Fox Celebrates Holidays With Outrageous Race-Based Attack On Obama
December 23, 2011 12:26 am ET by Solange Uwimana
Fox News' animosity toward President Obama, three years into his presidency, is by now well-known. This is the network that routinely calls Obama a socialist, accuses him of being involved in all sorts of conspiratorial plots, and claims that he hates America. But, as witnessed Thursday on Hannity, Fox's attacks have taken an increasingly racially charged tone: Brent Bozell, who runs the factually challenged outfit of conservative misinformation known as the Media Research Center, likened Obama to "a skinny, ghetto crackhead."
Bozell appeared on Hannity as part of the show's weekly "Media Mash" segment to talk about purported mainstream media failings. After listening to a clip of MSNBC host Chris Matthews saying that Newt Gingrich "looks like a car bomber," Bozell responded:
BOZELL: How long do you think Sean Hannity's show would last if four times in one sentence, he made a comment about, say, the President of the United States, and said that he looked like a skinny, ghetto crackhead? Which, by the way, you might want to say that Barack Obama does. Everybody on the left would come forward and demand he be fired within five minutes for being so insulting towards a leader of the United States.
A few months ago, Fox's Eric Bolling came under fire for his racially charged criticisms of Obama, including his claims that Obama was "chugging 40's in IRE while tornadoes ravage MO" (which he later tried to amend), and that Obama was hosting "hoodlum[s] in the hizzouse" when he welcomed Gabon President Ali Bongo Ondimba and rapper Common to the White House.
These attacks have become a pattern at Fox News.
Since April of this year when Obama announced he would be running for reelection, attacks have ranged from false claims about the president's place of birth and religion to claiming Obama has "black nationalist sympathies." Fox's Monica Crowley, for example, derided Obama as a "committed wealth redistributionist" for the apparent benefit of African-Americans.
But this is nothing new. Fox News and its personalities have a long history of aggressive race-baiting and racially charged commentary. Moreover, Fox News' news-aggregation website, Fox Nation, has a habit of prominently featuring race-baiting headlines and content in an apparent effort to attract and encourage racist commenters. One memorable headline read: "Obama's Hip-Hop BBQ Didn't Create Jobs."
Aside from sanctioning in-house race-baiting, Fox hasn't shied away from welcoming those who spread the same message. For example, after going on an extended, racially charged tirade about crime and "too many urban thugs, yo" in Atlanta, radio host Neal Boortz found a welcoming home on Fox News to discuss the economy.
During the Hannity segment, Bozell also blasted New York Times columnist Paul Krugman as a "little worm" for accurately describing, in a "melodramatic" fashion, Rep. Paul Ryan's proposal to end Medicare. Bozell accused Krugman of "hatemongering" and "fearmongering," then said to guest host Mark Steyn:
BOZELL: You think, Mark, about those endless lectures we've heard from the left over the years about hatemongering and fearmongering and civility, and they're always giving those lessons to Sean Hannity, to Rush Limbaugh, to Mark Levin, to Ann Coulter, but then Paul Krugman says this kind of thing and the silence is deafening. Paul Krugman is just a little worm.
I don't mean that figuratively.
When he talks, it's like looking into the abyss.
I hate to be snarky, but had whoever wrote that line smoked the other ten percent? :0)
I agree that his name-calling regarding Krugman is wrong, but I really don't think there's too much that was objectionable here. There's so much that's truly disgusting at Fox, it's unfortunate that Media Matters has chosen to weaken its credibility with this article.
Otherwise, what was his point? If it's acceptable for Bozell to say what he did, then what is he criticizing Matthews for? What a moron.
How long do you think Sean Hannity's show would last if four times in one sentence, he made a comment about, say, the President of the United States, and said that he looks like a car bomber
Then Bozell would have made his point, because Matthews was a jerk saying that about Gingrich, no matter what you think of the guy.. But instead Bozell pulls out a racist comment, & on top of that says the President in fact does look like a ghetto crackhead.
And then they scream hypocrisy. Too funny.
Off topic...Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays to everyone.
But as it played out, he took what seems to have been a valid complaint and then exhibited worse behavior than what he was talking about. That takes a special kind of stupid.
And condolences on BCD's passing. He seemed like a good guy who didn't deserve to pass prematurely AND to have his life co-opted by cruel elements of our society. Just know my thoughts are with his wife and his son.
Please make stopping smoking a New Year's resolution, my man.
Waiting for Capt Equinox, Damp Butte Wa.
As for the Paul Krugman comment, I didn't hear anything wrong with it, even in the limited context used on the segment it sounded completely reasonable and clear headed to me. I'm not sure what the problem was with that comment. I would have loved for them to try and dispute Krugman's claim rather then dismiss it as "hateful" without any examination.
Then he had to go for the Mike Malloy show to find another example. I guess he couldn't find anything better on any of the shows that have a significant audience. You could find better examples of hateful speech from right wingers on more mainstream shows on a regular basis(thanks Media Matters).
Oh yeah, Bozell's credibility got a real boost here.
think bozo-ell, used enough 'code' words?...
ho, ho, ho?
Even if he didn't come right out and say it... he did. Using hypothetical questions (and answers) to underhandedly insult the president. Wow.
The Malloy comment is over the top, but it begs the question why the Baghdad Braintrust aren't on trial for several thousand counts of criminally negligent homicide?
And the skinny crackhead comment is egregious in its brash racism and I love that he straw mans it with a "If Hannity said it..." then says it himself.
Bozell, give yourself an award you tool.
"Coupon Care" at it's finest!
Save the Insurance Cartels, not Grandpa!
Anyone linking Matthews with liberalism is an instant moron.
I'm not sure I would classify Bozell as an "instant" moron, though. He seems to have worked his entire life at it.
Zing! Shot em' down to the ground! lol.
Just thought I'd post that in the absence of trolls. Your welcome.
And for Bozo to say that Krugman is fearmongering more than the right is completely insane. Hannity, Levin, Limbaugh and Coulter have done nothing but fearmonger from the very beginning. They spent all kinds of energy to convince people that Obama was a Manchurian candidate, elitist, socialist who wanted America to give in to terrorists. That is all you heard on right-wing radio. Just three weeks before the election in 2008, I turned on Michael Savage for a couple minutes and he said that if Obama was elected that in 6 months he would come for all of our guns and in 1 year there would no longer be a United States of America. What do you call that, Bozo? Is that a rational, well thought out critique of Obama or is that fearmongering? By the way, how did Savage's prediction go? It seems we still have a country and that gun laws have been loosened almost to the point where we're back in the Old West again.
Bozo constantly complains about the right not getting their say on the "mainstream" media. Bozo is far right-wing but he thinks of himself as being center-right. Therefore, anything that is even slightly to the liberal side of his point of view is now considered far left liberal by him. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans were on board with a system like Social Security. Some still are but the vocal ones, like Bozo, now think of it as and entitlement program. By the way, Bozo, I've luckily been employed for 28 consecutive years, working hard, and paying into that "entitlement" program and if you think I'm going to let idiots like you privatize and take it from me you can forget it.
Thanks to people like Bozo, and their bogus claims of liberal media bias, the Republican party has been pushed so far to the right that they're really closer to facists now. And now that they are so far right, they look at the Democratic party and claim that they are on the far left of things. The reality is that the Democratic party has not changed much at all over the years, they're still unorganized as hell. They need the rational Republican party to help balance things out again, you know, the party that believes in financial responsibility all the time, not just when a Democrat is president. This country needs people like Bozo, Grover Norquist and the Tea Party to go back to the fringe, where they belong, so rational Republicans can take over the party again. When that happens, we'll have balance and maybe can function as a country again.
Bozo thinks his voice is not being heard enough and he cries foul because of it. On the contrary, his voice is being heard, loud and clear, and the country is worse off as a result. When the Republicans get crushed in 2012, and they will, maybe the party will finally chase off these lunatics that have hijacked it.
Every time I hear them say there is a liberal media bias, I just laugh because I know that the lunatics still buy this garbage. It used to be easy to find a ballgame on the radio to listen to on my drive home from work. Now, I have to work my way through about a half-dozen right-wing lunatics, ranting on the radio about how the media is so liberal before I can find a game strong enough to pick up. Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Savage and many others come through loud and clear but not my ballgame. The irony of the right-wing is astonishing!
The implication of that statement is that there existed a time in this nation's history when its policy was too liberal. When was that time? I've never heard about it.
The center of today's democratic party is the republican balance you want. We need a major party far to the left of that in order to surround reality from both ends.
Maybe you're right. Maybe we do need a major party far to the left of what we have now in the Democratic party to balance things out. However, in the end, we will need some sort of compromise on both sides to work effectively. We will never see that with the current leadership of the Republican party, though.
People like Bozell will never be satisfied with the amount of representation conservatives receive in the mainstream press. He is not an honest broker, but a hack.
Analysis after analysis shows that conservatives get better representation in almost all forms of mainstream media, from Sunday shows with conservative heavy panels, to the number of contractors and lobbyists with blatant conflicts of interest being allowed to spew propaganda unchallenged, to the method by which right wing frames and memes are injected into mainstream news reports regularly. This is not even counting the monopolistic hold over talk radio, the number one cable news network, and the plethora of television stations and newspapers owned by far right wing media moguls.
Sorry Brent, but the mythical days of liberal media bias are long gone if they ever really existed. With so much money invested in the right wing echo chamber, and so much ability to control and dominate the message, you should really be blaming your leaders for failing to communicate a rational message.
"Piggish"? Ain't that rich, coming from a neo-fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic, lying pig like Brent Bozell!
I suspect companies making bed clothes and bleach (gotta get those sheets White) pay top dollar for spots on this show.
>^o.-^<
The odd thing, though, is that Gingrich actually is a terrorist who supports the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. He supported Ronald Reagan's terrorism in Central America. Bozell did as well. Bozell comes from that right-wing Catholic milieu that supported Franco in Spain. By the way, the United States still has not paid the World Court judgment it owes to Nicaragua.
Sorry, but if you're too cowardly to speak on the subject, I see no further use responding to you.
You just proved my point. He could not have been talking about all blacks. Try to pay attention.
Now, again, "there's nothing that distinguishes Obama's appearance from any other respectable black person". True or false?
Even if I modify it to "any other respectable thin black person" ("skinny"? Is he emaciated, or just fit, honestly?), do you have a response? Is anyone, of any other race, likely to be called a "ghetto crackhead" just because they're in good shape? Not just "crackhead", but "ghetto", which I dare you to deny is strongly associated with race.
You can play games all you like, but you have no argument.
I made my argument in the post you responded to. You responded with an attack and nothing to address what I wrote. What's your problem?
You seem to be saying that something can't be racist if it only mentions one person, and doesn't explicitly specify the entire race. Is that your position?
Now, how about you respond to the point I've been making from the start, and specifically at 10:34 p.m? "I don't like being called a coward by someone who is one...", right?
You said I was completely confused. That's ad hominem, although it didn't bother me.
What had I "ducked" earlier? How do you expect me to address your arguments if you can't make a good faith effort to explain what the hell you're talking about?
Also, your question contains an assumption, like "have you stopped beating your wife" does. "Do you feel Obama is racist towards Palestinians" would be more appropriate.
Can you claim you're not "ducking" my questions with any sense of honesty?
You haven't responded to this:Did you honestly think you responded to that, or are you lying? By all means, let me know, so I don't wrongly assume the best of you.
And if you accept that definition, then why are you calling me a "moron" when asking if I know what it means? Clearly my context is consistent with how I described it.
Why can't you answer the question? "Is that your position?" It's clear and relevant to the post you demanded a response to.
What was your answer, specifically, and how did it relate to what I quoted? Thank you in advance.
Your false equivalence is not effective.
I take it you won't disagree with that, either.
It's really not that hard to figure out, but I'll help you out:
And if you think I've forgotten the original point that you refuse to address (how ghetto crackhead is racially charged, etc), you're unfamiliar with how well I do pay attention.
Like I said, you can play games all you want, but you have no argument. Thanks for proving the point.
That's fairly psychotic, by any measure.
This is for those who baselessly claim that no one here ever needs to be told to not feed a troll.
I was hoping you would get a sense of perspective regarding your own importance for Christmas, but I suppose there's always next year.
Okay 4teepee, then you will concede that what Fox has been calling Obama everyday for the last three years was at least far worse than what MAtthews called Gingrich?
Or have you forgotten that quickly?
Okay 4teepee, then you will concede that what Fox has been calling Obama everyday for the last three years was at least far worse than what MAtthews called Gingrich?
Or have you forgotten that quickly?
Comparisons like this and endless arguments are part of why there is no peace in the Middle East. You don't understand that you're part of the problem.
There is no reason to give any degree of credence to the odious remarks of Bozo.
Goodbye until you grow a pair.
4peeonyou! You feeling a little masochistic around the holidays? Things getting a little stressful?
I might concede that what Matthews called GIngrich was uncalled for, but Fox and Bozell have made lucrative careers out of calling Obama far worse things and you know that.
Its rather disingenuous for someone on Fox to claim that Hannity would be taken off the air for calling Obama such and such, when in fact Fox and MRC have made a daily practice out of calling Obama a Nazi.
Please, have you forgotten the Glenn Beck show THAT quickly...
Pathetic.
I kind of understand the "pay to hate" bit, but they enjoy being deceitful and mean.
I believe Fox has no right to the title "NEWS".
Bozell tries to make the case that it was wrong to say Gingrich looks like a car-bomber. Okay, I can agree... i honestly think Gingrich looks more like a creepy pedophile in a windowless van, but i wouldnt make it part of a news commentary.
But for Bozell to say that Sean Hannity would be shut down for calling Obama names... i mean its just flat out dishonest.
What regular Fox contributors call Barak Obama every day is FAR worse than what Chris Matthews called Newt Gingrich. And Bozell KNOWS that.
Hell, what they call him everyday is even far worse than calling him a ghetto crackhead. (and honestly, with that dead-fish, beary eyed stare, Bozell true looks like one methed up, cracked out blazer with a hundred dollar a day habit... seriously, look at that lifeless blotch in his eyes.)
I mean come on, the network made its money by calling him and everyone who supports him a Nazi. Glenn Beck made it a point to repeat that FAR more than 4 times a day. Thats a pretty bad slander, far worse than just a generic car-bomber jab.
And Fox news contributors HAVE called Obama a terrorist, and furtively try to draw some fictious link between him and terorist groups.
I mean come on dude, this even happened right when the guy was first elected.
Chekc out the link... how LESS worse is this than what Matthews called Gingrich? And how many times over the passed 3 years has Fox senselessly repeated the claim?
He would be kidnapped, shaved and tattooed from head to toe - in black. The word RACIST would be tattooed on his forehead in white. He would then be forced to ssmoke crack until he's addicted.
If not, then why would you suggest that criticism of Bozell's comments here are equivalent to all criticisms?
Go ahead and try to claim that Bozell isn't coming across as a flaming racist. Please.
No.
Let's see if you have the mental/moral capacity to understand an analogy:
"Hey Abe! I disagree with your policies you skinny, anorexic wretch."
"I totally disagree with you, you fat slob."
"I have a different opinion than that pathetic Chink."
By the way, altsoba, are you one of those four eyes?
Obama as Steve Urkel