From the June 14 edition of Fox Business Channel's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
Fox Business host Lou Dobbs downplayed proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that experts have estimated could end eligibility for millions of low-income households.
On the June 11 edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, Dobbs reported on proposed changes to the farm bill, the legislation that includes authorization and funding for the SNAP program. After noting that both the House and Senate versions of the bill reduced SNAP funding by several billion dollars, Dobbs downplayed the effects of the cuts: "The Senate bill would actually cut spending on food stamps by an almost negligible $4 billion, but a bill awaiting debate in the House calls for a $20 billion cut in food stamps. Still, when you're talking about both measures providing $700 billion to food stamps alone over the next decade, neither cut, of course, is particularly sharp."
But the cuts would have significant effects on SNAP eligibility. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the version of the bill advanced by the House Agriculture Committee, which cuts about $20 billion from SNAP over 10 years, would cause almost 2 million low-income people to lose SNAP eligibility and limit access to school meals:
From the June 11 edition of Fox Business Network's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
From the June 4 edition of Fox Businees Network's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
From the May 31 edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
Erick Erickson is receiving much attention this week for his remarks that female breadwinners conflict with "biology" and "the natural world" and are "tearing [society] apart." But Erickson's comments are nothing out of the ordinary for the Fox contributor - he has a long history of making sexist, homophobic, and otherwise inflammatory statements.
A new review of the infamous Reinhart-Rogoff debt-to-GDP study further undermines the right-wing claim that high sovereign debt leads to low economic growth.
In their paper, "Growth in a Time of Debt," Harvard economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff supported the notion that high levels of sovereign debt carry disastrous consequences -- particularly when debt reaches 90 percent of GDP -- that was promoted throughout the media.
Even though that premise was thoroughly debunked in April, members of the right-wing media have clung to the notion that while the 90 percent debt-to-GDP threshold in the Reinhart-Rogoff study was inaccurate, its conclusion that high debt slows economic growth remained unchanged.
When faced with the discredited research, Wall Street Journal editorial board member Stephen Moore claimed as debt mounts, "the negative effects of that become more pronounced." Fox Business' Lou Dobbs dismissed the critique of the Reinhart-Rogoff study as focusing too heavily on "a small mistake." Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum claimed that "the simple fact that debt ultimately hinders growth is unchanged." And editorials in both The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal responded to the critique of the study by renewing calls for debt reduction in fear of negative economic outcomes.
New research further undermines this right-wing narrative. University of Michigan economist Miles Kimball and undergraduate researcher Yichuan Wang, examining the Reinhart-Rogoff data, conclude that high levels of debt have no link to slow, much less reverse, long term economic growth:
Based on economic theory, it would be surprising indeed if high levels of national debt didn't have at least some slow, corrosive negative effect on economic growth. And we still worry about the effects of debt. But the two of us could not find even a shred of evidence in the Reinhart and Rogoff data for a negative effect of government debt on growth.
Kimball and Wang's findings provide yet another blow to right-wing media's academic defense of austerity.
Fox host Lou Dobbs and several Fox contributors -- all men -- lamented news that a record number of women are now the economic breadwinners of their families. The Fox figures worried about the dissolution of American society and nature.
Pew Research released a study on May 29 which found mothers are the primary or sole breadwinner in a record 40 percent of all American households with minor children. Pew's report considered both single mothers and married mothers who earned a higher income than their husbands.
On his Fox business program, Dobbs described the Pew study as "showing that women have become the breadwinners in this country, and a lot of other concerning and troubling statistics." He went on to call the report suggestive of "society dissolv[ing] around us."
Fox contributor Juan Williams agreed, calling record female breadwinners indicative of "something going terribly wrong in American society":
What we're seeing with four out of 10 families, now the woman is the primary breadwinner. You're seeing the disintegration of marriage, you're seeing men who were hard hit by the economic recession in ways that women weren't. But you're seeing, I think, systemically, larger than the political stories that we follow every day, something going terribly wrong in American society, and it's hurting our children, and it's going to have impact for generations to come.
Erick Erickson, one of Fox's newest contributors, was troubled by female breadwinners and claimed that people who defend them are "anti-science." Erickson told viewers:
When you look at biology, look at the natural world, the roles of a male and female in society, and the other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it's not antithesis, or it's not competing, it's a complimentary role. We as people in a smart society have lost the ability to have complimentary relationships in nuclear families, and it's tearing us apart.
From the May 23 edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
From the May 20 edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
From the May 17 edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight:
Loading the player ...
A New York Times article directly refutes the claims of House Republicans, including Speaker John Boehner, that State Department officials knew immediately that the attacks on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya in 2012 were connected to "Islamic terrorists." Fox News willingly repeated the attack on its evening programming May 9 -- but now that the Republican distortion has been exposed, will the network clarify its reports for viewers?
Boehner called for the release of a State Department e-mail sent in the wake of the Benghazi attacks that he claimed suggested the assault was perpetrated by "Islamic terrorists." At the House hearing on Benghazi on May 8, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), purporting to be reading from the email in question, quoted a State Department official as saying, "the group that conducted the attacks...is affiliated with Islamic terrorists." The phrase "Islamic terrorists" holds significance for Republicans who have suggested the administration knew from the outset that terrorists were behind the attacks but initially attempted to cover-up this knowledge for political reasons.
The May 9 editions of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier and Fox Business Channel's Lou Dobbs TONIGHT hyped the Republican line. According to a Nexis transcript search, Baier played clips of Boehner calling for the release of the e-mail, to which Fox guest and Fortune columnist Nina Easton responded, "I was happy to see Speaker Boehner call for the release of those internal e-mails. Anybody who thought that this was just a Republican hazing as the opposition party in power, I think those concerns were put to rest yesterday. I mean, there's so many unanswered questions."
Lou Dobbs also played Boehner's call for release of the e-mail, noting afterward that "somewhat predictably, no response from the Obama administration at this hour." Dobbs continued, claiming that Boehner's comments and the May 8 congressional hearings into the administration's response to the Benghazi attacks "open up new questions about the accuracy of the past testimony of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
The New York Times, however, obtained a copy of the e-mail in question and reported that the phrase conservatives are putting in the mouth of the State Department official -- "Islamic terrorists" - is in fact not used to describe the perpetrators of the attack. Rather, the official describes the perpetrators as having ties to "Islamic extremists" -- a distinction with a difference, according to the Times report:
[A] copy of the e-mail reviewed by The New York Times indicates that A. Elizabeth Jones, the senior State Department official who wrote it, referred to "Islamic extremists," not terrorists.
The distinction is important, administration officials said, because while the White House did not initially characterize the attack as terrorism, senior officials, including Ambassador Susan E. Rice, acknowledged the possibility that extremists had been involved in the assault.
Fox News is no stranger to carrying water for the Republican Party, and the network has led the charge to push Benghazi cover-up conspiracies. But now that the latest GOP line on Benghazi has been exposed, will Fox inform its viewers?
Fox Business' Lou Dobbs hosted Cody Wilson -- a self-described anarchist who was named one of Wired's top 15 Most Dangerous People In The World -- to promote his 3D-printed gun, which has come under intense scrutiny.
On March 5, Forbes reported that Wilson, a law student at the University of Texas, became the first person to fire a real bullet from a plastic gun made with a 3D-printer. The gun, named the "Liberator," is made almost entirely of plastic, with the exception of a single nail used as the firing pin and a six-ounce piece of steel to comply with the Undetectable Firearms Act, which makes it illegal to manufacture or possess any firearm that is not detectable by a walk-through metal detector. However, this six-ounce piece of steel is non-essential to the functionality of the plastic firearm; the gun would be just as effective without it.
During a May 7 interview with Wilson, Dobbs gushed over the prospect of more of these guns, saying that they could potentially allow "every human being on the planet to go to a printer and come back and be an armed citizen or revolutionary, depending on your perspective."
Later in the segment, Wilson said he is "sympathetic with the traditional school of anarchist thought," to which Dobbs replied: "In that view, which is to assert really individual freedom ... it's not entirely, well, dissident with American exaltation of self-reliance and independence."
The weapon, which Wilson calls the "Liberator," is being both hailed and denounced as a major blow to gun control. Wilson's nonprofit, Defense Distributed, has already put the design plans for the gun online for anyone to download. That means people could start printing out working firearms in their living rooms today. Of even greater concern to lawmakers, criminals could theoretically thwart security measures by carrying the all-plastic guns into secure buildings without setting off metal detectors.
In reality, though, we aren't quite there yet. For one thing, this fully 3-D printed gun isn't fully fully 3-D printed, Wilson explained to me in a phone interview. Because federal law bans firearms that aren't detectable by metal detectors, Wilson added a six-ounce, non-functional metal component to his version. Of course, anyone 3-D printing the gun at home could skip that step. But again, that would be against the law. And there's one other part that actually can't yet be 3-D printed: the firing pin. "We tried a lot of plastic pins," Wilson said. "They were a little too soft," so they deformed when they hit the primer.
New York Congressman Steve Israel has announced legislation to renew a ban on plastic guns. New York Senator Charles Schumer has called for legislation that would ban 3D-printed guns that fire real bullets, noting that this technology makes it possible for anyone to "essentially open a gun factory in their garage."
Even Wilson has acknowledged the dangers of his project. In an interview with Forbes, Wilson said, "You can print a lethal device ... It's kind of scary, but that's what we're aiming to show."
These potential consequences seemed lost on Dobbs, who praised the invention as "amazing" and asked Wilson to direct viewers on where they could go to download the design plans for the gun. Dobbs also said that he would post a link to the plans on his own website.
It should be noted that Wilson's manufacturing of the firearm was done legally. According to The New Yorker, he has received a federal firearms license, and has been in contact with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to ensure compliance.
Republican congressmen are giving credibility to Alex Jones and his conservative fringe website Infowars.com, which popularized a conspiracy theory that DHS is stockpiling ammunition for nefarious purposes. The conspiracy theory has now inspired legislation known as the AMMO Act of 2013, which seeks to limit the ammunition purchasing power of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), even though the underlying theory was based on flawed math and a mischaracterization of the facts.
Fox Business anchor Lou Dobbs dismissed the discovery of errant data points in a recently dismantled Harvard economics study that had formed the cornerstone for arguments supporting U.S. and European austerity as merely "a small mistake."
On the April 30 edition of Fox Business' Lou Dobbs Tonight, Dobbs discussed with former Reagan administration economic adviser Arthur Laffer a "contretemps" between New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman and historian Niall Ferguson over national debt and the economy. Dobbs stated that Krugman and Ferguson were referring to a recent Harvard study that contained "a small mistake," then asserting that the study's errors "doesn't change the fact," as advocated by Ferguson, that "high debt constrains opportunity for growth."
Laffer responded by saying he'd rather talk about taxes and spending. Dobbs added: "I'd rather they all start talking about both the creation of jobs and how to spur economic growth and be done with the bunch of nonsense and the debt. It's so dreary."
In fact, the Reinhart-Rogoff study -- which asserted that nations with public debt of more than 90 percent of GDP faced a tipping point of economic decline, an idea embraced by right-wing politicians and media alike, including Fox News -- suffered from much more than "a small mistake." The study was dismantled by Thomas Herndon, Michael Ash, and Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, who found that Reinhart and Rogoff's data includes calculation errors and selective exclusions that biased the results and invalidates the 90 percent tipping point finding. Rogoff and Reinhart conceded the calculation error but "adamantly deny the other accusations," which has been criticized as a weak rebuttal.
Dobbs' stance of finding discussions of debt to be "dreary" is a shift from how he led his program as recently as March 29, when he called for reduced government spending in response to President Obama's proposed improvements to infrastructure. "It shouldn't be a partisan issue because neither political party should be calling for higher spending when the federal government is running almost trillion-dollar deficits and the national debt amounts to almost $17 trillion," Dobbs said. "That doesn't seem to me to be a partisan issue at all, just one of common sense and good judgment and responsibility."