Media Matters: Wishing for Obama's assassination won't get you fired from Fox News
The media topic of the week was the firing of Juan Williams by NPR over his remark that he gets "nervous" around "people who are in Muslim garb" on airplanes.
Williams' firing comes weeks after CNN canned Rick Sanchez for remarks about Jon Stewart and Jews in the media. In both cases, news organizations made personnel moves in response to perceived violations of their editorial standards.
Yet when it comes to cable ratings leader Fox News, it's hard to tell whether any editorial standards exist, and what - if anything - would get you reprimanded by the network.
Unlike other media outlets, Fox News has a pattern of failing to seriously discipline employees for on-air transgressions. And in positioning itself as an alternative to traditional news media, that's probably how Fox News likes it.
Take the case of Fox News contributor Liz Trotta. During a May 2008 segment on the Democratic presidential primaries, Trotta actually remarked that she wished somebody would "knock off" both Osama Bin Laden and then-candidate Barack Obama:
TROTTA: The vast right-wing conspiracy blame has been undermined by her [Clinton's] evasions, by her outright lies, if I may say, by her pandering, by her race-baiting, and now we have what some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama - Obama - well, both if we could.
It bears repeating what Trotta did - she expressed her hope that someone assassinates Obama. The next day, Trotta appeared on Fox News to do damage control, telling Bill Hemmer that she is "so sorry about what happened yesterday and the lame attempt at humor. I fell all over myself, making it appear that I wished Barack Obama harm or any other candidate."
The fallout? Nothing, apparently. Trotta is still a Fox News contributor, and appears in a weekly segment offering commentary.
More recently, Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade made the clearly false claim - twice - that "all terrorists" are Muslim. Following outrage over his remarks, Bill Shine, Fox News' senior vice president of looking the other way, said Kilmeade would "clarify" his comments and claimed that Kilmeade actually meant to say that "all terrorists" involved in the 9-11 attacks were Muslim. Of course, this explanation was completely bogus, as Kilmeade referenced non-9-11 targets when he made the same comment on his Fox News Radio program later that day.
This wasn't the first time Kilmeade has gotten in trouble for remarks on race and religion. Kilmeade issued an apology over his remark that "we keep marrying other species and other ethnics and ... the Swedes have pure genes, because they marry other Swedes." Kilmeade has also repeatedly made inflammatory remarks about Islam and Muslims.
Additionally, Kilmeade's Fox & Friends program was forced to retract the false assertion that Obama "was educated in a madrassa" - one part of the web of internet conspiracy theories claiming Obama is a secret Muslim with a fake birth certificate. In May 2008, Fox & Friends was forced to issue an apology after it repeated as fact an online parody news report of a school prank that included fabricated quotes.
And during a July 2008 show, Fox & Friends altered photos of New York Times reporters they disliked -- the journalists' teeth had been yellowed, their facial features exaggerated, and one journalist's hair was moved further back on his head.
The fallout? The hosts of Fox & Friends, Kilmeade included, are still standing. In response to the Times incident, Fox News' vice president of shrugging, John Moody, reportedly "said the incident will not result in any official standards adjustments." Why? "Moody told the assembled press that the morning program is 'an entertainment show that does some news.'"
Media Matters documented this week that Fox News has a payola problem. Contributor Dick Morris again used his position as a Fox News "political analyst" to tout and solicit donations for the Republican-aligned group Americans for New Leadership weeks after they began paying him thousands of dollars. During his appearances, Morris did not disclose that he was receiving money from the group. To the contrary, Morris lied that he's been working for the Republican Party "without compensation."
Morris has also suggested that violence against government officials could be justified. In early 2009, during a long conspiracy theory about a "super-national authority" that will oversee U.S. financial institutions, Morris asserted that President Obama's policies are "internationalist" and that "[t]hose crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the U.N.'s going to take over' -- well, they're beginning to have a case."
The fallout? Morris is one of the most frequent on-air commentators on Fox News.
Fox News strategic analyst Ralph Peters once asserted of Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl, who was captured by the Taliban in June 2009 and appeared in Taliban propaganda videos: "[W]e know this private is a liar; we're not sure if he's a deserter." Peters added that if he is a deserter, "the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills." NBC's Jim Miklaszewski subsequently reported that the Pentagon said Peters' comments "could endanger" the captured soldier.
Peters still appears regularly on Fox News.
Fox News contributors Doug Schoen and Frank Luntz, meanwhile, have touted and defended the work of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce - without mentioning that the GOP-aligned group is their client.
Such behavior extends to Fox's "straight news" division. In February 2009, anchor Jon Scott essentially committed on-air plagiarism by trying to pass off a GOP press release as his own research (typo and all). When Scott was caught, he apologized - for the typo.
While students might have faced a suspension or expulsion, Scott suffered no apparent consequences -- to the contrary, he ironically hosts Fox News' media ethics program.
And we haven't even gotten to Glenn Beck. While over 100 advertisers have reportedly abandoned Beck's Fox News program, Fox News has stuck with Beck despite his history of violent rhetoric, bizarre conspiracy theories and promotion of anti-Semites. Rupert Murdoch even agreed with Beck's statement that Obama is a "racist," causing MSNBC.com's First Read blog to write about Beck, "What's most amazing about this episode is that what Beck said isn't a fireable or even a SUSPENDABLE offense by his bosses. There was a time when outrageous rants like this would actually cost the ranters their jobs. But not anymore; if anything, it's now encouraged."
Fox News has made noise about having editorial standards. Last year, it promised to implement a "zero tolerance" policy regarding errors - then appeared to throw the policy overboard when subsequent errors were found.
In another telling incident, Fox News executives yanked Sean Hannity from trying to tape his show at a Cincinnati Tea Party event which charged admission and had "all proceeds" benefiting the organization. Fox News execs were reportedly "furious," but The Los Angeles Times noted that "it does not appear that [their concerns] have resulted in any serious disciplinary measures taken against any staffers involved" and a spokesperson told the Times and NY Magazine that it wouldn't discuss the matter any further.
Since April's tea party incident, Hannity has used his program as a non-stop fundraising and promotion tool for favored Republican candidates like Ohio's John Kasich and New York's John Gomez, among others.
For those keeping score about what won't result in serious disciplinary action when working at Fox News: wishing for Obama's assassination; appearing to legitimize physical threats against soldiers and law enforcement officers; failing to disclose that you're touting your business clients; trying to financially enrich conservative organizations and candidates; plagiarism of a partisan source; and fundraising on-air for a conservative group without disclosing that they've paid you thousands of dollars.
Why the lack of standards? Perhaps it's that Fox News has long defined itself by being the opposite of their competition.
The "mainstream media," according to Fox News, is purportedly liberal. Fox's programming, therefore, has to be stacked with conservative hosts and commentators to "balance" out the competition. And other news organizations, apparently, are too focused on restrictions and standards. On Fox News, they don't care about you making "mistakes."
"Here you have an ability to do stuff, and then they can always rein you in," Kilmeade told the Los Angeles Times in October 2008. "But I know I'm not going to get reprimanded."
"When we make a mistake reading the news headlines, whereas at a [broadcast] network you'd probably get fired, instead, we're like, 'Eh, we screwed up,' " Fox & Friends' Gretchen Carlson similarly told the Times. "And I think that's disarming."
They have none.
I like Mr. Williams. He was simply speaking his true feelings in a larger framework regarding the importance of open discussion.
Regarding Dr. Watkins employment, I could not find any information to indicate he was fired. It does appear that Dr. Watkins claims the university denied him Tenure because of the Oreilly exchange.
The university denies that the Oreilly exchange had any impact on their decision for tenure. The university has more Black tenured professors than white, so they do not appear to have any problems with racial discrimination. They also appear to allow their staff to make public appearances as long as they disclose that opinions belong to themselves and not the university.
I suppose it is possible that the university is lying about the reasons for denying tenure. It is also possible that they had other reasons. Unless more information has been released, neither of us can know the full truth.
Just stop it.
Huh. Do you not hear people when they speak? Is there a Fox News App on your phone that redacts and translates people-speak into pablum you can understand?
Sherrod, in fact, did say she didn't want to help a white couple. She watched her father be murdered by whites and it scarred her for life. But she overcame her past and stepped up to save that family's farm. And that farmer and his wife are still friends with Sherrod.
Sherrod's anecdote was intended to urge people to go past their prejudices and understand that it isn't white against black, it's rich against poor. She was trying to do good, which is an extension of her entire professional life of doing good. But you just wouldn't understand, right, Wrongo? To you, it's all about twisting up the facts so that your team "wins," even if it means tearing down good people or dividing Americans to do it.
Like how you're still giving yourself thumbs up, by the way. Dumbass troll.
Plus, if Williams was a bigot then he would a) try to kill that muslim and b) get off the plane instead of just being a little nervous.
But your more interesting statement was "once [something] always [something]. So you don't believe that people can change? That's not an MMfA line, you came up with that all on your own. So I've got to ask, how can people ever learn anything if they're incapable of change? Are you who you were at 10? 16? 22? I know I'm not.
You're a sick woman.
What Fox DOES do, is goes into a giant hissy fit anytime anyone asks their candidates a question about what positions theyd have if elected. When it sees Sharon Angle or Rand Paul darting at full sprint away from a guy with a camera at a public event, it holds the doors of Fox open for the candidate to run inside and spout whatever lies they want, while falsely imprisoning the person who was asking questions, and then attacking them without other sides points of views, and without chance of their interaction.
Because Fox is Fair and Balanced. Also, Obama spoke to a crowd of 37,000 today: http://www.thenation.com/article/155540/obama-rallies-thousands-usc he does this all the time, not that youd hear about it. Always seemed odd to me, that a couple hundred idiots misinterpreting their bibles in shrill voices would be more newsworth that the dozens of thousands of people coming to hear Obama. But you know that "lamestream media" and how its always so good to Obama and the democrats... Except When Its Not. Which is always.
Never admit when they're wrong, never admit when a policy of theirs is failing/has failed. No matter what, full steam ahead!
I am voting conservative though because i unlike you believe in self support and dont think the government needs to take care of me. Which leads me to my question for you. You claim to be supporters of minorities especially blacks yet you continue to support a government that openly keeps them in poverty.
How is it that we have been supporting the poor through welfare programs and the like for over 40 years and yet the govt. dependency only continues to rise and is now a generational thing? It is now a time honored tradition in the black community as the norm to be dependent on the government. You call that a good thing? You think that is having the best interests of the blacks? I say that you are the racist in disguise and are a part of the problem. If it werent for you we may be able ween them off public assistance through training and education. But then, who would be there to vote for your party. The good news for me is that its only a matter of time before your racism is found out along with your parties. So keep on getting on. Keep those minorities living in poverty and filth and dependency just where you want them. Eventually, we will come to their rescue as we always do for almost everyone. You folks just call in the naacp to fight your battles in court.
Just because you and FoxNews are both conservative, that doesn't excuse FoxNews from having some professional, moral, ethical standards.
DUH!
What Fox doesnt like to tell you when it calls obama a tyrant, is that the President is a) not doing anything nearly tyrannical, at least no more so than every other president. (Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, the country did not immediatly materialize into Hell.) And that B) Tyrants tend to follow a relatively simple path: 1) Find disenfranchised (or those who feel that way). 2) co-opt political movement. 3) continue calling co-opted movement by its now false name.
The two best examples of this are easily the Nazi party (National Socialist) and fictional INGSOC (English Socialism/newspeak.) neither of these have ANYTHING to do with true socialism, merely seizing power of an already present system.
Fox doesn't like to tell you about that though, because then youd see they are trying to take over the republican party with corporation parties
We call the ACLU. Get your acronyms straight.
You don't think the Government needs to take care of you now. No one thinks the government needs to take care of them, until they actually need that help.
Racially generalize much?
Providing financial support for black is now racist? Do you even know WTF racist means?
How can they be trained and educated when you wingnuts want to cut those programs as well?
Typical wingnut
Hey Andronimo, are you still living in the 70's? You seem to think that everyone left of center supports welfare dependency and is against self support. Believing such stereotypes, I am sure, makes remaining ignorant emotionally and intellectually easier for you.
Just as it would be easy to dismiss all conservatives as Jim Crow war monger racist, the intellectually honest thing to do is recognize that many conservatives have moved on. It is not 1973 anymore.
Andronimo, i hate to break it to you but this web site is all about holding people accountable for their actions. Similarly many liberal and progressive ideas are about holding individuals and society responsible for their actions. Also modern progressives do not expect the government to magically solve all our problems but rather, we expect our government to belong to us and work for us.
Its the modern conservative libertarians that want everyone to do whatever they want as long as feels good or makes money. They give the market supernatural powers to solve all problems and manage society while government is attacked and bought and controlled by corporate interests
You did start out well when you stated not all conservatives are "war mongers", but went downhill from there by going into a this group vs. that group.
Where do I say that?
When I think of "bitterness and no self-worth" (it's hyphenated, by the way), I think of someone who goes to a site they hate to post about how much liberals suck. But that's just me.
Senator Craig?
Now, as far as you state I've come here to insult liberals...not true...in fact, I came to debate & was immediately called names but hey, I can take it, but it looks like you can't. And for that, I wanna send you chocolates so as your feelings can heal and life can go on...and you can continue with your typo posting police reports. Awesome job. Gotta say I'm falling for ya! I think you and I have something going on here....:)
badly.
Hey Rightpride, tell me how this statement is not true. What, except for magical market forces or after the damage is done lawsuits, holds people accountable in a libertarian view?
You highlighted the word everyone as well. Maybe I am being generous here. Perhaps there are categories of people that conservative libertarians are ok with regulating. Perhaps it is only the corporate interests that should have the most liberty...
Calling all Republicans warmongers is the same as saying all Libertarians believe in libertarian principles.
It's this black or white thinking that makes having a conversation with him almost impossible.
Like an uncool, whiny version of Cool Hand Luke.
<sarcasm>
OH LORD! Them Repkklicans shooo concerned about us poor government dependent Black folks!
What's we gonna do?
<sarcasm>
Please, continue along in your alternate reality of wind and ghosts. Please continue adding everyone who disagrees with you to your list of conspirators, fighting amongst yourselves like junkyard dogs. Please continue saying that violent revolution is a response to lawful elections. Keep forgetting that we've made money (yes, us, the taxpayers) from the repaid bailout money. And please keep saying its a christian nation -- then tell me whether itll be a lutherain, catholic, protestant, reform, calvinist, methodist, presbyterian, presbylutherain, or evangelic sect? Which of those groups will no longer be christian enough for ya once you enact your fallacious christian nation? Beholder Syndrome, spot on. "Kill your enemies for they are your enemies. Annihilate your family, for they mock you by being so similar, but so wickedly different."
Beholders took over parts of the lake of steam too. It did not go well for them.
Oh, and while you're at it: Keep ignoring the fact that the Democratic and Republican parties switched ideologies. Keep calling yourself the party of Lincoln (you aren't, as the republican party then was bascially the democratic party as it is today, and vice-versa) while attempting to reinstate segregation. And keep saying you are for real civil rights while you actively attempt to undo decades of civil rights, unless those rights include "Hating anyone you dont like and attacking them without consequences." Cause that seems to be the only reason you don't like hate crime laws: Cause you commit them.
And its infinitely amusing how you consider two of the biggest political turnarounds in history to be the losing side. Its weird because democrats held congress for 40 years..republicans had it for ten and shredded the country. Now people want the democrats in power, since the republicans keep saying they're going to pillage the US even more than Bush and Bush and Reagan. (Bush was NOT responsibile for clinton surplus, neither the old nor the new Bush, even though both are given credit by the right.)
How does it feel, knowing that in 20 years, you'll be just like all those people from the 30's and such who refuse to admit theyre racist, except you and your party will refuse to admit homophobic and extra-racist sentiments that you possess today.
Now then, as ive had my fill of losing hope for the future of humanity and easily taking down rightwing loser talking points, im gonna go further the gay agenda with my boyfriend and video games, and to plot your downfall. All of us here will make sure you never get to enact your twisted visions, and that "All men are created equal" will remain the rule of law, even for mincing gay men. (also women, but I dont have the patience of D&D writers to switch my nouns per paragraph.)
But let's look at some of the things that had and still continues to hurt blacks (if you wish to have a thoughtful conversation about it and I hope you do.)
One thing that hurts them is the drug war. Blacks and Latinos are a combined 25% of all drug users and dealers, but they are approximately 89% of people locked up in prison on drug charges. Whites are 74% of users and dealers but are only 10% of folks locked up on drug charges. I hate to sound conspiratorial, but this is intentional social policy that was designed to hurt people of color, and it ought not surprise you that it happened all after 1964 when the civil and voting rights acts were passed. It's a new form of social control sadly. And the center for disease control released a study that showed black males are 2.5 to 3 times more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs. Even though on the rare occasions that they are stopped, they are 4 times more likely to have the drugs on them in the car. Now that is some scary and sad revelation, I think you and I can both agree.
The other problem is the massive media stereotypes that permeate society to give negative imagery on folks of color. Now I'm not trying to give folks of color a pass, they do some stuff that they shouldn't do at times which can be criminal. But to deny (and I hope you wont) that folks of color are viewed through a collective lenses while whites get the luxury of being viewed as individuals is to deny reality. For example:
When a white man screws up the response is: "Well, that is just how John is."
Meanwhile if someone black screws up the response is: "Well that is just how 'those people' are."
And we know this too be true because there are studies that show this. One if which (but not limited too) a study done at Georgetown University by Deva Pager that showed black job applicants with white sounding names (James, Mary, etc.) are 50% more likely to get called back for an interview than those with black sounding names (Tyrone, Shaniqua, etc.) even when all the qualifications are the same. So this vicious stereotype is not just hurting black workers, but it hurts our economy overall.
Another thing is how black children are viewed in school by white teachers. I live in a state (MN) that has 4 times the national average in disparity treatment for blacks in regards to how their punished for bad behavior in school. Meaning blacks are more likely to be excessively punished (longer suspensions, quicker to be told to sit out in the hall, etc.) for their bad behavior than white kids who engage in the same bad behavior and are therefore punished far less excessively.
But let's talk about some of the problems that occurred in the past that still plague blacks today. In the 20th century, there were government grants, loans, and subsidies that were doled out to white families only (FHA and VA loans, GI Bill though blacks did get it eventually out with a smaller payout.) This causes blacks today to have 11 times less the net worth (and net worth is what matters in economic downturn) than whites which is why the NYT reported that blacks have been more devastated by the economic collapse than whites. Not to mention that black homes and business were forcibly uprooted to further white advancement. One example being the Treme in Louisiana. One of the oldest black communities that was uprooted decades ago to build a highway and the superdome. A highway that connected to suburban neighborhoods where only whites could live to the downtown areas where that had most the jobs.
Look, there is problems on both sides of the aisle in regards to systemic racism in America. Conservatives that want to stop talking about it and move on, because after all, "we have a black president." And also nice caring white liberals who "just want to help", but don't have the slightest clue on how to change the language and deal with the systemic.
So if you want to have an honest conversation regarding race, I speaking for myself, would be happy to have. But please don't come on hear indicting people with "this" and "that." It only shows that you're not as serious about fixing problems as you may like.
Thanks.
Hope everyone caught this. Andronimo just called minorities much stupider and lazier than white conservatives, because they will "eventually " get it, but, you know, they're a little slow on the uptake, and they will "finally" start working and earning a living. They have had it so easy for so long.
Sad thing is, you don't even realize how racist you are, Andro.
(Though very sad if you really think those things you post are true)
Ha ha ha!
BTW, those on the other side of the aisle are not ones to be talking trash about electing morons, or even nominating them.
Oh, you're way off. There are loads of right wingers stupid enough to post here. Believe it or not, some of them post stuff that's even stupider than your comments.
The smarter right wingers don't post comments, they just click on the "thumbs down". They get to vent, but avoid the humiliation of wearing the clown shoes.
But that's a very nice thing to say about left wingers, even if it show a bit of an inferiority complex on your part.
And I haven't given you any thumbs down. I enjoy your comments.
And yes Andro, thank you for telling me I am brainwashed because I am not a mature, thoughtful conservative like you.
Enjoy your little website and stroking each others egos since from what I can see I am probably the only conservative stupid enough to come play in your sand box.
Andro, you represent the modern conservative so well. You set a good example for us as a hard working, logical and fair minded person...
Well, no. Your post makes it obvious that you have not spent anytime getting familiar with the article or articles in this website or explored the discussions found here. If anyone seems brainwashed it is you, my friend. You seem unable to even consider what is posted here. Instead you throw out tired old talking points that not only miss the mark but are nothing new.
Prove to us that your not the brainwashed one by actually responding to the article and defending the ethics of a large corporate media network that seems to lack standards or hold their employees accountable for professional conduct.
At first I thought this was a parody troll...
...but then I got to the part where it implicitly threatens to murder us. Um, reported.
Oh, is that what that was about ? It was hard to follow the stream-of-consciousness rambling, but I figured it was about marrying a duck or importing some Dominican boys.
This recent Beck stuff has really got the mouth-breathers fired up.
(Though very sad if you really think those things you post are true)
Ha ha ha!
He and Glenn Beck call the President racist,as well as the 1st Lady,Sonya Sotomayor,Eric Holder.They have even mocked the Obama children,yet elected Republicans apologize to Limbaugh! Please tell me why they do that.etc
Also you refer to Obama & Co. being called racist as an example of being racist. So....in your world...calling someone a racist is an example of being racist. That would mean....any liberal calling conservatives racists...are actually racist themselves. See how it comes back..around and around?
As for the Obama children...that's unacceptable. No children should be brought into this on EITHER side..period. I would assume you took offense to Palins children, including her handicapped child being made fun of. Or is it patriotic to go after Republican children?
That was kind of an awkward phase in Biggie's career.
Is that what you do? I swear, your stereotypes of liberals are so hard to keep up with.
He obviously wanted to connect you to some unnamed "libs" who made fun of the mentally handicapped. A brighter bulb would have simply pointed out your comments to him on this thread and made it one less degree of separation..
No sweat about you ignoring me, I got bored of talking to you pretty quick, and will probably just have some fun talking about you.
Excellent, Whitepride. You caught me saying "talking" when it's technically"typing". That should be devastating to any morons who can't make the connection between posting on a website and having a conversation.
You've got the moron vote locked up with that "gotcha".
" Double standard" is one of those terms that wingnuts love like "Hypocrisy". You never give a good example, bu throw it round like confetti.
I don't know if your feelings are hurt, you just seem to spend the majority of your time here crying about the meanie lefties and their name-calling. You're either a whiner or a liar. Feel free to clarify.
I have no idea what being brought up in Brooklyn does to excuse your whininess. I know plenty of people from Brooklyn, and most of them aren't nearly as whiny as you.
OK, most New Yorkers are pretty whiny, but nowhere close to you.
As far as crying about meanie lefties...nope...just pointing out your hypocrisy...you know...Double Standards game. Now run along and go read.....
First of all, unless there's more than one RightOn posting here, he's pretty conservative, the one I know. But let's ignore that problem of yours right now to deal with your other problems.
I don't see RightOn posting on this thread, so it's a weird example, but let's post about it (not "talk", I don't want to confuse you any further).
RightOn, although I may have a lot of philosophical and political differences with him, has never impressed me as a mindless Foxbot or racist, so I wouldn't have any reason to note his screen names similarity to a white supremacist slogan. There's a big logical mistake you've made. Ar you with me so far ?
OK.
Now let's double down on your failure. "White Pride" is a very well-known term used by white supremacists. As far as I know "White ON" is not. So you've failed on a completely new level with your "double standard".
Just in case you're still not following- if somebody makes fun of your spelling when responding to you, but doesn't add corrections to every other poster here, that's not really a double standard, unless he's your teacher and is grading all of your spelling tests using different standards.
If somebody mentions racism in the GOP/Teabagger cult today (in the year 2010), but doesn't include a mention of Sen. Byrd's connection to the KKK before almost all of us were born, that's not a double standard, regardless of how "notorious" you've been trained to think he was.
You've got a really bad combination of ignorance and condescension going on. That's why everybody's laughing at you. As much as you want to think so, it's not a lack of reading comprehension by the "lefties", or them needing you to explain things, that's keeping others from seeing your brilliant points.
It's that everybody else is about ten steps ahead of you. We've all seen everything you've written, many times, and done better.
It's not entirely your fault. If you immerse yourself in the Rush Limbaugh show and Fox, you're going to be bombarded with the faulty logic, victim mentality, confusion and dishonesty that passes for "debate" there.
We can try to help you out of your hole, but you have to want it too. Nobody's giving you a fish.
I take offense to political attacks against family members not involved in politics.No one attacked Palin's shildren that were major media figures like Beck and Limbaugh.If so who? What did they say?Having an unwed pregnant daughter after being on record as a critic of family planning methods other than abstinence, leaves a politician open to criticism.That is not the same as openly criticizing the unwed teenage child.The stuff Beck and Limbaugh said to mock the Obama children was no where close to an equivalency.
My point about charges of racism from the right is not that they make the charge,its that they make the charge against minorities and never against white conservatives.They are quick to do the same against white Liberals too but not white conservatives.Harry Reid makes a statement of support for Barack Obama using the somewhat out of favor word Negro and is called racist by the same people that never see Rush Limbaugh as saying anything racist.Please explain that!!!I have certainly seen Democrats/Liberals criticized by their side on racial issues but you almost never see that on the conservative side.Palin never acknowledged the racist nature of the Mark Williams letter after having attacked the NAACP. Palin even gave Limbaugh a pass on using the word retard a dozen times after criticizing an out of context use by Rahm Emmanuel.Then she defends Dr Laura's insensitive racial rant!!!But of course she is a good patriotic leader of "Real Americans".
How could we, you Rushbots can't go ten minutes without screeching about him ?
You are embarrassing for me to even read.
The unfortunate problem is they have such a large group dependent on the government, they can't easily break from the nipple and make it on their own. That number continues to grow as long as liberal are in control. by sharpshooter57
Making it so that they spend most of their life on public assistance just getting barely by doesn't sound compassionate to me. Helping them succeed in life is more compassionate. by seahawks123
All they need to do is get a job..If they stay on public assistance maybe thats all they are able to do. by thebagger
We don't want to be dependent on the government in any way. Conservatives racist? Are you kidding me? Does Jeremiah Wright come to mind? Obama plays black against white everyday! What about Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson? by lmcpark
And THIS series is the CREAM OF THE CROP!
Keep those minorities living in poverty and filth and dependency just where you want them. Eventually, we will come to their rescue as we always do for almost everyone. You folks just call in the naacp to fight your battles in court. by andronimo
i know that is why soon the minorities will finally put it together that the Liberals are really the racists and only use them for votes. Its a losing battle the Libs are fighting since they dont have the truth on their side. They constantly have shuck and jive in order to stay relevant and eventually they will just run out of BS. And yes, even the minorities will eventually no longer fall for their lies and realize that they have been had all these years and finally begin the process of self sufficiency and personal wealth. ( With our assistance of course.) by andronimo
And THEY call US stupid?
It's almost as if andronimo is talking about livestock.
Of course, I'm probably, somehow, reinforcing his point by mentioning what a babbling nut job he is.
That's one of my favorite Fox Cult defense mechanisms. When people notice you're a moran, tell yourself that they're agreeing with you.
"How can they be trained and educated when you wingnuts want to cut those programs as well?" Now that is a racist comment.
Never happened. Go ahead, support your claim. You can't do it.
Go ahead and try to support that claim. It's another lie.
The vast majority of African Americans are middle class or better. Guess what? They still vote for Democrats in overwhelming numbers because they know which party has worked in their interest over the years, which party helped the most in creating the environment that allowed their movement to the middle class.
As others have pointed out, assistance in job training and education have been initiatives primarily championed by liberals.
Wow, not one of those statements is supported by facts. Not a single one. If you want to try to back up those claims I'll be happy to discuss them, but I'm aware that there are no facts you can bring to the table in support of your claims.
Try again sometime when you've achieved at least a nodding acquaintance with reality.
So, because I have no money, and had no way to earn income before my ability to function was crippled utterly. My parents do not have insurance, and thus, neither do I. Am I to take it that I should just curl up and die because I cant afford the health insurance to get me well enough so i could start working to pay for health insurance?
Oh, and no, I cant use emergency rooms. Physical therapy doesn't work well in those situations. So what about people like me, hmm? Through no fault of our own, disabled severely. Are we to just die?
"You claim to be supporters of minorities especially blacks yet you continue to support a government that openly keeps them in poverty. "
Here are the Republican leader's voting record:
Mitch McConnell, GOP Senate Minority leader: keep 'em dumb, keep em poor
Voted NO on $5B for grants to local educational agencies.
Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education.
Voted NO on funding student testing instead of private tutors.
Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation.
Keep em poor, deny health care
Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility.
Voted NO on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program.
Keep em from getting jobs
Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing.
John Boehner, GOP House Minority leader: keep 'em dumb, keep em poor
Voted NO on additional $10.2B for federal education & HHS projects.
Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.
Keep em poor, deny health care
Voted NO on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program.
Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility.
Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay.
Keep em from getting jobs
Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing.
Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25.
And of course all Republicans voted against any economic recovery, stimulus money or stimulus package for jobs, infrastructure, & energy.
So overall, the Republicans do a MUCH better job at openly voting for legislation that help keep poor people poor.
Didn't happen under Reagan -- strike one. Didn't happen under W. -- strike two. It won't happen under the tea partiers -- strike three.
You've got lots of bravado, but no guts.
Didn't happen under Reagan -- strike one. Didn't happen under W. -- strike two. It won't happen under the tea partiers -- strike three.
You've got lots of bravado, but no guts.
I am the product of a middle class African American family with a father who worked and provided for his family, including BCBS way back in the 1950s. We went on yearly family vacations, too, and we did this when this country was segregated. None of my friends has ever lived in the ghetto, needed/used public assistance, or had kids out of wedlock, and we're all college graduates and homeowners. All of my friends have similar backgrounds, but you base your view of an entire race on stereotypes. We aren't cardboard cut out figures, and we are all the same. There is no race of people in which every individual is exactly the same.
Your comments as expressed here at MMFA show that you have a limited world view and have not have many opportunities to interact with those who are different from yourself. All you have to rely on is what you see presented by the MSM. You really need to get out more.
Contrary to what you may see on Fox PAC, most of us in the African American communities throughout this country devote very little time to thinking about race and/or hating white people or anyone else. You have to devote time to thinking about people to care enough to hate them. We just don't care about those of your race who are hooked on stupid, as you are. It is whites like you who are fixated on race, otherwise, you wouldn't be always talking about it.
When I'm conversing with white members of the Democratic Party, we're not talking about race. We're talking about policymaking, and how to improve the lives of everyone in this country. We're not pre-occupied with race. We don't look as where someone lives/comes from as being a barrier to associating/interacting with that person. We have a really big tent because our party is a sort of come as you are type of thing where we focus on our common humanity rather than on superficial differences.
If the whites who stir the race pot would only realize that we AAs for the most part don't think about them, it would save them a lot of time.
We have better things to do than obsess over what you think about us, or to waste our time hating you or anyone else.
your conspiracy theories about keeping minorities down and dependant are ludicrous and Beck worthy
Do I have to explain the difference between the President of the United States and a pathetic, sorry "entertainer" for right-wing loonies?
Here we go AGAIN!
The ASSumption that welfare equals African Americans has been the theme of the right-wing loonies for YEARS! "We're supporting the poor" in the minds of the right-wing is ALWAYS followed by "African Americans".
You'd think that the ONLY poor people in America are African Americans and the ONLY people who get ANY assistance from the government are "African Americans" from your post.
Yet YOU offer NO explanation for the generations of poor Whites, in fact YOU don't even acknowledge the existence of poor Whites.
Oh my goodness, such concern about "those minorities living in poverty and filth and dependency", yet ALL the Republican party has offered since 1964 is J.C. Watts, Michael Steele and now Tim Scott.
Come on, the TRUTH is, IF 90% of African Americans supported the Republican Party, they could be "welfare, government living in poverty and filth and dependency" for the rest of their lives as long as they continued to support the GOP!
The history of the Republican Party's estrangement from African Americans is well known. One only has to look at the FACT, 32% of African Americans supported Richard Nixon in 1960 and ONLY 6% supported Barry Goldwater in 1964 to find the answer.
Add to that, the FACT for your YEARS, Republicans were completely satisfied with only receiving a small percentage of the African Americans vote. In fact it worked out really well in their "Southern Strategy" theme to win Southern Whites.
Actually, it's good news for the Democratic party. Now that Republicans have added the Tea Party to their resume of racial politics, they have guaranteed another 20 years of 90% of African Americans voting for the Democratic party.
I really hate when folks post "LOL", but seriously, THAT comment deserves a LOL!
IF African Americans had ANY doubt the Republican Party didn't give a rat's a** about them, your addition of the Tea Party to the Republican resume of racial politics, was the goal seal on the "we're not wanted" sign.
As far as rescuing us? DON'T BOTHER, we just spent the last 200 years getting away from your type of "rescue"!
Right or wrong it was his personal response to a given set of circumstances. He didn't directly or intentionally hurt or offend anyone. The only thing he is guilty of is being a human being. So, make him turn in his belly button or some other stupid response. This is like cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer.
I tend to agree with many who have said "what standards?". Most news presentation today lean more to drama for bucks than presenting the news. NPR you made a BIG mistake doing this as you best maintain your perceived notions that you are so darn ethical. Mr. Williams, good luck with your new job. NPR, I am done listening to you!
Ultimately NPR seems to have made their decision because they don't want Mr. Williams representing them after expressing these personal thoughts. Its not that NPR refuses to allow the idea Williams expressed to be heard on its programs. The perception that it is rational to feel fear or suspicion in the presence of Muslims has been aired and discussed on NPR. What is different is that the on air personalities have not revealed that is their own feeling.
Would Fox be wrong to fire Beck if, after a blow to the head or relapse of some sort, he began telling his audience that he hates and fears white people and supports George Soros? What if he began to quote chairman Mao with affection or said that tea party protesters personally made him nervous? Obviously lying and smearing without evidence is OK. Maybe working at FOX is like being in one of them unions where they never fire people...
Oh, and don't bring me that crap. You never came here with the intent of "debating". Your fisrt post was just another "People are to cowardly to accept Beck's dishonest invitation" post of the many that are said. Also you've been taunting ever since your first post. You lost the opportunity of civility long ago. There is no debate here and you never came to start it. Debate starts with civility and reality. You haven't displayed any.
I have listened to many shows on the tea party fad on NPR, and I have not heard their analyst say that they personally disliked tea party protesters or that they were afraid of them when they made their identity known. I have not heard them say that they felt personally threatened in the presence of tea party protesters. Mr. Williams expressed this type of reaction relating to Muslims, who make up around 1 billion people worldwide.
Also, in discussions on the tea party fad, NPR has aired opinions similar to Juan's. They have discussed the idea that many feel it might be rational to automatically fear Muslims. What they have not done is said that they personally fear Muslims automatically in their presence. Juan did.
Compare to fox, where the some of the unfavorable relationships between the corporate management and lobbyist seem to be nothing to worry about.
Ok libs, look around you. Think for yourself and study the facts yourselves. Don't take anyone's word. Look up the the real non-partisan websites.
Do you know why the Democrats running for office 2010 are not campaigning on the issues? Have you heard them bragging about the health care bill, stimulus bills, economy? Of course not. They don't even want Obama near them!!
Are you telling me that the main stream media is not liberal? Keith Olbermann, Christine Amanpour, Rachel Maddow, Katie Couric, on and on..... What about Hollywood? Jon Stewart, Joy Behar, Stephen Colbert, and that's just to name a small number of people. I could go on and on but it's useless to continue on deaf ears. I Listened to one man today who escaped communism in Poland and came to America for the American dream. He was nearly in tears because his business he had worked most of his adult life for is in jeopardy because of incompetency. When asked if he thought we were in danger of becoming "Socialist" he said "no, communist" and I've lived it. Wake up people. You are being fed pablum and you're eating it up.
Well, there's your liberal media, right there.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0508/Fox_analyst_apologizes_for_Obama_assassination_joke.html
Secondly, being a contributor and not an employee Fox has the right to not ask her to appear again which looks like that has happened, although I didn't like the apology, she said she was sorry for saying what she said, although she didn't say she was wrong in feeling that way, my take...
you bring up Liz Trotters gaf. I listened to it three times all the way through, it went like this
- first she flubs obama's name and says Osama.
- unfortunately for her, it was while talking about a serious topic like possibly being perceived as egging on assasination.
- realizing her name mixup had just implied some wanted to have Osama assasinated, she paused and said "if we could".
I've done things like that many times, my mouth and brain don't move at quite the same speed and when you catch yourself, your brain can race even further ahead. Haven't we all?
Granted, depending on how you pick apart her words, they can be seen as some kind of twisted statement, but I'm sorry, it's plain to me Liz Trotter was not calling for POTUS to be assassinated. And for you to imply she should be fired for it is just as silly as Juan's firing.
As for Kilmeade. I wish more people would stand up and look at the XMas day bomber, Times Square Bomber, Kobhar towers, Shoe bomber, USS Cole bombers and others and openly discuss the fact that things didn't stop at 9/11. There are still plenty of twisted people out there who are trying to kill innocent people and using the islamic religion as their excuse. Ever since Bill O and his View appearance, I've been hearing more people like the center of islamic relations openly stand up and applaud because being so doggone "politically correct" only serves to sweep the reality under the rug and prevent people from talking about it because they are too afraid to be called a islamophobe.
You make other points that I think are awfully weak too. But rather than make this longer than it already is, I'll jump to your conclusion. Fox news makes a lot of mistakes because they "lack standards".
As far as I can tell, Fox's primary mantra I've heard over and over is "Fair and Balanced" and "You decide". Yes, you make good points Hannity and and many others at Fox are definitely coming from the right. However, they almost always invite various liberals onto their show and give them a chance (almost always without shouting over the top of them) to balance out the other side of the arguments/topics.
By comparison, Oberman, Maddow, Matthews and so many others almost NEVER have any conservatives and when they do they just get shouted down the minute the open their mouths.
Basically I would actually reject your entire premise. I think there should be FEWER firings for clips of sentences taken out of context, not MORE.
Olbermann doesn't have conservatives on his show, true, but Maddow has an open invitation for conservatives to come on anytime, and she frequently mentions that so and so was invited on for a comment but declined. How do you think Rand Paul ended up there for his infamous interview ? And by the way, he said that she was "fair". And if you've watched her show, which I doubt, you'd know that she never raises her voice to anyone, ever, much less cut them off.
And if you watched Hardball, you would know that Matthews has at least one (usually more) conservative guest on for every single show. And Matthews shouts down everyone, whether he agrees with them or not.
Likewise, the Ed Show has at least one (usually more) conservative on every single episode. And early in his freshman season, Lawrence O'Donnell has hosted Lou Dobbs, Michael Steele, and Ron Paul, and he certainly didn't shout them down.
In short, with the exception of Olbermann, what you just wrote is baloney.
I know many small business owners and none of them have yachts. They have mortgages and payrolls they are responsible for, though. They have insurance premiums and business costs to maintain. They have so many obligations and these taxes are harming the economy right now by not just extending them. People are so dense and they believe 200,000 a year constitutes a ‘MILLIONAIRE and BILLIONAIRE’ as mentioned by the LEFT! That really has mean stumped? There is one MILLIONAIRE/BILLIONAIRE to discuss and that is the one who owns as much of our country as China, in sheeple! George Soros.
Some may excuse it as entertainment
Either way, it has no business on a Fox News Channel.