As we have previously posted, Bill O’Reilly spewed some shocking sour grapes on Election Night that were filled with racial resentment. The thoughts, albeit in more delicate form, have been reiterated all over Fox News. Two days ago, Megyn Kelly joined the Fox-News-Sore-Losers-With-Racial-Insinuations Club.
Although the election was far from over when O’Reilly offered up his commentary, it was clear he knew the night was not going well for Romney. With a sour face, he said:
It's a changing country. The demographics are changing. It's not a traditional America any more. And there are 50% of the voting public who want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it and he ran on it. And, whereby twenty years ago, President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney. The white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that the economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff. You are going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama, overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama’s way. People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things?
This was an out-and-out complaint that the country is no longer “white” enough. Shocking to many people - but “interesting” to Kelly. She said:
This is an interesting theory. O’Reilly’s been talking about this on his show, in his Talking Points before (Election) night about how he feels like we are morphing into a society in which large sectors of the public are too dependent on the government and believe the government is there to solve their problems, and the government has a responsibility to solve their problems and not self-sufficient enough.
Kelly left out just who makes up those “large sectors of the public” but anyone who has watched her through the years knows that it’s almost certainly the same people who support those scary black men she baselessly alleged would be showing up at a polling place near you thanks to President Obama’s racial preference for African Americans. And those same ACORN supporters she painted as some kind of welfare frauds.
Lou Dobbs jumped on the “Obama-voters-are-welfare-queens” bandwagon that, as I wrote in a post on Crooks and Liars, has become something of a mantra on Fox lately. He complained about “40% of the population receiving Disability, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”
There was a bit of discussion and dissension from Alan Colmes, the lone liberal voice on a panel with two other guests plus Kelly. She cited the old adage, “give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.” Then she added, “There’s a question about, you know, whether there is this um, inclination by some on the left, by the President by the Democratic Party to give the man the fish… Is that fair?
Oh, those black fish-takers are just making life so difficult for Kelly, struggling as she does on her “middle class” wages while they loaf on her tax dollars! And isn’t it too bad that just like her colleague Steve Doocy, she didn’t bother to read up on just how that “entitlement” money is spent: overwhelmingly on the elderly, disabled and working people?
Colmes made an excellent point, that people like Romney also get hands outs from the government in the forms of tax breaks and bailouts.
But the others batted that away by saying they wouldn’t support that either and guest Dobbs went on to complain:
“(We need to) come to terms with the fact that all of this ideological rhetoric is an impediment and outright obfuscation in what should be an important national dialogue and debate that was not had by the presidential candidates because they were fueled, driven, enabled and embraced by a national liberal media, primarily,” that didn’t want a “national consensus.”
Of course, what the Foxies are really looking at is debt and deficit reduction and President Obama’s plan to raise taxes for the wealthiest Americans (i.e. themselves) while not cutting back on all those (people of color) they imagine living high on the hog at their expense. That’s probably the next political battle on the horizon and if you think the Republicans are going to roll over just because Americans voted for tax increases over spending, then I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Apologies to the frogs (my ancestors on the European side) of the enlightenment era.
@d d: The double standard of anything related to Rupert Murdoch is confirmed by an article in today’s Italian papers: seems “everybody knew about Petraeus’s affairs for weeks if not months.” Had it been anybody but their hero, the foxies would have been on that story 24/7/366 (2012=leap year)
Talking heads like BOR and his ilk are despicable when it comes to this sort of bogus talk – they spend their time belittling people who vote for Obama as nothing more than “takers” yet they just can’t seem to bring themselves to call out people like Mittens and America’s corporations for also taking from the government/taxpayers.
Plus, they ignore the fact that there are tons of conservatives who voted for Romney who are also taking from the government (welfare, food stamps, etc.). I happen to know a bunch of these types living in Missouri. BOR and pundits like him point at the Demcratic-votin’ takers but give the Republican-votin’ takers a pass. It’s intellectual dishonesty at its best (worst) and it showcases their partisan (racist?) mindset.
The demographics are indeed changing and the Republicans are silly as allgetout to think their retro-grade core principles can stop it. They should stop and THINK how the demographics in the USA are likely to change if low-income women continue not to have access to affordable for birth control.
I once read a comment by a Dalit on the practice of sex selection in India: declaring himself to be the proud father of eight girls, he said that allowing the higher castes’ to abort female fetuses would enhance the chances of his girls marrying well.
Saying that the republicans and the foxies have their heads buried in the sand does not convey my judgement at all: they are pathologically delusional. I’m glad the foxies are expressing that denial so mindlessly because that cannot fail to expand the body of people who react “whaaaaaaaaaat? You gotta be kidding me!”
Augh! Bemused (aka Pollyanna) has spoken!
Good dawg… these clowns on Fox.
The changing demographic is NOT some conspiracy built by them ebeeeeel LBRULS.
mUCKING Forons! Read a damned History book.
The Baby Boomers didn’t just Baby Boomed in the USA. It was a world wide event.
Read a damned History book!
We had a long period of stability which gave us the Baby Boom. But now that they are retiring, the welfare safety nets cannot carry them BECAUSE of a DIMINISHING birth rate unable to pay into those nets at the same rate they are spent.
Japan saw it. Chile saw it. Mexico saw it, and now Europe is seeing it.
Japan didn’t and doesn’t have “an immigration” problem. Their Baby Boomers were taught to work their arses off for ONE company expecting some kind of pension after retirement.
Guess what happened when Japanese companies started OFF-SHORING their jobs to countries where they didn’t need to deal with unions or pension plans?
Including the USA.
Another example the wingnuts like to cite is Chile.
Guess how much the Chilean retirees understand about pegging their funds to the stock market.
In Mexico it is the same crap. The banks and “investment” advisers try to suck people into their “plans” which never yield anything but the “management fees” never fail to be withdrawn on time.
In the USA, depending on your job, one may or may not have an additional retirement plan beside Social Security. Most of these plans are, again, mutual funds relying on the stock market. I am not knocking down the stock market. I am saying most people rely on faith alone trusting their “advisers”
Just ask the many municipal and state pension plans who got the shaft.
Are these retirees “people who want free stuff”?
Are they people who didn’t learn or don’t know how to fish?
Now we have imbeciles who find it “interesting” that people will vote to preserve what little is left from their work, the same people who know education is the way to a better paying job, and working in a community effort is better and easier that building a wooden, floating zoo alone.
With imbeciles like Billdo and Megyn Kelly on Fox, who needs enemies in Mayberry.
TRANSLATION: White males don’t have all the power anymore.
And there are 50% of the voting public who want stuff. They want things.
Yeah, BillO — like food, clothing, shelter, employment . . .
And, whereby twenty years ago, President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney.
Twenty years ago, Mitt Romney would have ran against . . . Bill Clinton.
Mitt Romney “roundly defeat” him?
PLEASE DON’T MAKE ME LAUGH
You are going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama, overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obamaâs way.
Well, BillO, if that upsets you that much, you teabagging rightwingnuts can always try suppressing the vote.
Oh wait . . .
You and the rest of the Foxites have your personal wealth vastly increased under Murdoch for the sole purpose of running a 24/7 campaign to discredit a democratically elected leader by voter daily intimidation, lies & smears. Your master, Rupert, was magically made a naturalized US citizen in 1985 (under good old befuddled Ronald Reagan) for the purpose of empowering him to buy US TV media. But make no mistake about it, you are effectively working for an illegal alien and it is no wonder your words & actions are damaging to America.
Karl Rove’s 19 Justifications For The GOP’s 2012 Election Loss
And Bill…I don’t want a thing. I do however believe in helping people in need. It’s not about “fair”…it’s about being human.