Fox & Friends -- and friends -- distort Axelrod's "unhealthy" remarks
SUMMARY: Suggesting the Obama administration is "trying to put the kibosh on free speech," Fox & Friends' Gretchen Carlson aired a statement by David Axelrod but left out the context of his remarks; guest Brandon Brice falsely accused Axelrod of calling the tea parties "un-American."
On the April 20 broadcast of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Hip Hop Republican spokesman Brandon Brice falsely accused senior White House adviser David Axelrod of calling the April 15 tea parties "un-American," and co-host Gretchen Carlson misrepresented the context of Axelrod's comments.
Carlson asked: "Is the Obama administration trying to put the kibosh on free speech? Listen to what senior White House adviser David Axelrod had to say about last week's tea parties." Carlson then aired an edited video clip of Axelrod from the April 19 edition of CBS' Face the Nation but left out host Harry Smith's question, which addressed both the tea parties and comments by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) regarding secession. Specifically, Carlson aired Axelrod saying: "I think any time that you have severe economic conditions, there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy." But Axelrod's use of the word "unhealthy" followed a question from Smith about tea parties and secession: "What do you make of this spreading and very public disaffection with, not only the government, but especially the Obama administration -- the tea parties this week? You even have the governor of Texas even using the word 'secession'? What -- should Texas be allowed to secede?"
After Carlson aired the Axelrod clip, Brice said: "You know, I was actually one of the speakers at the tea party, and I find it appalling that this gentleman would say that it's unhealthy and it's un-American." At no point in the interview did Axelrod refer to anything as "un-American."
From the April 19 edition of CBS' Face the Nation:
SMITH: What do you make of this spreading and very public disaffection with, not only the government, but especially the Obama administration -- the tea parties this week? You even have the governor of Texas even using the word "secession"? What -- should Texas be allowed to secede?
AXELROD: Well, I don't think that really warrants a serious response. I don't think most Texans were all that enthused by the governor's --
SMITH: But what about the first part of the question? This building disaffection --
AXELROD: -- by the governor's suggestion. Look, I think any time -- I think any time that you have severe economic conditions, there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
SMITH: Is this unhealthy?
AXELROD: Well, we're in a -- this is a country where we value our liberties and our ability to express ourselves, and so far, these are expressions. Now, one thing I would say is, the thing that bewilders me is this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people. So, I think the tea bags should be directed elsewhere, because he certainly understands the burden that people face.
From the April 20 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
CARLSON: Welcome back, everyone. Well, the question for you this morning: Is the Obama administration trying to put the kibosh on free speech? Listen to what senior White House adviser David Axelrod had to say about last week's tea parties.
AXELROD [video clip]: I think any time that you have severe economic conditions, there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
CARLSON: Unhealthy. So what is the White House afraid of? We're back in the pit. Brandon, let me turn to you.
Unhealthy. It looked like he was struggling for the word to describe what he thought about those tea parties, and instead of saying something else, he came up with "unhealthy"?
BRICE: You know, I was actually one of the speakers at the tea party, and I find it appalling that this gentleman would say that it's unhealthy and it's un-American. I think this is actually more American than anything that this administration has done. And from the -- like I said, the political partisanship that many people have criticizing, there were Democrats, there were Republicans, and there were independents.
And I think that's the message did not get out. So, you know, I go against this statement; I think it was way off. And I think that for this man to be that senior and to make a statement about the American people right now, I think it's appalling.
CARLSON: K.T., unhealthy?
K.T. McFARLAND (former Pentagon spokeswoman): I think it's also, though --
CARLSON: Unhealthy just because these people didn't agree with the Obama administration? Is that why it was unhealthy?
McFARLAND: I don't think they get it. I mean, this was not an anti-tax rally. This was an anti-Washington rally.
That's some look on Gretchen's face there. Obviously this fellow's sense of humor is plenty healthy. I love the subversiveness.
The funniest "Tea Party" sign I saw was the one a guy was hoding up which said "And I shaved my b*lls for this?" ;>)
Might help if you're inclined to go commando ;-)
Looks like Gretchen was reading that guy's sign ;-)
Or this one, Mary. Btw I liked your tea bag hat lady the other day. ;-)
prev | 27/29 | next
»
«
That's one of my favorites! HAhaha!
But did they get the joke?
I seriously doubt it. You'd have to be informed first.
Actually it's not correct. The tax hike, or increase in taxes is 8%. The tax "rate" went up 3%. Big difference and clearly the maker of the sign would have failed economics.
And it hasn't happened yet, so it didn't "went" up. Clearly you are wearing your top hat & tails & breathlessly waiting for the upper crust to hand you a crust...
I love that sign!
the resident valley girl, dumb a## blonde of fixed noise strikes out again
I would argue that it is FOX who are trying to 'put the kibosh' on free speach by continually editing and misrepresenting public statements. OK. Not seriously but it's gotten to the point where a politician can't say anything without having his or her words twisted. Infact if I were a politician they would probably take what I've just written and say 'Rep. Shaggles calls FOX News 'Twisted' and claims it has no right to free seach.'
Fox, like republicans themselves, wouldn't get an audience if they told the truth
lol... very well put. i guess that explains their high ratings.
SMITH: But what about the first part of the question? This building disaffection --
AXELROD: -- by the governor's suggestion. Look, I think any time -- I think any time that you have severe economic conditions, there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
"But Axelrod's use of the word "unhealthy" followed a question from Smith about tea parties and secession"
huh?? clearly the "unhealthy" was in direct response to the disaffection question, it had nothing to do with the secession as mmfa claims.
And did you read his response? You must have, because you put it in your posting. There is a caveat in his response, the "can mutate..." in there. Which means, he doesn't believe that it has become un-healthy, but there is a potential that it can become un-healthy, and I think we see some signs of that honestly.
Indeed. It's already muted to un-healthy for 3 Pittsburgh cops.
his unhealthy remark was in direct response to the first part of the question about disaffection. why can't mmfa just admit that Axelrod misspoke or said something relatively stupid with that remark? It's no big deal, but the way they try and spin everything and parse the words is ridiculous. just take responsibility for it and move on.
What makes your parsing better than Media Matter's parsing?
But again, what he said was it "can" mutate into something un-healthy, and that's not parsing, that's what he said.
Your analysis of the question and response seems accurate to me.
I second it !
do you agree with mmfa when they keep insisting that the unhealthy response was also a response to the secession part of the question? because that is the jist of these mmfa complaints and that is completely untrue. Axelrod's unhealthy response had absolutely nothing to do with secession, for mmfa to push that is utter distortion, and pretty pathetic.
Tommy, you've been appointed to the Media Matters article screening committee. Your first meeting is in the broom closet at midnight. Free lunch buffet for the first 50 committee members.
funny, it's many of you liberals who are closeted when it comes to criticizing an mmfa thread, even one as blatantly distorting as this one is.
Tommy, scrutinizing Media Matters' articles for relevancy...and mutating the discussion into a WITH.
SMITH: Is this unhealthy?
AXELROD: Well, we're in a -- this is a country where we value our liberties and our ability to express ourselves, and so far, these are expressions. Now, one thing I would say is, the thing that bewilders me is this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people. So, I think the tea bags should be directed elsewhere, because he certainly understands the burden that people face.
In other words, nobody's trying to put the "kibosh" on anyone's right to free speech, but the protests are unwarranted. The "unhealthy" remark clearly applies to talk of secession and other things beyond the mainstream.
SMITH: But what about the first part of the question? This building disaffection --
AXELROD: ......element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
Yes, and the continuation of the conversation has a bearing on the meaning of his words.
Tell me why you disagree with that.
simple, one more time.
SMITH: But what about the first part of the question? This building disaffection --
AXELROD: ......element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
Dodge!
Context is everything. What he said after has an impact.
simple, one more time, part II
SMITH: But what about the first part of the question? This building disaffection --
AXELROD: ......element of disaffection that can mutate into something that's unhealthy.
Dodge again. I'm familiar with that particular section of the exchange, it doesn't change the perception from reading the entire thing.
Axelrod was quite clearly continuing his answer from the entire question. He was asked for clarification, and he provided it in no uncertain terms.
Is there anything more pathetic than the willfully ignorant perpetuating the disingenuous populism of six-figured corporate authoritarians?
But shame on the Democrats for letting conservatives tap into and manipulate genuine public outrage over this nuclear meltdown of predatory capitalism. It is so frustrating to watch the Democratic majority let these radical conservatives offer ridiculous narratives without offering the real story about how cons are out redistribute as much income as possible to the wealthy.
Wow, I thought you disapproved of these media "gotcha games".
Give it up, J.B. If Axelrod misspoke, he corrected himself in the subsequent sentence when he said "and so far, these are expressions".
You got nothin'.
How many times can FOX jump the shark before being relegated to the ratings purgatory they deserve?
when liberals have to parse their words' meaning AFTER they very clearly said what they meant, that is hardly some correction, despite all the liberal hand wringers, including mmfa, to the rescue. He said it, it's all there. liberals can never take responsibilty for anything, it is amazing, especially their own words. nope, not buyin' it. Axelrod should just say he misspoke, but damn liberals can't do that. They have to slice, dice, parse and play word games all day long, it's actually comical to watch, albeit sad at the same time.
How on earth are you somehow not playing word games?
James is quite an accomplished mental gymnast, he twist and turns his mind into a tight knot until all he can hear is himself!
TJ was for slicing, dicing and parsing before he was agin' it.
that's another way of sayin' it!
That shouldn't still fascinate me, but it does. People like JimmyB get the righty spin put in their heads, and are immune to the truth, and to top off their public display of gullibility, they try to use the sledge hammer repetition that works on them ,thinking it'll work on rational people. Those of you taking the time to explain are more patient than I am.
Yep! You never lied!
JamesB Wrote: Axelrod should just say he misspoke, but damn liberals can't do that. They have to slice, dice, parse and play word games all day long, it's actually comical to watch, albeit sad at the same time.
Actually, you have just described the tactics of Fox and the fanatical right-wing, which you are a part of. The only way you can get across points is by dealing with non-issues, parsing words, and twisting the truth. THAT is why the GOP focused on Ayers in the '08 campaign. THAT is why you chose to label Obama as a socialist (and non-citizen). If you had to actually discuss ideas, or reference your slander with facts, you would have nothing to say. Can a Republican say anything besides the 2 words, 'tax cuts?' Or the absurd attack of 'socialist?' Yet these frauds who cry that would never dream of refusing medicare or medicaid for themselves or their family. So much for hating socialism.
I suspect this is not comical to you, because you have lost and are becoming increasingly irrelevant. However, your response is comical to us, because of your increasing irrelevance and lack of contribution to the public discourse.
James, make all the excuses you want but FOX always leaves out the pertinent, "context" part of tapes whenever they can do so to convey a bad impression about Dems. I've seen them leave out the specific question to which the person was responding countless times. FOX is just a propaganda machine.
jamesB just did the same thing Fox did. He acts as if Smith's question stands alone by itself and then concludes that Axelrod's response applies only to the first part of a previous, multi-part question. If you watch the tape or read the transcript, you can see that Smith's second question is actually interrupting Axelrod's response to the first question. Axelrod was just trying to complete his thought after he was interrupted.
Nice spin james he clearly said it CAN mutate into something unhealthy which is not saying that it was unhealthy. Just like with Animal rights activist Id respect the protest of the ethical treatment of animals but it can turn unhealthy to the point where people take the rights of animals past the rights of humans....SEE!! I think he fears that it may become unhealthy because the name and timing of the parties makes no sense. It's a jumbled issue of opinions some valid and some insane. Also he was asked about dissent. He didn't say that is was bad he said that it can turn "unhealthy". Thats like if a Basbeall team is plaing bad and fans start booing. It can turn unhealthy by people rioting and throwing stuff on the field. DOESN'T mean it's going to happen. Now it's "Anti Washington" and I fear that this can become unhealthy by people taking state rights so far they may think succession if Washington doesn't do everything they say no matter how stupid.
Here comes another fox spin, how can the administration be trying to stop free speech when they recognized that's Americans have a right to expression and this was an expression. If you continue to conform to the muck that's fox throws out and certain politicians are tossing then it will turn unhealthy because you will be fighting for an cause unjustified by reality without a defined message where everyone is out to get you...what is that MENTAL condition called?. People are going to get Ulcers with all this fallacy of fascism, totalitarianism, and Socialism.(by the way if you are looking forward to Social Security and your social security check then you are dabbling in socialism oh my....we have been since the 1930's) almost every government has a multi- facited system that takes ideas from different systems
Also if this is an "Anti Washington Rally" then maybe we should remove some people from our government....like the people who say that government doesn't work and then runs for office to prove their point by being as useless and obstructionist as possible?.
Come on fox definitely spun the hell out of this. When did he say that it was unamerican and when, until someone in the Republican party pointed out the fact that Obama is cutting taxes for these people, did fox ever say that this wasn't about taxes. fox changed the meaning of the Tea parties continuously and there was no constant message there. fox continuously pushed the taxes part and later pushed the spending part which shows that you don't know that it cost a lot more to reduce a deficit then to make one. Everyone was mad about different things and mad at different people. How are you going to say this wasn't a protest about taxes when the name is the taxed enough already parties. Was this protest about cigarettes? Is this aout cap and trade which will help to lower health care cost with lower emissions? It would have to be about various state governments and growing the federal government has nothing to do with that.
WOW! I wonder what all of you would have said in response to the first 'tea party' in our nation's history? Lead to some real "unhealthy" results didn't it?
Except that these tea parties didn't have anything to do with original tea parties, not in the least. What were they protesting back in the 1700's? Do you really know?
They were essentially protesting a large corporate tax cut the Crown gave to the East India Company on tea, and forced the colonies to buy only English tea when they were getting Dutch tea much cheaper before. Also, the large tax cut, made it impossible for other colonists to compete with the East India Company, and therefore, drove lots of colonists out of business.
Now, in that time and age, who would have been protesting large corporate tax cuts? I'm pretty sure liberals are usually on that side of the equation, talking about not letting corporations get away with things like this. Who is normally on the side of the companies and corporations? Yes, conservatives.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Transplant today's conservatives back to 1776, and they'd all be tories. Take our founding fathers, put them here, they'd be hardcore liberals, and I'm sure would be called socialists/commies/fascist, and or whatever else we're being called these days.
Learn history, it helps sometimes.
Thanks, Mag, I should have refreshed the page. I wonder if it got through? eh, who cares, if he doesn't want to know, you can't force him.
I don't know if I can explain the difference to you here. If you don't get that these recent teabagging stunts were working towards almost opposite ends as the Boston Tea party, you're watching too much tv news.
The original, real ones were a protest in support of the average citizen of the colonies, these recent sucker traps were manufactured to work against the average American.
If you would be so kind as to point out the similarities between the two events, it would ever so clarifying. Beyond the similarities in the title of the events that is. Any comparisons between the leaders of this mock revolution and the original Revolution?
Not sure what you mean by "unhealthy." The risks involved in the original were real. I'm sure various loyalist royalists had no few scathing words about it. The Revolution proceeded regardless. As the current vox humana for teabaggers Faux will I'm sure try to make the Revolution du jour, proceed.