About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

After repeatedly smearing people with falsehoods, Beck claims "the things that we are saying ... are true"

October 13, 2009 1:27 pm ET — 103 Comments

Attacking White House communications director Anita Dunn for saying that Fox News is "undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House" and suggesting the network is not a "legitimate news organization," Glenn Beck asserted of his attacks against Obama administration officials, "[T]he things that we are saying have been checked out; they are true." In fact, Beck has repeatedly made false statements in his witch hunt against Obama administration officials, such as calling Van Jones "a convicted felon" and claiming that Cass Sunstein "believes that everyone must be an organ donor."

Beck: "[T]he things that we are saying have been checked out; they are true"

From the October 13 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

GRETCHEN CARLSON (co-host): I remember during your show when you were talking a lot about the czars, you would say, "I know the White House is watching, and, so far, they haven't disputed much of anything that I have said."

BECK: Yeah, you know what's amazing is, I mean, I see it all the time. I see their statements, and they'll say, "Oh, the smear" -- I mean, exactly what people used to say about those who were going after [former President] Nixon. "Oh, it's just a smear campaign." Help me out, because I'll stop saying the things if they're not true. Just tell me what's not true. But the -- the -- the White House hasn't done that, because the things that we are saying have been checked out; they are true." [10/13/09]

Beck has repeatedly gone after targets of his witch hunt with falsehoods

Beck falsely claimed Van Jones is a "convicted felon." On August 11, Beck said former White House green jobs adviser Jones "is a convicted felon, a guy who spent, I think, six months in prison after the Rodney King beating." In fact, as Eva Paterson, president and founder of the Equal Justice Society, has explained, "Van [Jones] has never served time in any prison. He has never been convicted of any crime."

Beck told falsehoods about Sunstein's views on organ donation, rat removal. Beck falsely claimed on September 9 that Sunstein, head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, "believes that everyone must be an organ donor." In fact, in a book, Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler advocated for approaches to organ donation policies that "would be likely to save many lives while also preserving freedom" (emphasis added) and did not advocate for mandatory organ donation. Beck also claimed on September 9 that Sunstein said "you should not be able to remove rats from your home if it causes them any pain." In fact, in the introduction to a book of essays he co-edited, Sunstein did not advocate against rat removal, but rather said, "At the very least, people should kill rats in a way that minimizes distress and suffering." Sunstein also stated that, from a utilitarian perspective, "[i]f human beings are at risk of illness and disease from mosquitoes and rats, they have a strong justification, perhaps even one of self-defense, for eliminating or relocating them."

Beck falsely claimed Holdren supported "forced abortion." On July 22, Beck said: "I mean, look at what's going on. We got czars coming out our -- they're shooting out of our butts. Czars like [science and technology adviser] John Holdren, who is -- there is great evil happening in our country. Holdren has proposed forced abortions and putting sterilants in the drinking water to control population. Oh, that's crazy. What, that was -- that was 20 years ago." Responding to Beck's claim, the website PolitiFact.com concluded that "the text of the book clearly does not support that. We think a thorough reading shows that these were ideas presented as approaches that had been discussed. They were not posed as suggestions or proposals. In fact, the authors make clear that they did not support coercive means of population control. Certainly, nowhere in the book do the authors advocate for forced abortions." PolitiFact ended its post on Beck's comments by stating, "[W]e rate Beck's claim Pants on Fire!"

Beck boasted that "some of the biggest minds in America" do his research, but frequently gets facts wrong. Beck has bragged that "[m]y credibility means everything to me," and that he has "some of the biggest minds in America" on his research team "working harder than ... any staff ever on television" to get the truth out. However, in addition to his falsehoods about Jones, Sunstein, and Holdren, Beck repeated Andrew Breitbart's false claim that an online video showed community organizers from the Gamaliel Foundation "pray[ing]" to President Obama; claimed an obsolete constitutional provision protecting the slave trade applies to "immigrants"; claimed a "Class of 2007" mosaic painted on tiles outside of a California school was carried by G-20 protesters in Pittsburgh; and seized on a World Climate Conference presentation on short-term natural climate variability by Mojib Latif, a prominent climate modeler, to suggest that Latif has "backed out now and said, 'We were wrong,' " about global warming. In fact, Latif asserted that contrary to common "media" misperceptions of global warming as a "monotonic process" in which "each year is warmer than the preceding year," there are significant natural climate variations within the decadal timescale that do not change the "long-term warming trend."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (October 13, 2009 1:34 pm ET)
      12  
      Now come on, how can a man of Becks stature be lying, after all 2 gazillion people went to Washington for him.

      Doggone commie, liberal media.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (October 13, 2009 1:40 pm ET)
        9  
        And, how can he be making things up when he has the highest ratings? I mean, after all, doesn't ratings = truth?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by westla (October 13, 2009 1:37 pm ET)
      2 11
      I see nothing good coming from this media brouhaha with Fox News that some at the White House feel they need to ignite. All it does it give publicity to Fox and elevate their stature. Sure, maybe some will see Fox for what they are but I believe for the most part they will just firmly entrench themselves as a victim....positioning their network as being bullied into giving Obama more positive stories, and throwing their hands up in the air effectively saying "What? Us?"

      Leave the media catfights to those in the media. The White House needs to stay on message, do the work they were elected to do, stay positive and don't sink to the level of a network that slings and wallows in the mud.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (October 13, 2009 1:41 pm ET)
        11  
        Honestly, I thought that possibly they needed to address it because FoxNews has been lying about the Obama administration since day 1. And, as we've seen over time here, they are not truthful in whatever little reporting that they do happen to do.

        If conservatives can cry foul about the media, why can't liberals?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by westla (October 13, 2009 1:48 pm ET)
            12
          I didn't say liberals shouldn't complain, I am talking about the White House. I would say the same thing whether it was inhabited by a Democrat or a Republican. As I said, let pundits or other networks fight it out. I just don't think it's in Obama's best interest to get the White House embroiled in a war against Fox.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:26 pm ET)
            3  
            I think you are absolutely wrong. By making the Republican party into the caricature that it has allowed itself to become, they are marginalizing their political adversaries. Even those who believe in some conservative values or in some conservative candidates will not support Rush Limbaugh or Fox News. They have been revealed for the pathetic party over country partisans that they are.

            Intelligent, educated, informed individuals that are moderate or independent in their voting have been lost by the Republicans specificially because of Fox News and Limbaugh. It is a master-stroke by the White House to make these voices out to be the Republican party. What is remarkable, is that so few on the Republican side of the aisle have caught on and actually attempted to extricate themselves from the stranglehold of Fox News and Limbaugh.

            Limbaugh and Fox News do not need or want to win any elections. In fact, they probably make more money when their party is out of power. How long will it take the Republican party to figure this out?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
            18
          The problem with you liberals is your obsession with Fox News has now permeated the White House, and the folks at Fox are loving every minute of it. To have the POTUS taking aim at you is delicious if you're Fox. But your hatred for Fox has you hauling out the kitchen sink because you think something will stick and sink Fox, it just has too, dammit! LOL! More emotional arguments over a media cable news network that is more of a thorn in liberals' side than anything else. If Fox would just shut up and go away, liberals will not rest until they are taken down. Pick your battles elsewhere liberals, this only makes you look ineffective and unable to govern, if this is all you have to worry about is Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (October 13, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
            16  
            Pick your battles elsewhere liberals]

            Who made you general? Fox News deserves these attacks regardless of how nutjobs like you think it will play out. If nothing else the smearing of Van Jones and Kevin Jennings was reason enough for me.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:32 pm ET)
                14
              So why didn't Jones and Jennings publicly lobby to appear on Fox and defend themselves? If you are being unfairly smeared and you know it, then it should be a piece of cake to confront those doing the smearing and make them look like fools. That is what they should have done.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 2:33 pm ET)
                14  
                What would be the point? People like you would continue to believe the bulls**t being shoveled.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by peace4all (October 13, 2009 2:38 pm ET)
                13  
                because if they did go on fox, they would be subjected to having to try and defend things that are flat out lies, and when they would try and defend themselves they would be talked over so that they could not defend themselves. i do watch fox enough to know how they work. the guest is not important. the host hearing him or herself speak is what is important. they throw out some outrageous question and then as soon as the answer comes they begin their shrill yelling about "your not answering my question" or in billos case, "CUT HIS MIKE"

                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:40 pm ET)
                    14
                  "they would be subjected to having to try and defend things that are flat out lies"

                  Well that should be easy then, shouldn't it? If you can't defend yourself against obvious lies, then what can you defend?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by peace4all (October 13, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
                    13  
                    you have to be able to be heard to answer the lies. if you watch fox you will notice that if the person they are attacking starts to refute the lie the conversation takes a turn where both parties are talking and no point can be made. the host controls the show and if the guest tries to deviate from the format the host lays out then they are either interrupted or cut off. it happens daily on fox. no, i think the white house should go after fox in public. let it increase the fox viewership. when people see what fox does they will become even more marginalized and people will either tune out or watch it for jerry springer type entertainment.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 3:17 pm ET)
                      1 13
                      Well if your reason is there is no point because they won't be heard, that is just an excuse. And I don't buy it. To criticize them from afar looks like you don't have the stones to go on there and defend yourself. If the lies are so obvious then I don't see the dilemma at all.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
                        11  
                        Once in a while I have conservations with my boss who is a far righty. He's convinced Obama wasn't born here; Obama is a secret Muslim (he doesn't like Muslims); Obama is a communist; Obama wants to kill old people; he also laughed when America failed to get the Olympics. He's comfortable in his delusions and I've basically given up on trying to convince him of anything. There's no point in it.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
                          1 10
                          The point of going after Fox on their own turf and directly confronting their stupid hosts is not to convince the sheep that hate Obama and know only what Fox tells them, but it's to marginalize them even more. To expose their silly rhetoric and crap for what it is. Show up Hannity and the others on point, let them squirm and try to defend their stuff for once. Take it to them. Look, all of their other efforts have proved ineffective so far, and pointless. Fox is getting more popular, ratings through the roof. It's time for a new strategy for Obama and his White House. What has been done previously hasn't worked, and isn't.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 4:10 pm ET)
                            8  
                            There's a bunch of loons watching that channel and there's no convincing them. It's like what Barney Frank said - having a conversation with your dining room table.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
                                9
                              That's a cop out
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
                                8  
                                These people are convinced of an alternate reality. They don't need Democrats to talk to them; they need a psychiatrist.
                                Report Abuse
                              • Author by pilotshark (October 13, 2009 5:13 pm ET)
                                6  
                                So who is better fox or AL-jeerzzra (spelling) news?

                                they both seem to have it in for USA. both are know to have no real facts.

                                Actually AL is just a bit better as its facts are at lease some what check on.
                                Report Abuse
                          • Author by peace4all (October 13, 2009 4:47 pm ET)
                            5  
                            there is nothing to indicate that what the white house has been doing is not effective. thats like saying that the health care bill is dead. the process is still ongoing. and the reality is that fox's rating are not really going up. if you look at the numbers for fox the actual viewers of their shows is pretty constant. sure there are spikes but they go back down over time. they have the top spot on CABLE and unless some big event happens the numbers stay pretty much the same for all the channels. i think the white house has some pretty smart people. at least as bright as beck and hannity. so for now i will just wait and see how it plays out. if you don't agree thats ok, it's just my opinion.
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:29 pm ET)
                            3  
                            "The point of going after Fox on their own turf and directly confronting their stupid hosts is not to convince the sheep that hate Obama and know only what Fox tells them, but it's to marginalize them even more." - RightOn

                            Nonsense. That is giving them and their propaganda credibility. Fox News has been marginalized. It is not taken seriously by an honest, unbiased minds. What is amazing is that the Republican party has allowed Fox to become so aligned with them. Now, the entire Republican party has become marginalized. Once again, Obama has shown himself to be two steps ahead of Fox News and the Republicans.
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:34 pm ET)
                            2  
                            "It's time for a new strategy for Obama and his White House. What has been done previously hasn't worked, and isn't." RightOn

                            Nonsense. Obama has consistently outmaneuvered Fox News, and the Republicans along with them. Fox News IS marginalized and the Republican party has followed them right out into the wilderness.

                            The majority of Americans don't buy into Fox News's nonsense. They either laugh or wretch when they hear their obvious nonsense. Obama should certainly NOT appeal to the Fox News crowd. That has done NOTHING for the Republican party but lose one election after another.

                            The word is out on Fox News and Limbaugh. They believe in party over country. What is amazing is that the Republican leadership has allowed Fox News and Limbaugh to become their representatives in public. They will never get out of the political wilderness until they wake up. I do not care how big you think Fox News' ratings are, they have been proven to be electorally irrelevant.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 6:44 pm ET)
                                4
                              "The majority of Americans don't buy into Fox News's nonsense"

                              Then why all the stress over Fox? You cannot continue to say they are crappy and illegitimate yet freak out everytime they lie. It makes no sense.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:55 pm ET)
                                2  
                                "Then why all the stress over Fox? You cannot continue to say they are crappy and illegitimate yet freak out everytime they lie. It makes no sense." - RightOn

                                I don't think I freak out everytime Fox lies - that is your own caricature. But I can certainly say they are a crappy and illegitimate news organization and they are not worthy of the title "news". I can certainly refer to them as the mouthpiece of the Republican party. I certainly can. Why can't I? The Republican party is certainly not refuting it.

                                Have you watched Obama and then watched Fox News? I don't think the White House is stressed out about them. I think Fox News is stressed out about Obama. You might want to look again.
                                Report Abuse
                      • Author by Ruby (October 13, 2009 8:58 pm ET)
                           
                        By even going on television to defend yourself, you therefore give credence to those ridiculous accusations. One of those individuals appearing on a Fox show would be enough to establish their guilt to the average fox viewer.

                        It's exactly why Obama didn't publicly comment on the Birther conspiracy...why give them legitimacy that they don't have?

                        Obama's taking a page out of W's book on this one--never allow the opposition to dictate the terms of the conversation.
                        Report Abuse
                    • Author by srichardson (October 13, 2009 5:06 pm ET)
                      5  
                      I happen to agree that for the majority of the shows on Fox, it's either the bat crap, rabid ass crazy right wing or people wanting to watch a circus show who are tuning in to their channel. If you want to watch real news, sane people tend to not tune into Fox. Right ON's continued argument that VanJones and others should have gone on Fox to defend themselves without listening to others responses is a perfect example of why you can't argue with these people. They don't listen. And as soon as you start making sense, they raise their voices, repeat the same talking points and tune you out. It really is a no win situation for the White House to stand up to Fox, but I'm glad they finally did. After a while even the most highly intelligent, morally superior person has to stand up for themselves against those less intelligent and amoral.
                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:28 pm ET)
                    3  
                    "Well that should be easy then, shouldn't it? If you can't defend yourself against obvious lies, then what can you defend?" - RightOn

                    Why don't you ask those who were blacklisted by McCarthy. The Americans who lost their careers due to lies and innuendo.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 6:45 pm ET)
                        5
                      Ridiculous. We are in a totally different world, era and everything else.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:56 pm ET)
                        3  
                        Really? You don't think people can be ruined by lies and innuendo today. Naivete.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by DellDolly (October 14, 2009 1:22 am ET)
                        2  
                        Yeah, Van Jones wasn't trashed by being blacklisted by FoxNews? He was forced to resign, not because he was a communist, and not because he had done anything wrong, but because of a multitude of lies told about him.
                        Report Abuse
              • Author by n'est-ce pas (October 13, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
                   
                It's impossible to prove that you didn't do something. That's why the burden of proof falls on the prosecution, genius.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by hurricaneyankee52983 (October 14, 2009 5:14 pm ET)
                   
                right on, FOX would alter and edit any interview to make JONES AND JENNINGS as bad as possible.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 2:32 pm ET)
            8 1
            Right on . . . if you were truly a conservative, you would hate Fox and Beck and Rush also. They don't represent conservative ideology and have tagged the Republican Party and conservatives with a most destructive image of pettiness, hatred, dishonesty and intolerance.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
              1 9
              Huh? You have no idea what you are talking about. Fox is crap, I have said so many times. But you don't address crap from the sidelines, you go after it and expose it as crap at their own doorstep.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by captfoster2 (October 13, 2009 3:39 pm ET)
            10  
            right ON

            Exactly what 'liberals' in the White House are you talking about??

            There hasn't been any true liberals in the WH since the Johnson administration.

            If you believe that Obama and/or his administration is in any way liberal... you have not one damn clue as to what you are talking about!!
            Report Abuse
          • Author by sleepy joe (October 13, 2009 4:24 pm ET)
               
            The con has a point.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by hurricaneyankee52983 (October 14, 2009 5:12 pm ET)
            1  
            Right on, FOX continusly lies about this administration and needs to be taken to task for it.FOX'S lies need to be exposed to the rest of the country.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (October 13, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
        10  
        You think this is about negative stories???

        It's about FALSE stories.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by westla (October 13, 2009 2:13 pm ET)
            6
          What? I am talking about how Fox will play this, they certainly won't admit to false stories so they won't be positioning themselves from that point of view. They will however position themselves into being goaded into giving Obama more positive news coverage. We know the lies Fox tells, but they would never admit that.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by sleepy joe (October 13, 2009 4:22 pm ET)
           
        That is so true. The more they fight with these loons, more exposure is given to their crazy accusations - as if they need it.

        The White House and the "liberal media" are falling into a trap set by the far right to keep them off message and make sure nothing gets done.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 1:55 pm ET)
        12
      More White House whining. You, or your spokespeople, can't sit there and whine day in and day out about how unfair Fox is and then never go on there to defend yourself. Set the record straight then Obama. Back during the campaign you went on O'Reilly's show. Go on all of them, make your case. Don't complain how they distort and lie and then refuse to appear on the network. Beat them on their own turf.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (October 13, 2009 2:05 pm ET)
        9  
        More right ON whining. You are less than insignificant, Tommy.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (October 13, 2009 2:15 pm ET)
          7  
          More off topic whining. He's trying to turn this into a debate over whether or not the Obama Administration reps should appear on FoxNews. That's not the topic though. The topic is how Glenn Beck denies reality. How Beck claims innocence, that all they're doing is simply exposing facts to their audience, and therefore the complaints from the White House aren't valid!

          If all Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, et al were doing is exposing facts to their audience, then FoxNews's objections to being called out like this would be accurate and relevant and newsworthy. If all they were doing was providing their audience with factual information that doesn't help the White House, then Obama's argument would fail.

          But that's not the case. Another strawman argument bites the dust.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:27 pm ET)
            2 9
            Hey genius, Beck Hannity and O'Reilly are slugs who pass on their opinions to lockstep viewers who only want their views reinforced. They have opinion programs not newscasts.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by clams casino (October 13, 2009 2:15 pm ET)
        8  
        If they don't consider Fox to be a legitimate news organization, then there's hardly any point in going on the network to make that case.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:20 pm ET)
            9
          You just made my point. Adult White Houses don't spend their time trying to discredit illegitimate news organizations. It makes no sense. Think about it.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
            9  
            They do when those illegitimate news organizations organize protests based upon false information promulgated by said illegitimate news organizations. Also when people citing false information obtained by watching and listening to said illegitimate news organizations make death threats, show up at military installations with guns in order to bring down those "FEMA" camps, and shoot doctors for doing their jobs, legally.

            The lies of Fox are dangerous and are becoming more and more dangerous every day.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:38 pm ET)
              1 10
              Fine. Then go after them on their own turf. Don't be afraid, you just look weak. Put your money where your mouth is.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:16 pm ET)
                6  
                Obama said he would be willing to go on Fox any time they asked, but he's not going on with the understanding that they are a news organization, just as a member of the "opposition." Did you miss that in the WH statement? He'll go if they ask . . . they haven't asked in a while.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:42 pm ET)
                    9
                  "but he's not going on with the understanding that they are a news organization, just as a member of the "opposition"

                  What kind of meaningless qualifier is that, exactly? I will go on under an understanding, blah, blah, blah. Ridiculous.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:53 pm ET)
                    6  
                    A truthful one. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not worthwhile, in fact, I think many would argue that the fact you don't like it MAKES it worthwhile.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:55 pm ET)
                        8
                      Means nothing. You go on Fox to confront the lies about you and those telling them, if that is your position. Period. All this other qualifying nonsense is just useless filler written by well-trained communications directors. Ho-hum.
                      Report Abuse
          • Author by clams casino (October 13, 2009 2:39 pm ET)
            8  
            No, I didn't make your point. Going on Fox, as you suggested, would legitimize them, while pointing out that they aren't a legitimate news organization does the opposite.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
              1 11
              How is that workin' out for ya so far? Not so much, huh?
              Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:42 pm ET)
                10
              Oh, and Obama has been on Fox, so are they legitimate or not?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:20 pm ET)
                5  
                "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

                Anita Dunn, WH Communication Director, October 10, 2009, on CNN.

                What part of that statement fits with your continued retorts?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:44 pm ET)
                    8
                  I was responding to Clams Casino who said he shouldn't go on Fox because it only legitimizes them. Perhaps you should read what I respond to so you won't look foolish.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:54 pm ET)
                    5  
                    Oh, hon, I've read every little piece of nonsense you've posted.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:56 pm ET)
                        7
                      You even missed that. I tried.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by srichardson (October 13, 2009 5:24 pm ET)
                        5  
                        Honestly, the way you are treating and reacting to people on this blog reminds me a little of the way that Hannity responds to guests who disagree with him (and therefore whom are correct).
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by DellDolly (October 14, 2009 1:27 am ET)
                          1  
                          That's because he's not trying to interact with anyone. He's trying to derail a thread so that the real point doesn't get talked about. The issue never has been whether or not Obama or other people from his administration will go on FoxNews or not. It was that Beck ignored the known facts! He didn't want us to talk about that, apparently, so he went off on this tangent multiple times, trying to rope in as many people as he can!

                          And it's that I tried to derail that strategy that has made him get teed off at me.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by srichardson (October 14, 2009 9:48 am ET)
                            1  
                            Your point is so true. In all honesty very few of these points even address Beck and his lies. I think we can all (well, most of us) agree that Beck wouldn't know the truth if it slapped him in the face. He is a professional liar and gets paid handsomely to do so. For anyone to deny that fact is either incapable of thinking for themselves or also a liar.
                            Report Abuse
        • Author by westla (October 13, 2009 2:22 pm ET)
          1 7
          It's a good point. Their lies and distortions render them illegitimate in my book, but if the White House publicly goes after them it only elevates their stature. But I can see your point too.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by pete592 (October 13, 2009 2:38 pm ET)
            6  
            It only elevates their stature with those who have already joined the Campaign For Obama's Failure.

            Given Fox's already worthless reputation among Obama supporters, I think it's a stretch to assert that Administration officials talking $*** about Fox News would make supporters more prone to tune in to Fox News.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (October 13, 2009 2:21 pm ET)
        7  
        Fox News has all but declared themselves the enemy of the Obama Administration.

        The Administration's approach to dealing with the enemy, in my view, should make conservatives proud: Don't talk to the enemy. Instead, talk $*** in the media about the enemy. Rattle sabers. Ratchet up the rhetoric. Sounds like it's straight from the conservative playbook.

        What about Major Garret? He's in the White House press corps. If the "czars" are such a huge story at Fox, why doesn't he use his access to confront the administration about Jones, Sunstein and Holdren?

        Simple answer: Fox is just as cowardly as the Obama Administration. The right-wing professional liars talk $*** and lie all day from the safety of their news desks, but they pass on all opportunities to say it directly to the White House.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
          1 10
          The point is the only way liberals and the WH is ever to going to show Fox for what they are is to confront them head on. You cannot keep insisting they are illegitimate and stand on the sidelines and complain how unfair they are and how they live to lie and distort. Go attack them on their own shows. If they won't book you then say so, publicly. Name names, be specific, reveal who won't book you and why. Go after them with all guns blazing. Get on every show as much as you can. Putting silly ineffective spokespeople on other cable networks to whine about them is ridiculous, cowardly and weak.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 3:53 pm ET)
            5  
            The point is the only way liberals and the WH is ever to going to show Fox for what they are is to confront them head on.


            We are. FOX "News" is the propaganda arm of the republican party. Their sole purpose is to undermine the Democratic Party and propped up the woeful republican party.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
              1 6
              You are? By giving some low level staffer go on some obscure CNN program and whine about how biased Fox is? Whoopee! Takes a lot of guts that does, really head on isn't it? All that does is make O'Reilly and the rest run with that for days on their network playing the scarred victim, can't you see that?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 4:20 pm ET)
                5  
                You're not going to convince FOX "News" and its audience of anything because they're comfortable in their own delusions. What you can do is focus on the sane among us who watch other channels like CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, Univision - basically any other channel.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:54 pm ET)
                    5
                  Then I still don't have an answer as to why you engage in any fashion an illegitimate news network whose viewers are delusional insane idiots? It makes no sense.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by loonz (October 13, 2009 5:52 pm ET)
                    3  
                    You have to ask them. I've been advocating for years that Democrats should either avoid FOX (aka the republican propaganda channel) or go on it and bash the network. The one thing Democrats shouldn't do is to treat it as though it's a legitimate news channel.
                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:45 pm ET)
                    2  
                    "Then I still don't have an answer as to why you engage in any fashion an illegitimate news network whose viewers are delusional insane idiots? It makes no sense." - RightOn

                    Because they (Fox News) are the Republican party. Because they (Fox News) are the opposition. Obama has never ignored the opposition, he just recognizes that their voices should be considered by where they are coming from - A bunch of sore losers who are no longer in power and are becoming increasing irrelevant.

                    This is politics 101 by Obama. Take the least attractive part of your political opponents (Fox News and Limbaugh) and make them the opposition. What is remarkable is that the Republicans have allowed this to happen. As long as the Republican party allows Obama to portray Fox News and Limbaugh as what Republicans believe, he has nothing to worry about. The days of Limbaugh or Fox News swinging voters is over, and I thought this had already been settled.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 6:48 pm ET)
                        3
                      "As long as the Republican party allows Obama to portray Fox News and Limbaugh as what Republicans believe, he has nothing to worry about"

                      Then I ask you again, why bother? Why is the WH tangling with something they needn't worry about? Doesn't speak well of where their priorities are, does it? They either are something to worry about, or they aren't.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:59 pm ET)
                        1  
                        What? Come on. You're not this simple-minded. You really think the White House is spending alot of time worrying about Fox News? Because of this one statement? Please. Obama seems to laugh every time they come up. They have become a joke to rational adults. You really think they speak for some majority? That is laughable.

                        Why bother what? Aligning Fox News with the Republican party? Because as long as the Republican party will do nothing to refute this, it is good for business for the Democrats and Obama. Fox News is the kind of political adversary you want. They make fools of themselves daily. As long as this is all the Republicans have, Obama is in good shape.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by DellDolly (October 13, 2009 8:12 pm ET)
                          1  
                          No, he's not simpleminded.

                          But he was trying to derail the thread, and he did a very good job, several times, didn't he?

                          The issue wasn't if Obama should go on FoxNews, or if FoxNews should be called out for their falsehoods by the White House. But that's what he was able to turn it into, all the while avoiding the reality that Beck is claiming that FoxNews doesn't lie.
                          Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:21 pm ET)
                4  
                "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition."

                Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director on CNN, 10/11/09.

                You are incorrect in your assessment.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by pilotshark (October 13, 2009 4:42 pm ET)
                4  
                So went you have your enemy surrender is it not customary to have a lower ranking subordinate receive that generals weapon.

                As not to give them any satisfaction.

                Well and why go to they place went you can be more effective on your own ground. But then again your side really dont have many good leaders to be able to understand.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by pilotshark (October 13, 2009 5:38 pm ET)
            3  
            So, Why would you go on knowing that what ever you say will be chopped up and sound bite to your enemy likings?

            Went you can sit back and have them self destruct.

            As a old school Sargent I would not leave or give any ammo my enemys can use against my troops.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:41 pm ET)
            2  
            "The point is the only way liberals and the WH is ever to going to show Fox for what they are is to confront them head on." - RightOn

            Come on. Everyone has caught onto Fox News and their silliness. No adult takes them seriously as a news organization. The "true believers" who still buy their crap have been shown to be electorally irrevlevant.

            Agreeing with Fox that they are simply the opposition and no longer a news organization is just getting one step closer to EVERYONE considering them what they are - the Republican party. He will still engage them, just as he does the Republicans. But any opposition they voice should be looked at as partisan, not journalistic. What is amazing is that the Republicans have allowed this to happen.

            How can you possibly believe that Fox News becoming the voice of the Republicans has turned out well for the Republicans? It has been nothing but a blessing for the Democrats. Check the last few election cycles if you do not believe me.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by History Professor (October 13, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
          5  
          Some days when I'm feeling that things are headed in the right direction for this country, I come to this website which provides ample evidence of just how stupid the American people are. Those who listen to Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh and their ilk and ignore the fact-checking of all of them that clearly indicates these talking heads are just plain wrong -- and likely are intentionally duplicitous -- probably know nothing about US history. I heard one "tea-bagger" said that what he wanted most is for the United States to be like it was 100 years ago. Think about it. The mind reels.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Dmacalypse (October 13, 2009 4:23 pm ET)
        5  
        It's not about how unfair Fox is. It they want to be the opposition cable "news" network, by all means please do so. The problem is the outlandish lies that are made up on a daily basis and presented as legit news. But wait if they didn't do that we wouldn't be talking about this because Fox in fact, would be irrelevant. Fatual opposition isn't sexy and what material they could garner would be used up in a 30-min segment if that.........
        Report Abuse
      • Author by sleepy joe (October 13, 2009 4:28 pm ET)
           
        Once again. Good point.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (October 13, 2009 2:49 pm ET)
      5  
      From that little exchange with Carlson it sounds like Beck expects the White House to directly refute his every claim. Being proven a liar by someone else isn't going to stop him. Who am I kidding? Even if the White House did refute every claim he wouldn't stop but he knows they won't so he can play this 'they haven't refuted anything I've said' game.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by vhw28672478 (October 13, 2009 3:11 pm ET)
         
      Beck is a liar
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pasteve (October 13, 2009 3:39 pm ET)
      4  
      As for going on and correcting the issue head on, I get the feeling Fox is rather selective about who they invite/allow on their network, just ask MMFA's Eric Burns.

      What's happening is that Fox is making the news. They are forcing other networks and now the WH to respond to them. That's not how it should be. I will echo a comment from above, that what the response is about in each case is false reporting, not necessarily tough reporting.

      Sadly, very few of the Fox audience will ever learn the truth. They will only see this through the filter of Fox News. For example, I'm certain Hannity will edit any statement accusing him of editing statements.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 3:44 pm ET)
        1 5
        If Fox won't let you on their network, then Gibbs could publicly state in one of his briefings that they have contacted Fox to go on and they refuse, name the names. Say it outright, Fox won't allow us to defend ourselves against the falsehoods and we are eager to go on. Make it a public declaration. The bully pulpit of the WH is the most media covered entity in the world. Other news organizations would run with it and that is all it would take. Fox would them look scared and weak, instead of the other way around.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (October 13, 2009 4:23 pm ET)
          4  
          "Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again... when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition." Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director.

          Obama will go on Fox any time they ask . . . they haven't asked because they know that if he shows up on their Network, he will demolish their idiot crew.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by right ON (October 13, 2009 4:49 pm ET)
              5
            No specifics, no meat, no dates, no names, nothing. A meaningless bunch of spokesperson vague nonsense from some communications director who knows how not to be cornered into anything concrete. Do you think I am impressed by that? No.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:50 pm ET)
              1  
              The White House should not care whether or not you and the Fox News viewers are impressed. They are trying to maintain the moderates and independents. Not the fringe. They don't need to answer to Fox News (the Republican party). They can just point and laugh at them, like the rest of us have learned to do.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (October 13, 2009 6:49 pm ET)
          1  
          You overestimate Fox News's power and importance RightOn. They have become the fringe. If you do not believe me, tune into Hannity or Beck any night of the week. The pathetic part, is that the Republicans have allowed Fox News and Limbaugh to appear as if they speak for them.

          As long as moderate, independent Americans believe that Republicans, and their candidates actually support the nonsense that comes out of Limbaugh and Fox News, Obama has nothing to worry about politically in the long run. And he knows it. I am sure he is amazed that they have made it this easy for him to marginalize them.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (October 13, 2009 4:12 pm ET)
        5  
        An hour and a half ago I said "More off topic whining. He's trying to turn this into a debate over whether or not the Obama Administration reps should appear on FoxNews. That's not the topic though." And he keeps doing it.

        The topic is Beck trying to claim that he's a purveyor of the truth when he's not.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by pilotshark (October 13, 2009 4:47 pm ET)
          3  
          well whining is all they have. Well its not like they have facts or real facts.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Snertly (October 13, 2009 6:08 pm ET)
         
      Beck doesn't give a jolly damn about the truth. He has no incentive to be honest and apparently no penalty for lying.

      His audience reacts to ever greater tall tales, and Beck feeds them what they want in spades. It seems that Beck has yet to find where the boundaries of credulity are.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Unorthodox (October 13, 2009 11:14 pm ET)
         
      Didn't Beck say on The View that he's not a reporter, he's a commentator, and that he doesn't check facts? [link] Maybe it was just the quick talking going on, so I don't know about how credible the audio is on him not checking facts, but it seemed like he vehemently tried to press that he was a commentator... And, well, that's just sad, really.

      I will admit that every once in a while he does bring up important topics, with legitimate concerns, but then he just dives off the deep in and starts shoving things together on that godforsaken chalkboard of his to try and make sense of an out-of-the-park theory. Then fails horribly at it.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (October 14, 2009 12:13 pm ET)
         
      Glenn Beck shoud be forced to donate his brain - now.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by congero6189599 (October 15, 2009 9:17 am ET)
         
      RO aka tommy just derailed this whole thread.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.