About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox News' Campaign for Brown

January 19, 2010 6:13 pm ET — 50 Comments

In recent weeks, Fox News has continued its pattern of engaging in political advocacy, this time supporting Scott Brown, the Republican nominee in the special election for the Massachusetts U.S. Senate seat. Fox has hosted Brown several times, providing him a forum to raise funds; Dick Morris has explicitly asked viewers to go to his website to help elect Brown. Fox media figures have distorted Democratic nominee Martha Coakley's statements and suggested Democrats may steal the election; and Fox News has suggested that a Brown victory would provide economic benefits.

Fox News hosted Brown several times and provided forum for him to solicit campaign funds

On Fox, Brown encouraged viewers to visit his campaign website to find out "how to help with donating and volunteering." In several Fox News appearances, Brown pointed viewers to his campaign website, solicited funds for his campaign, and also cited RedInvadesBlue.com, where, he said, "we have a money bomb right now that's hitting ... and you can help me fight back against the machine." Fox News hosts Martha MacCallum and Greta Van Susteren said they invited Coakley to appear on their Fox News shows.

Brown: "If people want to help they can go BrownForUSSenate.com and they can donate so I can fight against the machine." From the January 14 edition of Fox & Friends:

BROWN: Well, it certainly is me against the machine, and there's three negative ads running, all -- many of them obviously distort my record. It's the typical, you know, one-on-one bad politics, dirty politics playbook, and I'm fighting against the machine. They're rallying around not only locally but nationally to make sure that I do not win this seat, and if I, in fact, win it, that I'm not seated in time. And if people want to help, they can go to BrownForUSSenate.com, and they can donate so I can fight against the machine. Because I can win this race if the people in Massachusetts look at the issues.

Brown said Fox viewers "can learn more" by visiting campaign website. From the January 12 edition of America's Newsroom:

BROWN: There's political chicanery. I'm used to it in Massachusetts. And people can go to BrownForUSSenate.com, they can learn more about that and how to help with donating and volunteering.

Brown tells Fox viewers where to find his campaign's "money bomb right now that's hitting." From the January 11 edition of On The Record with Greta Van Susteren:

BROWN: Martha's a good person, but she's wrong on all the issues. And the people of Massachusetts are upset at the taxing, the spending, the backroom deals. Martha Coakley's position on terror -- it's outrageous. She said tonight that there are no terrorists in Afghanistan. That's the type of person who has a policy that is very scary, especially when we're trying to provide the tools and resources for our soldiers to keep them safe. And if people want to learn more, they can certainly go to BrownForUSSenate.com.

But we have a money bomb right now that's hitting, and you can go to RedInvadesBlue.com, and you can help me fight back against the machine, because the negative ads -- the second I walked off the stage, the negative ads have started. And you all around the country can make a big, big difference in this race.

Brown to Fox viewers: "If people are kind of fed up ... they can go to BrownForUSSenate.com." From the January 8 edition of Hannity:

BROWN: If people are kind of fed up with the way things are going, they can go to BrownForUSSenate.com, and they can make a difference and they can stop the business as usual -- not only in Massachusetts, but more importantly nationally. They can give me a chance to go down there and bring some common sense back to Washington.

Fox fundraises to elect Brown

"Political analyst" Morris: "Please, please help" Brown. During the January 11 edition of Hannity, Morris urged viewers to "go to DickMorris.com ... to help elect Brown," because if "we win this fight, then there will never be another victory for Obama." DickMorris.com includes a fundraising plea "to help us raise $300,000 for a last minute media buy to push Brown and the Republicans to victory"; Fox News executives allow Morris to solicit funds for Republican efforts despite reportedly telling colleague Mike Huckabee to cease conflict-of-interest promotions that help his political action committee.

Beck suggests Democrats may steal MA election

Discussing MA election, Beck says ACORN, progressives will "lie, cheat, and steal their way through anything." On the January 19 edition of his radio show, Fox News host Glenn Beck stated:

BECK: Well, the fat lady has not sung. And this is a very fat lady. It's ACORN, it's the Working Families Party, it is the progressive movement. They will lie, cheat, and steal their way through anything. But it looks like Brown may be a winner. If there's a big turnout today, Brown may be the winner in Massachusetts. Everyone is predicting this. I'm not going to predict anything until it's over.

Beck suggests Democrats will steal the election if "it's within a couple of thousand votes." On the January 19 edition of his radio show, Beck stated:

BECK: I want to make this very clear. We were just saying this very thing off the air. I don't -- don't count your chickens before they've hatched. I don't say this thing is over until it's over. And I don't mean even tonight, I mean after the secretary of state has signed off and certified this vote. That's why it's imperative that this vote is nine points spread, because you just can't falsify nine points. If it's within a couple of thousand votes, she wins.

Fox suggests Brown victory would provide economic benefits

Varney: "Your 401(k) could do well" if Scott Brown wins. On the January 19 edition of Fox & Friends, guest Stuart Varney predicted that a Brown win might cause a rise in the stock market because "investors would love" it if the Obama administration "reverse[d] course":

GRETCHEN CARLSON (co-host): Well, are you concerned about the money in your 401(k)? Who's not, right? Well, you may want to make a call to Massachusetts and get some people out to the polls? Well, that's because our next guest, and a friend, says that your portfolio could look much better if Scott Brown wins Ted Kennedy's vacant Senate seat. Who's that friend? Stuart Varney is here. He's the host of the new show Varney & Company on the Fox Business Channel. Morning to you.

VARNEY: Morning, Gretchen.

CARLSON: All right. So if Scott Brown wins --

VARNEY: Yep.

CARLSON: -- our 401(k)s are going to benefit?

VARNEY: Well, it's possible. Think of it this way: If Scott Brown wins, I mean, that is a revolution in Massachusetts politics, and it sends an enormous message, a very powerful message to the Democrats in Congress and to the White House that, "Hey, we don't like your domestic economic policy. Reverse course." So, if Scott Brown wins, that message gets heard, and you've got 10 months before the next big election. Time to reverse the tax, spend, and borrow and deficit story that we've had for the past year. Investors would love that. Your 401(k) could do well because of that.

BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): And Stuart, people are saying the stock market could go up if he -- it looks as though he's going to win. It's happening today. That, of course, if you're 100 percent stocks, that would definitely raise it up in the short term. But I want to tell you what the president's message is: Health care knocks down the deficit. And if you pass health care, that'll be a way of attacking the deficit. And if you have Scott Brown, you're not going to have health care.

Fox chyron: "What Can Brown Do For You? A Boost In Your 401K May Be In The Cards." During the same interview, Fox & Friends aired the following on-screen graphic:

Fox Nation declares "Brown Win Could Cause Huge Stock Rally." TheFoxNation.com posted the headline "Brown Win Could Cause Huge Stock Rally" and linked to a post on NewsBusters.org:

Fox Business' Payne: Brown win "fertilizes the soil for an incredible longer-term stock market rally." On the January 19 edition of the Fox Business Network's Varney & Co., host Stuart Varney asked contributor Charles Payne if a Brown victory "sends a huge message to Washington." Payne responded that "it fertilizes the soil for an incredible longer-term stock market rally. Wall Street will be so happy. You will hear the corks popping from Wall Street in this studio."

Fox News repeatedly distorted Coakley's comments

Fox distorted Coakley's comment about "terrorists" in Afghanistan. On Fox & Friends, Carlson, Kilmeade, and co-host Steve Doocy repeatedly attacked Coakley for saying during a January 11 debate that "terrorists" are "gone" from Afghanistan, and at one point falsely claimed she said the "Taliban" is "no longer a threat," calling her comments "astonishing" and "a problem." On Hannity's January 18 Fox News show, after guest Curt Schilling said Coakley was "out of touch" with Massachusetts constituents, Hannity said: "Yeah, well, she manages to say that -- that all the terrorists are gone from Afghanistan." America's News HQ co-anchor Gregg Jarrett said that Coakley might be "out of step when she says things like terrorists are no longer in Afghanistan," while The Fox Nation posted video of her comment with the link "Coakley: There Are No More Terrorists in Afghanistan."

But Coakley was specifically referring to Al Qaeda's presence in Afghanistan, which Fox never acknowledged. In fact, during the debate, moderator David Gergen asked Coakley, "[H]ow do you think we then succeed in Afghanistan?" Coakley replied: "I'm not sure there is a way to succeed [in Afghanistan]. If the goal was -- and the mission in Afghanistan was to go in because we believed that the Taliban was giving harbor to terrorists. We supported that. I supported that goal. They're gone. They're not there anymore. They're in, apparently Yemen, they're in Pakistan. Let's focus our efforts on where Al Qaeda is." She added: "[T]he focus should be getting the appropriate information on individuals who are trained, who represent a threat to us, and use the force necessary to go after those individuals." As Media Matters for America has noted, national security adviser Jim Jones, Gen. David Petraeus, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal have all reportedly stated that Al Qaeda's presence in Afghanistan has been diminished.

Fox News distorted Coakley's comments to falsely claim she said "Catholics shouldn't be working" in the ER. Hannity stated that Coakley "says Catholics shouldn't be working in emergency rooms. This is Massachusetts. I lived in Rhode Island five years. A lot of Catholics in Massachusetts. So what's happening?" Likewise, Beck stated: "Now, the next one is religious bigotry. Do we have that with Coakley? Oh, sure. Catholics -- pay attention to this one." After playing an audio clip of Coakley saying, "You can have religious freedom, but you probably shouldn't work in the emergency room," Beck said: "Oh, well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Hey, Catholics, as soon as we get all of the -- you know, all of the universal health care, if you got to provide abortions or something, you're a nurse and you don't want to do that, well, go find another job. And practice that religious freedom elsewhere." The Fox Nation linked to Jim Hoft's Gateway Pundit post -- which highlighted Coakley's comments -- with the headline: "Coakley: Catholics Shouldn't Work in the ER."

But Coakley was discussing those who would deny treatment to rape victims, not all Catholics. In an interview, WBSM's Ken Pittman asked Coakley, who reportedly is Catholic, if she would "pass a health care bill that had conscientious objector toward certain procedures, including abortion." Coakley stated that she didn't "believe that would be included in the health care bill," and that she would oppose legislation that "say[s] that if people believed that they don't want to provide services that are required under the law and under Roe vs. Wade that they can individually decide to not follow the law." Citing her Republican opponent, Coakley added: "And let's be clear, because Scott Brown filed an amendment to a bill in Massachusetts that would say that hospital and emergency room personnel could deny emergency contraception to a woman who came in who had been raped." Coakley's statement prompted the following exchange with Pittman:

PITTMAN: Right, if you are a Catholic, and you believe what the Pope teaches, you know, that any form of birth control is a sin. And you don't want to do that, that --

COAKLEY: No, but we have a separation of church and state here, Ken, let's be clear.

PITTMAN: Yeah, but in the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.

COAKLEY: The law says that people are allowed to have that. And so, then, if you -- you can have religious freedom, you probably shouldn't work in the emergency room.

PITTMAN: Wow. OK, so if you have religious conviction, stay out of the emergency room.

COAKLEY: Well, no, I'm not -- look, you're -- you're the one who brought the question up. I don't believe that the law allows for that, and I know that we accommodate all kinds of differences all the time. I think Roe vs. Wade has made it clear that women have a right to choose, and in Massachusetts, particularly if someone has been the victim of a rape, an assault, and she goes to an emergency room to get contraception, someone else should say, "Oh, no, I don't believe in this, so I'm going to affect your constitutional rights?"

PITTMAN: I agree that you've gotta have some balance there.

Fox distorted Coakley's comment about the need "to get taxes up" On the January 17 edition of America's News HQ, Jarrett also said that Coakley might be "out of step" for "in the debate saying, quote, 'We need to get taxes up.' "

But Coakley was talking about the need to increase employment in order to increase tax revenues. During a November 30, 2009, Democratic primary debate, Coakley said we "need to get out of this recession" by "get[ting] people back to work." Coakley stated: "We need to get people back to work. We need to get taxes up, and we'll start to chip away at that deficit, because individuals and the country, my colleague in California Jerry Brown said, we've all been spending too much money we don't have on stuff we don't need." Coakley went on to say: "[H]ow do we get you back to work, and how do we bring that deficit down? Ultimately by being more careful on how we're spending our money as a country and as individuals. We can do it. We've done it before." The New York Times reported on January 8 that "a spokesman for Ms. Coakley said the comment, made during a primary election debate, was referring to the need to increase tax revenue by getting unemployed people back to work." The Times added: " 'It's a completely misleading ad,' said the spokesman, Corey Welford. 'Martha was referencing the need to get people back to work and tax revenues that would come with increased employment.' "

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by southerngal (January 19, 2010 6:24 pm ET)
      9 8
      "Fox News hosts Martha MacCallum and Greta Van Susteren said they invited Coakley to appear on their Fox News shows"

      So then, why didn't she?

      If she was being so distorted and her opponent was being pimped like crazy, then why didn't she?

      You, or your supporters, have nothing to complain about if you couldn't get up the courage to face your biggest media foe.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Max Credits (January 19, 2010 6:42 pm ET)
        7 3
        The issue is not Coakley's campaign for Coakley, the issue is Fox News' campaign for Brown.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (January 19, 2010 6:46 pm ET)
          5 8
          Maybe if Coakley campaigned for Coakley on the network where her supporters seem to be whining that they campaigned for her opponent, there would be no reason to whine about it.

          Then what?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Max Credits (January 19, 2010 6:49 pm ET)
            7 4
            You might think that Coakley's choice to not appear on a Fox News show somehow makes Fox News' active campaign for Brown ok. But you'd be wrong.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by beatenvalve (January 19, 2010 6:53 pm ET)
              6 7
              It's a little late to start blaming FOX News for Coakley's poor showing.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Disputed Zone (January 19, 2010 7:04 pm ET)
                5 1
                Who did that?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by Max Credits (January 19, 2010 7:14 pm ET)
                7 8
                I'm blaming Fox News for being a corrupt enterprise that breaks campaign laws and usurps our democracy. Pay attention.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by nativeofsf (January 20, 2010 6:39 am ET)
                  4 1
                  ¶Regardless of how [negatively] politically astute it is, Fux Noose continuously subverts any true benefit for America. This soulless entity forsakes americans while kowtowing to a covert corporate cartel which bleeds our country of its vigor. What a horrible symbiotic relationship. Ultimately, Fux will self-desruct.
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by achrispage6992 (January 20, 2010 7:48 am ET)
                4  
                Fox News didn't win the election for Brown. As I have indicated over and over, the reality is that not that many people watch Fox News (when compared to the entire television viewing public). Probably less then the national average in a state like Massachusetts.

                I see MMA's point about a "fair and balanced" news organization actively campaigning for a particular party and/or candidate. I think the evidence and documentation is simply overwhelming that Fox is a mouthpiece and an extension of the GOP. Those who actually believe they are "fair and balanced" and don't favor conservative POV's are simply fooling themselves. It's that simple.

                I for one am glad there are organizations like MMA who at least have the b@lls to point this out to people. The fact is: it's a disgrace for a self acclaimed journalistic entity to openly display contempt and bias for the left under a slogan of "fair and balanced." Seriously, we all know Fox is biased. Even people like righton and fairliberal know it (although they may not admit it) I think they know it. How could one not know it? The people who work there know it (there is evidence of this) and yet they continue to willingly operate under a slogan of "fair and balanced."

                With that in mind, I simply cannot respect one single reporter and/ or journalist who receives a paycheck from Fox. In fact, I should include commentators, producers, advertisers, sales persons, and just about everyone except for perhaps the janitors. Knowingly working for a company that openly misrepresents itself every day, shows a clear lack of personal integrity and an abundance of poor professionalism.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (January 19, 2010 8:10 pm ET)
            5 4
            I'm still trying to figure out the name of that liberal network that gives softball interviews and high fives to liberal candidates 24/7 while doing everything in their power to denigrate and diffuse reichswine counterparts. Maybe you can help us identify that network, Tommy?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Tbone Slickens (January 19, 2010 10:32 pm ET)
              8 6
              Clinton News Network
              MSNBC
              NBC
              CBS
              ABC
              NPR
              PBS
              LA Times
              NYTimes
              Boston Globe
              Miami Herald
              Atlanta Journal Constipation
              Newsweek
              Time
              US News and World Report (online only now)

              Do I need to list anymore water carriers for the left? It doesn't matter now anyway. This is just the first of the losses headed your (democrats) way. Better get used to it.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bluestate69 (January 19, 2010 11:36 pm ET)
                3  
                only 9 months ahead until the 2010 elections!! keep your fingers crossed that our economy tanks tbone!! you're a "great american"!!
                Report Abuse
              • Author by achrispage6992 (January 20, 2010 7:59 am ET)
                6  
                Fair enough Tbone. You seem to be quite sure of your counter argument. That being the case, perhaps you could give some glaring examples similiar to the ones you see at the top of this page. I'm sure you will be able to put forth an argument about MSNBC but I simply can't wait for you to show us similiar actions committed by the other entities you listed.

                *Remember now, just because a news organization doesn't show open favoritism toward a conservative point of view doesn't necessarily make it biased toward liberals.*

                I think that is one of the biggest problems in the reasoning people like you have about Fox and other news organizations. You have this inane idea that- anything other than obvious conservative bias is automatically "liberal bias." In other words, there is no such thing as "straight news" to people like you. It's either conservative friendly i.e. "fair and balanced info from Fox" or its liberal bias.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by Kikabi (January 20, 2010 12:48 pm ET)
                2  
                Not one of those listed above has ever done what Fox is guilty of doing during the Mass. campaign. None has ever allowed active fund raising by candidates or by pundits on their side (Morris), for example.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by RightLeftDebate (January 19, 2010 10:23 pm ET)
             
          MSNBC's Chris Matthews was campaigning for Coakley. MSNBC in general was lobbying for her just as much don't you think?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by obamacheerleader (January 19, 2010 11:18 pm ET)
             
          Ya, and you can say with a strait face that MSNBC "didn't" campaign for Obama? The double standard lives!
          Report Abuse
    • Author by beatenvalve (January 19, 2010 6:46 pm ET)
      2 5
      I don't understand the controversy.

      How do you think Obama got elected?

      The "system" works for both parties...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TomJoad (January 20, 2010 7:10 am ET)
        1  
        Hmm. Not that I necessarily disagree, but that would be a much more convincing point if you could demonstrate a systematic bias the way MMfA has done here.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by DownWithMarxism (January 19, 2010 6:47 pm ET)
      9 13
      So Brown has one media outlet mildly favorable to him, while the rest of the mainstream media put their full support behind Coakley. How is this even remotely newsworthy? You are in the bag for Coakley. There is nothing new here...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (January 19, 2010 7:12 pm ET)
        6 2
        I would probably be shocked your example of a media outlet solidly behind a canidate.
        Give some examples of the media support for Coakley. Links if you've got them.
        A review of some of the above threads will find us looking at Coakley as an underwhelming democratic candidiate.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bluestate69 (January 19, 2010 11:42 pm ET)
        1  
        i'd also like to see some links, so i can view the evidence of media support of coakley. if all you have is your "opinion" of media bias for coakley, then you can't be making the claims your making.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Major Tom (January 19, 2010 7:28 pm ET)
      6 2
      How can anyone deny that the 'news' in Fox News is really just a ruse to spread GOP information? Fox News should be kicked out of the White House press corps. Why host a network that will certainly crop, twist, and lie about what was said? Why host your sworn enemy, apparently hell-bent on ridicule and revenge? It is a black eye for journalism... and it's shameful.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bessman (January 19, 2010 8:35 pm ET)
        5 10
        I went on the internet today to read up on the Massachusetts election, to get some results. I found this website, media matters, I thought it would be a website where the facts would be laid out. What I found was another website griping about conservatives. Sir, if Fox News is, "...really just a ruse...," then I say it's about time. Our good liberal friends already have CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, need I go on? Have your heard Olbermann? Maddow? (By the way, if Fox is kicked out, so are the aforementioned.) Which leads me to believe most of those in an uproar over the conservative leaning Fox News are just spouting the party line, forming opinions from soundbites. Have you ever watched Fox? A lot of people do, about 3 million more than Olbermenn (900,000 est.) when that great American Sara Palin was on. (Read her book, you may think differently. I've read Obama's and Bush's and they were all impressive, but Palin is more like you and me than any national politician.) I have watched your liberal shows and it strikes me, that while Fox may lean conservative, they will at least disagree with other conservatives. Unlike MSNBC, where it always leaves me feelinng like I need a shower--lockstep with Obama and the liberal leadership. The message is clear, if they don't like a conservative, they'll just just call them names. That's what happens when you've got no ideas, no real fix for our country's concerns. All they do is attack. I'll ask you this question sir, Are you better able to spend your money or is government? If you answer yes. Welcome to the Republican Party. If not, then I hope you have a lot of money, because the 40% of your money you're paying in some form of tax is going to 60%. Until, the coonservatives save us in 3 years.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by comonsensebob (January 19, 2010 9:31 pm ET)
          1  
          **Sara Palin was on. (Read her book, you may think differently. I've read Obama's and Bush's and they were all impressive, but Palin is more like you and me than any national politician.)**

          She may be more like you, but I thank god, that I am nothing like her.

          **Until, the coonservatives save us in 3 years.**

          Well sure, they did such a wonderful job the last 8 years that it is almost a cakewalk for President Obama.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by stoogedude (January 19, 2010 10:49 pm ET)
             
          Remember the laughable Tea Parties? Remember Van Jones? Remember...just about everything Glenn Beck says becomes the focus of many AP articles, many news outlets. Not necessarily the crazy crap he says, but Van Jones became a big story and he was eventually ousted. Kevin Jennings was a big news story. Fox News pushed the ACORN story big time.

          Fox News shamelessly plugs conservative candidates and Tea Parties, with correspondents prompting Tea Partiers to cheer louder. Fox News has no liberal as a headlining host, MSNBC has a conservative hosting his own show. Media Matters exists because of the conservative misinformation that goes unchecked in the MSM. Fox News, CNN, and yes, MSNBC sometimes broadcast stories or have commentators that say things that are facually inaccurate. Media Matters has criticized Chris Matthews many times, even naming him Misinformer of the Year one year.

          The notion that because more people watch Fox News than MSNBC means that Fox News has more credibility that MSNBC is nonsense. Many more people watched Paul Blart: Mall Cop than Up in the Air last year, but how many Oscars do you expect Blart to take home?

          You are correct. Sarah Palin is more like you and me than any national politician. And that scares me. I don't want an ordinary Joe Blow representing me. She has a journalism degree. That's it. She knows little about law, of anything. She doesn't know what the whole North/South Korea situation was about. She didn't know what the Bush doctrine was. She couldn't handle finishing her term in office as governor of Alaska. Maybe she was too much like you and me that she didn't have the thick skin your ordinary politician has.

          Have you really watched MSNBC? I've heard Chris Matthews arguing with Howard Dean. I've heard Ed Schultz argue with Chris Matthews. I've heard Keith Olbermann call out Democrats. I've heard Rachel Maddow call out Democrats. I've heard many criticisms of President Obama on MSNBC, so no they are not lockstep with Obama and the liberal leadership.

          It's funny, the last part of your post sounds a lot like what the right is doing with Obama and progressives...if you disagree with them, call them Socialist, Marxist, Communist, Racists, and any other negative -ist. All the right is doing is attacking the President.

          By the way, you asked whether we're better able to spend our money or government. You didn't ask a yes or no question, which kind of goes against the last part of your post.

          By the way, only God could help us if Tea Party conservatives get into power in 2012. Perhaps it's a foresight into whats going to happen that year. Tea Partiers win and take control...the world ends.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by GreenLantern (January 20, 2010 12:02 am ET)
          4  
          Wow, that is like 20 fixed noise talking points in one long run-on paragraph, you have been brainwashed (or paid) well. (My favorite is the Olberman and Maddow on CBS, NBC, ABC! They are everywhere, all those libruls.) Well if there really was a "Liberal Media" in this country they never would have let someone with Browns past and voting record get elected. (Or bush appointed or Kerry smeared for 6 months by "swiftboaters", etc) But looks like Coakley lost this on her own. (Course a Liberal Media would have made her a shoo in!) If FOX campaigned illegally, that is a crime and can be, and should be punished. But they will get away with it cause the "Liberal Media" won't hold their feet to the fire and force the correct authorities to do their jobs. Too bad, brainwashing works, and we keep heading downhill!
          Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 20, 2010 1:21 am ET)
          2  
          Coonservatives? A freudian slip?
          Otherwise a long string of abuse towards liberalism.
          Your pardon for not taking the time to slice your baloney thin, its late.
          In the meantime enjoy it, stretch out in it. sink deep into it. Blow bubbles. Try differant colors.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Major Tom (January 20, 2010 9:19 am ET)
          2  
          I stand by my comment, and would add that Fox is actually a P.A.C. that raises money for candidates exclusively running with the GOP. Their propaganda has twisted American society by injecting misinformation into the larger issue debates. They have nothing to offer the American public but division.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by dave (January 19, 2010 8:54 pm ET)
        3 5
        I don't know that anyone denies Fox leans right. But kicking them out of the press corps under a D President would be a win for them. O'Reilly/Beck could run with that everyday...kind of a badge of honor. And Brown is ahead 53-47....according to above stated network...carry on.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by dave (January 19, 2010 9:25 pm ET)
          6 5
          The party of reason (sometimes) and fiscal spending (sometimes) has gained another senator. Hoping Obamacare will go down next.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Max Credits (January 19, 2010 9:33 pm ET)
            6 2
            I have it on very reliable sources that George W. Bush just read your post and nosed his milk.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by HeeNow (January 19, 2010 9:42 pm ET)
      7 3
      Well, it's over now...Coakley has conceded.

      Who, in their right mind, could have predicted Ted Kennedy's seat would be won by a Republican?

      So it's time to take stock. Where are the problems? In my mind it's within the President's stroll to the Oval Office.

      Yep. It's time to show Rahm Emanuel the door. He is the problem, the root of the divisiveness, the root of the Chicago machine, and the root of the hatred against all other than democrats.

      He must go.

      If he doesn't, we will see many more Republican victories and I will not vote for Obama in 2012. Certainly he must see the problem...but I sometimes wonder.

      Take care.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dave (January 19, 2010 10:21 pm ET)
        3 3
        The irony is that Ted's death may be the death of Obamacare
        Report Abuse
        • Author by traderdad37 (January 21, 2010 11:55 am ET)
             
          I was pointing out the very same thing to my spouse this morning. Ted Kennedy had been a champion of universal health care for 40 years and now his successor is looking to be the nail in the coffin.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by wookie (January 19, 2010 10:55 pm ET)
        1  
        Nah, they aren't divisive enough. Obama has tried so hard to coax Republicans that he gave the voters no reason to believe that the Dems plans are essential. If he is willing to shelve the public option, jobs programs, Employee Free Choice Act why not just elect the real Republicans?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by dave (January 19, 2010 11:03 pm ET)
          4 2
          The R's felt the same way about McCain last year. He reached across the aisle too many times and gave them no reason to vote for him.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by traderdad37 (January 20, 2010 9:33 am ET)
           
        It's funny you mention this as I was having a conversation with a true Republican last week and he pretty much stated the same thing. He said that the real problem is that Emmanuel is trying to run the national Democrats like the Chicago machine and they're not taking to it very well. And he stated that Obama's going to have trouble getting anything substantive done with his own party as long as Emmanuel's the driver.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by MagCynic (January 19, 2010 9:43 pm ET)
      3 5
      Wait. So people on MSNBC are neutral in this race? Nobody on MSNBC wants Coakley to win and think it'd be "crazy" if Brown won?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© (January 19, 2010 11:10 pm ET)
        5 2
        Did anybody on MSNBC raise money for Coakley?

        Have you asked Joe Scarborough (3 hours a day on MSNBC) how he feels about the election?

        Have you ever stopped huffing right-wing Kool Aid long enough to wonder how this country got bogged down in two wars overseas and a massive asset bubble burst?
        ~
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (January 20, 2010 12:47 am ET)
          1 1
          Wait. You didn't answer the question. I could've sworn I heard guys like Matthews, Shuster, and Olbermann say something about not liking Brown and thinking it's crazy to even think about electing him. Hmmm. But what do I know. Too much Kool Aid for me I guess.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by traderdad37 (January 21, 2010 11:56 am ET)
               
            Indeed. Olbermann even stated that in any other election even conservatives would reject Brown. I think Keith is a little hyperbolic and a lot biased.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by SANDS1448 (January 20, 2010 3:24 pm ET)
            1
          It's amazing you guys are still harping on the Wars and the finance bubble. Yes Bush was President but you can thank a Dem congress, Barney and Chris for creating the mess. Why doesn't the Dem,Progressives or whatever they call themselves just get that America will not allow this egotistical, socialist idealog turn us into France. This is just a taste of 2010. If this snake oil salesman doesn't move center, he is an instant one termer and can write a book and start on a host of speaking tours where he can blow hot air without ruining the country. 2010 is the test and 2012 will tell the rest. Hmm sounds like slogan
          Report Abuse
    • Author by banditsdad (January 20, 2010 5:15 am ET)
         
      You People need to wake up FoxNews is #1 for a reason You are missing the forest for the trees
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jpeagle21 (January 20, 2010 12:43 pm ET)
        2
      This is what Keith Overbite had to say the day before the Mass. election. I would call this campaigning for Coakley by bashing her opponent. Stay classy Keith.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlpF7wG8vI0
      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.