On his show, he responded to the critics -- especially those like David Brock at Media Matters, who demanded Rupert Murdoch take responsibility for this outcome: "You have the power to order them to stop using violent rhetoric, on and off of Fox's air. If they fail to do so, it is incumbent upon you to fire them or be responsible for the climate they create and any consequences thereof."

Beck's response:

Beck: Well, I don't use it on or off the air, so I guess I'm in compliance, Media Matters.

Well, as Eric Boehlert has amply documented, this is simply a brazen lie: Beck has used violent rhetoric since nearly the first day he joined Fox News, and it has built and amplified since then.

Indeed, he uses two particular kinds of violent rhetoric in abundance. The first is eliminationist rhetoric, particularly the kind aimed at progressives:

DOWNLOADS: (4799)

PLAYS: (14329)

Embed

Here you can see Beck call progressives a "cancer" (multiple times), "the disease that's killing us," a "virus," a "parasite," "vampires" who will "suck the life out" of the Democratic Party, and claim that progressives intend the "destruction of the Constitution" and will strike it a "death blow".

Then there's the fearmongering rhetoric he uses to demonize his opponents:

DOWNLOADS: (2224)

PLAYS: (10773)

Embed

This kind of talk even earned him the sobriquet "Fearmonger in Chief" from the ADL.

Hey Glenn! Here's something you could add to your "pledge":

"I choose not to hold my political opponents up for dehumanization and demonization in a way that makes them the object of fear and loathing and a target for violent elimination."

You take that pledge, and we might listen.