Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

How Much Does 'Fox and Friends' Hate Clinton? Let Me Count the Ways

Reported by Judy - March 1, 2007 -

How much do the three amigos on "Fox and Friends" hate Sen. Hillary Clinton? Let me count the ways. With video.

The three co-hosts of "Fox and Friends" on Thursday (March 1, 2007) devoted more than seven minutes of their show to negative comments about Clinton, including four teasers and four lengthy segments criticizing her, her brother Tony, or President Clinton. Subtracting about 30 minutes for commercials in the two-hour show, they devoted nearly 8 percent of their show to a steady drum-beat of negativity against Clinton.

The bulk of their negative comments involved nothing that Senator Clinton herself has actually done or said. Rather, it was Newt Gingrich's characterizations of unspecified actions by Clinton. Gingrich told the New York Post, another of Rupert Murdoch's holdings, that Clinton's campaign was "endlessly ruthless" and that no campaign could "out-mud" the Clintons.

Of course, Gingrich gave no examples of ways in which Clinton has been "endlessly ruthless" and no examples of how she has smeared anybody in this campaign. And that was the genius of Gingrich's smear. He ruthlessly smears her by saying she ruthlessly smears other people and people overlook that he is the one who is ruthless and doing the smearing, to focus on her.

The co-hosts, Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade, repeated this story twice in their show, giving viewers a double-dose of ruthless Gingrich's smearing of Clinton as ruthless.

They also repeatedly teased a story that appeared in the second hour -- a smear by Howie Carr of WRKO radio, Boston, that claims a lawsuit involving Tony Rodham reinvigorates the issue of pardons issued by President Clinton when he left office in 2001. Rodham is being sued for $100,000 by someone who asked him to lobby Clinton for a pardon, claiming the money was a loan and not payment for his lobbying.

Carr claimed that Senator Clinton should have to answer questions about the pardons because the lawsuit has revived the issue. What questions are there?

Every time the show teased Carr's segment, Fox managed to display a negative banner, such as "Pardon Problem?" trying to tie Clinton to the actions of her husband.

A fourth segment was the weekly "Horse Race" discussion with Jason Wright of politicalderby.com, who claimed Clinton was caught off-guard by Sen. Barack Obama's aggressiveness in the David Geffen controversy.

Apparently, there was to be another segment, but it mysteriously never materialized. Doocy had opened the show promising to answer the question whether President Clinton was a "bonus or a burden" to his wife's candidacy. Doocy claimed "Fox and Friends" would reveal "what you think." Nothing came of that at all. Maybe because "Fox and Friends" viewers don't think?

Overall, the show gave viewers a steady dose of negative words used in conjunction with Clinton's name and a re-hashing of old stories, along with the insistence that Clinton deal with them again. Gee, can't she just use George Bush's tactic and say she's not going to talk about anything that happened before 2001?