Kevin Koster commented on Watch Megyn Kelly Give A Melodramatic Rendition Of Fox’s Fake Version Of Benghazi
2015-10-25 22:42:24 -0400
· Flag
Kelly also went way over the top at the end of her show, as she sorrowfully intoned that the victims’ families “DESERVE TO KNOW”. If I didn’t know better, I’d say Kelly was doing a bit of grandstanding.
The funny thing about the hearing is that you can see right away how badly it backfired on the GOP. Because the clips brought up on the various Fox News shows afterward wound up just being recaps of this or that GOP congressperson trying to Bogart the microphone and get their 15 minutes. Nothing of the supposed “gotcha” moments or “smoking guns” that the Fox News audience was eagerly hoping to see. Instead, they were treated to a spectacle of GOP congresspeople looking fairly incompetent while Clinton calmly stared them down, hour after hour.
This was not the Benghazi Hearing that the Fox News people were looking for…
The funny thing about the hearing is that you can see right away how badly it backfired on the GOP. Because the clips brought up on the various Fox News shows afterward wound up just being recaps of this or that GOP congressperson trying to Bogart the microphone and get their 15 minutes. Nothing of the supposed “gotcha” moments or “smoking guns” that the Fox News audience was eagerly hoping to see. Instead, they were treated to a spectacle of GOP congresspeople looking fairly incompetent while Clinton calmly stared them down, hour after hour.
This was not the Benghazi Hearing that the Fox News people were looking for…
Kevin Koster commented on ROFLMAO - Elisabeth Hasselbeck Says Mainstream Media "Takes Sides"
2015-10-04 17:33:38 -0400
· Flag
Bob’s post is a little odd, assuming that he actually means what he’s saying and isn’t trying for satire. The reality is that conservative right wingers tend to be quite angry and belligerent by nature. This is easily demonstrable by looking at the behavior of various Fox News and right wing radio hosts, like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly in particular is openly stating in his friendly discussions with GOP candidates that he’s “really angry!” So this isn’t something that should be a surprise to anyone seriously discussing the issue.
The fact is that Fox News viewers tend to be angry right wing people who are comforted by the Fox News (and right wing radio) spin that somehow all the voters who disagree with them are all “low information” people who don’t know anything. The almost casual bigotry that goes with this spin seems to go unnoticed as well, for those people inside the bubble. Granted, there are also a lot of more liberal viewers who tend to be drawn to the rants of people like Hannity for sheer entertainment value – along the lines of “Can you believe that so-and-so said that?” The overall ratings numbers for Fox News have usually been higher than the other networks (although they faltered in early 2013 for obvious reasons), but this disregards the important information we can glean from the key demographics. Namely, that Fox News viewers have been shown to primarily be older, whiter and male. It’s a demographic of an aging population that does not understand how someone like Barack Obama was elected president (and likely was not helped to understand by the kind of coverage that Fox News has provided).
Fox News has never internally believed itself to be “fair and balanced”. That’s an advertising slogan, based on the anger of the right wing that they felt they weren’t hearing “their” side of the story. So now angry right wingers have an outlet that repeats the same biased worldview they’ve been hearing from Rush Limbaugh for nearly 30 years now. And as a result, the GOP has been pushed steadily farther to the right, to the point that it can no longer appeal to mainstream Americans and thus cannot win national elections in anything other than gerrymandered districts. And as a side result of that, we now have not only right wing radio, but Extreme right wing radio, fomented by angry and hateful people like Glenn Beck.
Bob apparently does not understand that Fox News has a history of misstatements, misrepresentations and biased coverage that has been exhaustively documented in public by outlets like this website. And there are research papers that have consistently shown over the past 20 years that Fox News viewers are the least informed of news consumers – regularly indicating that they believe the most extreme and inaccurate propaganda to be purveyed on Fox News and right wing radio. (There’s an argument to be made that it’s actually the Fox News viewers who may be the “low information voters” – as we saw in the 2012 election results.)
The issue that really should concern Fox News proponents is what they’ll do in a few years when the older population that was watching the channel begins to sharply recede. It’s the same problem that the GOP faces – what will they do when their base of older white male voters (mostly from the Baby Boom) begins to decline? Fox News has worked very hard to encourage the most extreme views, particularly of angry “Tea Party” groups, but there’s simply not enough of those people to make for a dependable audience base. Further, the really extreme groups no longer think that Fox News is extreme enough for them now – they’re off listening to exploiters like Alex Jones or Glenn Beck, and referring to even hard right GOP congresspeople as RINOs. This is a problem of the right wing’s own making, and it is one that they’ll have to face sooner or later.
Posters like Bob would do better to spend a little more time looking at those real problems and not trying to debate undisputed facts that have been documented on sites like these. And they might want to look a bit more inward to see who’s really posting out of anger.
The fact is that Fox News viewers tend to be angry right wing people who are comforted by the Fox News (and right wing radio) spin that somehow all the voters who disagree with them are all “low information” people who don’t know anything. The almost casual bigotry that goes with this spin seems to go unnoticed as well, for those people inside the bubble. Granted, there are also a lot of more liberal viewers who tend to be drawn to the rants of people like Hannity for sheer entertainment value – along the lines of “Can you believe that so-and-so said that?” The overall ratings numbers for Fox News have usually been higher than the other networks (although they faltered in early 2013 for obvious reasons), but this disregards the important information we can glean from the key demographics. Namely, that Fox News viewers have been shown to primarily be older, whiter and male. It’s a demographic of an aging population that does not understand how someone like Barack Obama was elected president (and likely was not helped to understand by the kind of coverage that Fox News has provided).
Fox News has never internally believed itself to be “fair and balanced”. That’s an advertising slogan, based on the anger of the right wing that they felt they weren’t hearing “their” side of the story. So now angry right wingers have an outlet that repeats the same biased worldview they’ve been hearing from Rush Limbaugh for nearly 30 years now. And as a result, the GOP has been pushed steadily farther to the right, to the point that it can no longer appeal to mainstream Americans and thus cannot win national elections in anything other than gerrymandered districts. And as a side result of that, we now have not only right wing radio, but Extreme right wing radio, fomented by angry and hateful people like Glenn Beck.
Bob apparently does not understand that Fox News has a history of misstatements, misrepresentations and biased coverage that has been exhaustively documented in public by outlets like this website. And there are research papers that have consistently shown over the past 20 years that Fox News viewers are the least informed of news consumers – regularly indicating that they believe the most extreme and inaccurate propaganda to be purveyed on Fox News and right wing radio. (There’s an argument to be made that it’s actually the Fox News viewers who may be the “low information voters” – as we saw in the 2012 election results.)
The issue that really should concern Fox News proponents is what they’ll do in a few years when the older population that was watching the channel begins to sharply recede. It’s the same problem that the GOP faces – what will they do when their base of older white male voters (mostly from the Baby Boom) begins to decline? Fox News has worked very hard to encourage the most extreme views, particularly of angry “Tea Party” groups, but there’s simply not enough of those people to make for a dependable audience base. Further, the really extreme groups no longer think that Fox News is extreme enough for them now – they’re off listening to exploiters like Alex Jones or Glenn Beck, and referring to even hard right GOP congresspeople as RINOs. This is a problem of the right wing’s own making, and it is one that they’ll have to face sooner or later.
Posters like Bob would do better to spend a little more time looking at those real problems and not trying to debate undisputed facts that have been documented on sites like these. And they might want to look a bit more inward to see who’s really posting out of anger.
Kevin Koster commented on This Is How Sean Hannity ‘Doesn’t Politicize’ Oregon’s UCC Shooting
2015-10-02 17:59:50 -0400
· Flag
This is a typical Fox News double standard. And yes, it was interesting to see Hannity get in every cheap shot he could with Dietl, but then suddenly insist that Williams was straying from the topic by answering them with facts.
Similar double-standarding happened with Megyn Kelly, who challenged the Washington Post’s fact checking of Carly Fiorina, saying that they shouldn’t have given her three Pinnochios. Except that Kelly and Hannity have never had any problems citing the Pinnochios when they are used on Democrats. So the message would seem to be that the Pinnochios are extremely reliable – unless they’re used on a Republican, at which point they should be questioned. Got it.
Similar double-standarding happened with Megyn Kelly, who challenged the Washington Post’s fact checking of Carly Fiorina, saying that they shouldn’t have given her three Pinnochios. Except that Kelly and Hannity have never had any problems citing the Pinnochios when they are used on Democrats. So the message would seem to be that the Pinnochios are extremely reliable – unless they’re used on a Republican, at which point they should be questioned. Got it.
Kevin Koster commented on Discredited Author Ed Klein Makes Far-Fetched Accusations About Hillary Clinton’s Health
2015-09-29 23:36:13 -0400
· Flag
I suppose it shouldn’t surprise anyone that Fox News is so terrified of Hillary Clinton that they’re dredging up Ed Klein again. Given how unreliable his statements are, I have to wonder if the polling numbers that Roger Ailes sees are actually even worse for the GOP than he’s admitting publicly.
Kevin Koster commented on Bill O’Reilly Uses Pope’s Visit To Smear Obama And Pro-Choice Democrats
2015-09-24 10:36:06 -0400
· Flag
There was a significant amount of nonsense in O’Reilly’s material last night.
Yes, the discussion of the bogus additional “Born Alive” material left out the most important information – that the procedure is already illegal. The new GOP hard right wing bills are actually intended to add more penalties and to attack all clinics that provide any abortions, regardless of whether this illegal procedure is involved. The votes here were intended to pull a “gotcha” on the Dems, and they backfired. O’Reilly’s sham outrage at the Dems who refused to vote for even more penalties and additional attacks is laughable.
More laughable is O’Reilly’s attempt to spin the Pope’s statements as “a shot at Obama”, when in fact the Pope was offering mutually supportive and friendly statements. Sadly, O’Reilly was so committed to his feelings on this that he refused to allow Jessica Ehrlich to finish a sentence in correction to his rant. It’s interesting that he allowed Andrea Tantaros to throw some fairly nasty invective, including a shameful cheap shot at the end of that segment – and showed none of the righteous anger he’s displayed at moderate or liberal guests who have behaved similarly in the past. For Ehrlich’s gentle statements, O’Reilly had no patience at all – he cut her off and began lecturing her before she could even make her point. In fact, she was reminding him that he was taking the Pope’s sentences out of context and even trying to speak for the Pope. She tried to note that the very next sentence from the Pope completely disproved what O’Reilly was saying, and that his body language (something O’Reilly has always professed to study) showed his support and friendship toward President Obama. O’Reilly’s response was to have a bit of a tantrum – “You’ll see that I am RIGHT and you are WRONG”, etc.
O’Reilly’s only little allowance to Dems or President Obama was that he acknowledged that the President was a good host and showed good manners. Mike Huckabee, on the other hand, seems to have abandoned his earlier statements along those lines. Maybe three years ago, Huckabee sounded a bit like John McCain at times, noting that he disagreed with the President but didn’t doubt his faith or his sincerity. This week, Huckabee tried something fairly vile – he threw in the notion that the President is only “pretends” to be a Christian, and issued an embarrassing apology to the Pope for what Huckabee somehow thinks is disrespectful behavior by President Obama. Like Huckabee’s frantic rush to the side of Kim Davis, this move was similarly disregarded by most media. It was seen for what it is – a desperate attempt by Huckabee to stir up more of the hard right GOP base and thus allow him to stay in the race a little longer. (It’s becoming obvious that Huckabee and Cruz are each attempting to outlast each other – they’ll wind up as the Santorum/Gingrich couple of the 2016 campaign. This is why Cruz is desperately trying to say he’s raising “so much” money and why Huckabee keeps jumping up and down for every extremist cause. (I confess to enjoying the spectacle of Cruz trying to crash Huckabee’s Davis event and being told no.) When the 2016 election is over, we’ll see if Cruz gets his wish and winds up in Huckabee’s old slot at Fox News, or if Huckabee himself takes it back. I’d guess the latter, with Cruz getting a “commentator” position like that of Sarah Palin. But the bad blood between these guys is palpable, even thousands of miles away. You can see it directly through all the false piety and the desperate clambering for the moral high ground neither man possesses.
Yes, the discussion of the bogus additional “Born Alive” material left out the most important information – that the procedure is already illegal. The new GOP hard right wing bills are actually intended to add more penalties and to attack all clinics that provide any abortions, regardless of whether this illegal procedure is involved. The votes here were intended to pull a “gotcha” on the Dems, and they backfired. O’Reilly’s sham outrage at the Dems who refused to vote for even more penalties and additional attacks is laughable.
More laughable is O’Reilly’s attempt to spin the Pope’s statements as “a shot at Obama”, when in fact the Pope was offering mutually supportive and friendly statements. Sadly, O’Reilly was so committed to his feelings on this that he refused to allow Jessica Ehrlich to finish a sentence in correction to his rant. It’s interesting that he allowed Andrea Tantaros to throw some fairly nasty invective, including a shameful cheap shot at the end of that segment – and showed none of the righteous anger he’s displayed at moderate or liberal guests who have behaved similarly in the past. For Ehrlich’s gentle statements, O’Reilly had no patience at all – he cut her off and began lecturing her before she could even make her point. In fact, she was reminding him that he was taking the Pope’s sentences out of context and even trying to speak for the Pope. She tried to note that the very next sentence from the Pope completely disproved what O’Reilly was saying, and that his body language (something O’Reilly has always professed to study) showed his support and friendship toward President Obama. O’Reilly’s response was to have a bit of a tantrum – “You’ll see that I am RIGHT and you are WRONG”, etc.
O’Reilly’s only little allowance to Dems or President Obama was that he acknowledged that the President was a good host and showed good manners. Mike Huckabee, on the other hand, seems to have abandoned his earlier statements along those lines. Maybe three years ago, Huckabee sounded a bit like John McCain at times, noting that he disagreed with the President but didn’t doubt his faith or his sincerity. This week, Huckabee tried something fairly vile – he threw in the notion that the President is only “pretends” to be a Christian, and issued an embarrassing apology to the Pope for what Huckabee somehow thinks is disrespectful behavior by President Obama. Like Huckabee’s frantic rush to the side of Kim Davis, this move was similarly disregarded by most media. It was seen for what it is – a desperate attempt by Huckabee to stir up more of the hard right GOP base and thus allow him to stay in the race a little longer. (It’s becoming obvious that Huckabee and Cruz are each attempting to outlast each other – they’ll wind up as the Santorum/Gingrich couple of the 2016 campaign. This is why Cruz is desperately trying to say he’s raising “so much” money and why Huckabee keeps jumping up and down for every extremist cause. (I confess to enjoying the spectacle of Cruz trying to crash Huckabee’s Davis event and being told no.) When the 2016 election is over, we’ll see if Cruz gets his wish and winds up in Huckabee’s old slot at Fox News, or if Huckabee himself takes it back. I’d guess the latter, with Cruz getting a “commentator” position like that of Sarah Palin. But the bad blood between these guys is palpable, even thousands of miles away. You can see it directly through all the false piety and the desperate clambering for the moral high ground neither man possesses.
Kevin Koster commented on Ron Reagan, Jr. Thinks His Father Would Consider O’Reilly And Hannity As ‘Just Hucksters’
2015-09-24 00:40:59 -0400
· Flag
While I applaud the sentiments of Ron Reagan, the factual record unfortunately shows that his father approved of and admired Rush Limbaugh, as evidenced in the famous letter he sent to Limbaugh in the early 90s. (This was one of the last public-ish statements made by Reagan before his Alzheimer’s announcement in 1994)
And I agree that it’s become a regular and ridiculous spectacle for current right wing shouters to invoke Reagan for whatever they want. But we must remember the facts of Reagan’s presidency, and the sad legacy of issues his administration left us. His was certainly the most virulent right wing presidency we’d ever seen, with members of his cabinet pushing many ideas not thought prudent or polite before at that level.
This was a President who wanted to appoint Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, who wanted to name Paul Laxalt as his Chief of Staff during the Iran Contra mess, who cultivated an Administration that saw a record number of indictments and convictions – essentially a record amount of demonstrable criminality in the White House. And that’s not even getting into the wild problems he ran into in terms of fomenting untruths about welfare, social policy and foreign policy. The rise of people like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity can directly be traced to the behavior of the Reagan Administration back in the 1980s. Back then, the most direct echo of Reagan’s thinking was the infamous Wally George, who could only get himself on a public television station for his rants and screeds. Nowadays, thanks to Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, we have a whole passel of Wally Georges – namely, the entire Fox News Channel.
And I agree that it’s become a regular and ridiculous spectacle for current right wing shouters to invoke Reagan for whatever they want. But we must remember the facts of Reagan’s presidency, and the sad legacy of issues his administration left us. His was certainly the most virulent right wing presidency we’d ever seen, with members of his cabinet pushing many ideas not thought prudent or polite before at that level.
This was a President who wanted to appoint Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, who wanted to name Paul Laxalt as his Chief of Staff during the Iran Contra mess, who cultivated an Administration that saw a record number of indictments and convictions – essentially a record amount of demonstrable criminality in the White House. And that’s not even getting into the wild problems he ran into in terms of fomenting untruths about welfare, social policy and foreign policy. The rise of people like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity can directly be traced to the behavior of the Reagan Administration back in the 1980s. Back then, the most direct echo of Reagan’s thinking was the infamous Wally George, who could only get himself on a public television station for his rants and screeds. Nowadays, thanks to Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch, we have a whole passel of Wally Georges – namely, the entire Fox News Channel.
Kevin Koster commented on Ann Coulter Attacks Bill O’Reilly For Defending The 14th Amendment
2015-08-22 14:09:08 -0400
· Flag
We should note that Bill O’Reilly’s position here is not about taking a principled stand on bigotry and racism.
O’Reilly’s concern is that he be perceived as an expert in these matters, and that his ideas, which “just stick up for the folks” are intended to keep the GOP base from getting distracted by legal challenges that won’t win in court.
O’Reilly isn’t saying that he disagrees about wanting to overturn the 14th. He absolutely does agree that the children of undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be able to be citizens, and that some kind of legislative action should be taken to somehow stop this. O’Reilly just doesn’t think that this will be accomplished by either ignoring or somehow abolishing the 14th. So O’Reilly isn’t concerned about the naked bigotry here – just that he doesn’t want to waste his time on a legal challenge that won’t get him what he wants.
O’Reilly’s other concern, which is probably larger than the first, is that he really does not like it when another right winger calls him out on this stuff. So when Andrea Tantaros foolishly challenged him, he made certain to publicly chastise her on his show. He wasn’t angry with her for her position on this issue – he told her he agreed with her. He was angry that she’d publicly said he “was wrong”. And that’s a line you don’t cross with O’Reilly.
O’Reilly’s concern is that he be perceived as an expert in these matters, and that his ideas, which “just stick up for the folks” are intended to keep the GOP base from getting distracted by legal challenges that won’t win in court.
O’Reilly isn’t saying that he disagrees about wanting to overturn the 14th. He absolutely does agree that the children of undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be able to be citizens, and that some kind of legislative action should be taken to somehow stop this. O’Reilly just doesn’t think that this will be accomplished by either ignoring or somehow abolishing the 14th. So O’Reilly isn’t concerned about the naked bigotry here – just that he doesn’t want to waste his time on a legal challenge that won’t get him what he wants.
O’Reilly’s other concern, which is probably larger than the first, is that he really does not like it when another right winger calls him out on this stuff. So when Andrea Tantaros foolishly challenged him, he made certain to publicly chastise her on his show. He wasn’t angry with her for her position on this issue – he told her he agreed with her. He was angry that she’d publicly said he “was wrong”. And that’s a line you don’t cross with O’Reilly.
Kevin Koster commented on Will Megyn Kelly Follow Up On Josh Duggar’s Adultery?
2015-08-22 14:01:07 -0400
· Flag
I’d be surprised if Fox News did much coverage of any kind of this story. The only thing they might try to play with is the hack of the website, and even there, I’m not sure how much mileage they could get for their cause.
As for Megyn Kelly, I expect her to resume her usual attacks as soon as she gets back from her break. I’d be very surprised to see her suddenly take off – she’s extremely well paid and promoted at Fox News. If anything, the nonsense with Trump just gives her street credibility that I honestly don’t think she deserves. She’ll use this situation to say that she’s tough with everyone – which is demonstrably false in most situations, as Ellen has tirelessly proven here on dozens of occasions.
It’s true that Kelly has occasionally stuck up for something that personally mattered to her – such as when she went after other right wing personalities for criticizing her Family Leave time. But she knows that her position at Fox is based on her keeping up the attacks on whatever Roger Ailes dislikes this week. Conversely, I can’t see her being able to go to another network – her professional reputation is now irrevocably tied to Fox News. I can’t imagine what other network would have any use for her – except maybe as a right wing panelist sometimes. Which would be a huge come-down from having her own prime time show. She won’t go backwards like that.
As for Megyn Kelly, I expect her to resume her usual attacks as soon as she gets back from her break. I’d be very surprised to see her suddenly take off – she’s extremely well paid and promoted at Fox News. If anything, the nonsense with Trump just gives her street credibility that I honestly don’t think she deserves. She’ll use this situation to say that she’s tough with everyone – which is demonstrably false in most situations, as Ellen has tirelessly proven here on dozens of occasions.
It’s true that Kelly has occasionally stuck up for something that personally mattered to her – such as when she went after other right wing personalities for criticizing her Family Leave time. But she knows that her position at Fox is based on her keeping up the attacks on whatever Roger Ailes dislikes this week. Conversely, I can’t see her being able to go to another network – her professional reputation is now irrevocably tied to Fox News. I can’t imagine what other network would have any use for her – except maybe as a right wing panelist sometimes. Which would be a huge come-down from having her own prime time show. She won’t go backwards like that.
Kevin Koster commented on Fox’s Jesse Watters Argues ‘Anchor Baby’ Controversy Is A Liberal Media Conspiracy
2015-08-22 13:29:56 -0400
· Flag
The term is one of open racism and hatred. It’s regularly used by right wing shock jocks to stir up listeners’ ideas about some kind of a foreign invasion by “other people”.
Watters might be able to clear himself of the “offensive” label if he were to actually stop doing and saying offensive things. The issue here isn’t that there’s some “conspiracy”. The issue is that Watters and other angry right wingers are being properly called out for their bigotry. If they don’t like that, maybe they shouldn’t engage in bigotry. Pretty simple solution.
Watters might be able to clear himself of the “offensive” label if he were to actually stop doing and saying offensive things. The issue here isn’t that there’s some “conspiracy”. The issue is that Watters and other angry right wingers are being properly called out for their bigotry. If they don’t like that, maybe they shouldn’t engage in bigotry. Pretty simple solution.
Kevin Koster commented on Paul Ryan Reveals GOP Will Do Away With ObamaCare If Supreme Court Rules Against It But Won’t Discuss Plan To Replace It
2015-06-14 23:09:51 -0400
· Flag
Joseph, I agree that President Obama has never been a left wing president. He’s been more of a Bill Clinton centrist, with a few feints to the right and the left to appeal to everyone. But the GOP can never admit that. For their narrative, they need to play him as a far left ideologue regardless of the reality.
You’re absolutely right that they thumbed their noses at their own plan – because Obama proposed it. Had George W. Bush proposed the identical plan, they would have backed it a thousandfold.
Their actual agenda since January 2009 has been pretty simple – say no to everything that Obama and the Dems say or do. Nothing complicated about that. Just say no. Throw up roadblocks. Refuse to behave in a civilized fashion. Deny even a modicum of civility, while at the same time projecting the GOP’s issues of rage and impotence on the Dems. It’s frankly the display that many on the left were hoping they would see from the Dems when George W. Bush was in office. The difference being that the Dems always try to get along and the GOP has never had such an intention.
Venues like Fox News have sadly made even the tiniest steps toward bipartisanship almost completely impossible today. No GOP politician dares cross the aisle for fear of being primaried or pilloried on the TV and radio. It’s a truly sad state of affairs.
You’re absolutely right that they thumbed their noses at their own plan – because Obama proposed it. Had George W. Bush proposed the identical plan, they would have backed it a thousandfold.
Their actual agenda since January 2009 has been pretty simple – say no to everything that Obama and the Dems say or do. Nothing complicated about that. Just say no. Throw up roadblocks. Refuse to behave in a civilized fashion. Deny even a modicum of civility, while at the same time projecting the GOP’s issues of rage and impotence on the Dems. It’s frankly the display that many on the left were hoping they would see from the Dems when George W. Bush was in office. The difference being that the Dems always try to get along and the GOP has never had such an intention.
Venues like Fox News have sadly made even the tiniest steps toward bipartisanship almost completely impossible today. No GOP politician dares cross the aisle for fear of being primaried or pilloried on the TV and radio. It’s a truly sad state of affairs.
Kevin Koster commented on Megyn Kelly’s Concern For Duggar Teen Privacy Missing From Trayvon Martin Case
2015-06-13 16:04:15 -0400
· Flag
August’s new approach is novel. Since he is unable to deny the fact of the right wing’s hypocrisy in these cases, he has now chosen to embrace it. Not sure that this really helps his case. Because he’s just conceded the entire argument that Ellen was making here. It’s refreshing to see him admit this, but he may not realize what that means.
His statements about Occam’s Razor continue to avoid the simple truth we’ve already discussed. If anything, it’s ironic to see him over-complicating that discussion, when Occam’s Razor works to avoid that.
Regarding Polanski’s victim, August takes a regrettable approach. He calls her a hypocrite – an outrageous statement that assumes he has moral standing to judge this woman. He fails to understand that there is a significant difference between this woman giving an interview and/or writing a book to tell her story, and being subjected to a media frenzy of right wing pundits reading gory details of Grand Jury testimony about her case on the radio and television. The former is a matter of the victim having a voice and the courage to use it. The latter is a matter of craven media figures stepping over the victim and her family in search of salacious material to put on the air. There isn’t a constant stream of this because there isn’t a seriously pending matter of extradition happening today. But a couple years back, there was a sudden move to try to extradite Polanski that got a lot of publicity and churned up the media machine – during which time Fox News and right wing radio were very much “beating the drums”. This was a great opportunity to condemn Polanski and Hollywood while luxuriating in the nastiest of details of what happened to this woman when she was a young girl. Were another “Hail Mary” attempt to come up to try to suddenly grab Polanski, the right wing media would undoubtedly swing back into gear on the story, picking up right where they left off.
And to be clear, this isn’t a discussion of the DOJ’s efforts to extradite. It’s a discussion about how right wing pundits reacted to such efforts in the past – with sensationalistic coverage that walked all over the victim and her family. And it’s a discussion about how the same pundits now wish to morally condemn that same behavior when it comes to the Duggars and the victims of Duggar’s crimes. For August to accuse the victim here of hypocrisy is unacceptable. To quote the great Joseph Welch, “You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”
His statements about Occam’s Razor continue to avoid the simple truth we’ve already discussed. If anything, it’s ironic to see him over-complicating that discussion, when Occam’s Razor works to avoid that.
Regarding Polanski’s victim, August takes a regrettable approach. He calls her a hypocrite – an outrageous statement that assumes he has moral standing to judge this woman. He fails to understand that there is a significant difference between this woman giving an interview and/or writing a book to tell her story, and being subjected to a media frenzy of right wing pundits reading gory details of Grand Jury testimony about her case on the radio and television. The former is a matter of the victim having a voice and the courage to use it. The latter is a matter of craven media figures stepping over the victim and her family in search of salacious material to put on the air. There isn’t a constant stream of this because there isn’t a seriously pending matter of extradition happening today. But a couple years back, there was a sudden move to try to extradite Polanski that got a lot of publicity and churned up the media machine – during which time Fox News and right wing radio were very much “beating the drums”. This was a great opportunity to condemn Polanski and Hollywood while luxuriating in the nastiest of details of what happened to this woman when she was a young girl. Were another “Hail Mary” attempt to come up to try to suddenly grab Polanski, the right wing media would undoubtedly swing back into gear on the story, picking up right where they left off.
And to be clear, this isn’t a discussion of the DOJ’s efforts to extradite. It’s a discussion about how right wing pundits reacted to such efforts in the past – with sensationalistic coverage that walked all over the victim and her family. And it’s a discussion about how the same pundits now wish to morally condemn that same behavior when it comes to the Duggars and the victims of Duggar’s crimes. For August to accuse the victim here of hypocrisy is unacceptable. To quote the great Joseph Welch, “You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”
Kevin Koster commented on After A Steady Diet Of Demonizing Baltimore Mayor, Fox Plays The Victim When She Won’t Talk To Them
2015-05-02 13:30:22 -0400
· Flag
Vittert appears to be following the Stephen Crowder playbook of attempting to incite trouble and then acting surprised when people aren’t happy to accommodate him. Vittert was not there to ask real questions – he was there to ambush and attack the Mayor, with Sharpton as a boon to the fun. Nobody was physically attacking him – they were trying to clear him from the Mayor’s space, since he was clearly trying to obstruct her path. He’s frankly lucky he wasn’t arrested for this.
Kevin Koster commented on ‘Private Jet’ Hannity Complains About Hillary Clinton’s Elitism
2015-04-17 10:25:45 -0400
· Flag
The GOP and Fox News are clearly terrified of Clinton’s candidacy. I’ve never seen such a concentrated series of smears and attack pieces being mounted in rapid-fire style.
Interesting that O’Reilly, Kelly and Hannity are just so concerned about how Clinton is running her campaign. Clearly, they’re very interested in helping her run a successful campaign, right? That wouldn’t be open hatred dripping from Hannity, Kelly and Mark Thiessen, would it? That wouldn’t be open condescension from Bill O’Reilly, would it?
And I say this not as a fan of Hillary Clinton. But it’s telling how openly desperate the GOP is becoming – maybe it would be a better idea for them to see if they can pull the angry factions of their own party together before running out and telling another party how to operate a presidential campaign? Just a thought.
Interesting that O’Reilly, Kelly and Hannity are just so concerned about how Clinton is running her campaign. Clearly, they’re very interested in helping her run a successful campaign, right? That wouldn’t be open hatred dripping from Hannity, Kelly and Mark Thiessen, would it? That wouldn’t be open condescension from Bill O’Reilly, would it?
And I say this not as a fan of Hillary Clinton. But it’s telling how openly desperate the GOP is becoming – maybe it would be a better idea for them to see if they can pull the angry factions of their own party together before running out and telling another party how to operate a presidential campaign? Just a thought.
Kevin Koster commented on Watch Megyn Kelly Give A Fox News Fave A Campaign Boost – And Pretend It’s News
2015-04-17 10:13:37 -0400
· Flag
This was a pretty obvious attempt to just attack Barrett, using a known right wing local voice to do it. We should note that Kelly followed this up last night with another cheap shot, this time attacking the Police Chief and using Dana Loesch to do it – without providing any alternative viewpoint to Loesch’s hysterical rant.
Interesting that comments by the Mayor and the Chief of Police are to be attacked and reviled as partisan pettiness, but cheap shots from right wingers (particularly uninformed ones like Loesch) are to be celebrated as bastions of truth and reliability.
I agree this is likely an attempt by Fox News to campaign against Barrett’s re-election. It will be more interesting to see what happens if Walker steps away from the state for the considerable time he’ll need when he attempts to be a presidential candidate.
Interesting that comments by the Mayor and the Chief of Police are to be attacked and reviled as partisan pettiness, but cheap shots from right wingers (particularly uninformed ones like Loesch) are to be celebrated as bastions of truth and reliability.
I agree this is likely an attempt by Fox News to campaign against Barrett’s re-election. It will be more interesting to see what happens if Walker steps away from the state for the considerable time he’ll need when he attempts to be a presidential candidate.
Kevin Koster commented on Did Bill O’Reilly Fabricate His L.A. Riot ‘Bombardment’ Story?
2015-02-27 12:53:33 -0500
· Flag
There’s a good op-ed at CNN calling on O’Reilly to humbly apologize so he could move on with some grace. O’Reilly is unlikely of course to ever do so. The only times I’ve seen him apologize for mistakes were when it was on his terms. In this situation, I think he’d sooner eat quiche than admit that “guttersnipe” David Corn was right.
The overall impact of this on his reputation doesn’t really change anything. It just continues to frustrate his dream of becoming a respected elder statesman rather than a pundit who made himself rich by exploiting people’s baser instincts. And this is yet another piece of evidence of how hypocritical Fox News truly is.
The overall impact of this on his reputation doesn’t really change anything. It just continues to frustrate his dream of becoming a respected elder statesman rather than a pundit who made himself rich by exploiting people’s baser instincts. And this is yet another piece of evidence of how hypocritical Fox News truly is.
Kevin Koster commented on More O’Reilly Credibility Questions: Murder Of El Salvador Nuns Edition
2015-02-26 14:47:13 -0500
· Flag
I agree with Muto’s idea – basically that cooler heads at Fox News have been able to get O’Reilly to stop fanning the fire for a minute in the thought that it will die out on its own.
I’ve sent a question to Muto to see if my perception of O’Reilly’s thinking here feels correct to him.
And of course, Fox News did go ahead and mount another attack after these articles went up, but it was clearly less enthusiastic about it. The funniest part of their thinking was to say that this was some kind of “orchestrated campaign”. I suggested on one site that the simpler explanation is more plausible – that Corn’s article prompted more people to come out of the woodwork with their own stories about O’Reilly’s inventions.
I’ve sent a question to Muto to see if my perception of O’Reilly’s thinking here feels correct to him.
And of course, Fox News did go ahead and mount another attack after these articles went up, but it was clearly less enthusiastic about it. The funniest part of their thinking was to say that this was some kind of “orchestrated campaign”. I suggested on one site that the simpler explanation is more plausible – that Corn’s article prompted more people to come out of the woodwork with their own stories about O’Reilly’s inventions.
Kevin Koster commented on O’Reilly Airs CBS Riot Video But There Are Still Open Questions About His Claims
2015-02-24 18:02:07 -0500
· Flag
We should keep in mind what’s actually at stake here – O’Reilly’s reputation and legacy. That’s what he’s most concerned about. He knows that Fox News will never take him off the air like NBC did with Williams. He knows that his fortune is not in any danger. But things like this tarnish the image he’s been trying to invent for himself, and that’s why he’s so angry about it.
The truth is, he has spent years embellishing his experiences as a younger newsman, among other things. He’d like the record to show him as an intrepid Good Journalist working for Bad People who didn’t recognize his worth. He’d like to act as if he has combat experience, even if it’s just at the level of reporting from the middle of the battle. Except that he doesn’t have that experience. So he puffs it up a bit. He says he was in active war zones from El Salvador to the Falklands. Except that he wasn’t actually in any active war zones. He says that he saw soldiers shooting people to death in front of him. Except that the evidence shows that he only saw them firing tear gas and plastic bullets. He says that he rescued his cameraman who he says had been bloodied up. Except that the evidence shows it was other reporters who had tense moments with the demonstrators, and that O’Reilly’s own disobedience of safety precautions caused problems. He says he was the only reporter to get a team out covering the protests. Except that the evidence shows there were five teams out there. And the problems for his credibility here just go on and on.
And I’m not even going to go into his novel Those Who Trespass, since it seems to show a fictional version of O’Reilly murdering the CBS folk who’d done him wrong, and then being tracked by another fictional version of O’Reilly as investigator…
If we were to believe O’Reilly’s version of these events, we’d think of him as a sage voice of authority – a person who’s been in combat situations and knows the military issues and certainly knows more about this stuff than critics who want to peck at him. We’d think of him as an elder statesman who’s always been straight with everyone and just wants to look out for “the folks”, and that his experiences have taken him to some awful places in order to do that. Unfortunately, the reality of O’Reilly’s career would tend to indicate something else. Just watching the various tapes of his performances (“We’ll DO IT LIVE!!!”) and listening to the various recollections of his co-workers and supervisors, we can see him for who he’s always been. His behavior at CBS is consistent with his behavior on Inside Edition, which is consistent with his attitude even today. And that, sadly for him, will be his real legacy.
The truth is, he has spent years embellishing his experiences as a younger newsman, among other things. He’d like the record to show him as an intrepid Good Journalist working for Bad People who didn’t recognize his worth. He’d like to act as if he has combat experience, even if it’s just at the level of reporting from the middle of the battle. Except that he doesn’t have that experience. So he puffs it up a bit. He says he was in active war zones from El Salvador to the Falklands. Except that he wasn’t actually in any active war zones. He says that he saw soldiers shooting people to death in front of him. Except that the evidence shows that he only saw them firing tear gas and plastic bullets. He says that he rescued his cameraman who he says had been bloodied up. Except that the evidence shows it was other reporters who had tense moments with the demonstrators, and that O’Reilly’s own disobedience of safety precautions caused problems. He says he was the only reporter to get a team out covering the protests. Except that the evidence shows there were five teams out there. And the problems for his credibility here just go on and on.
And I’m not even going to go into his novel Those Who Trespass, since it seems to show a fictional version of O’Reilly murdering the CBS folk who’d done him wrong, and then being tracked by another fictional version of O’Reilly as investigator…
If we were to believe O’Reilly’s version of these events, we’d think of him as a sage voice of authority – a person who’s been in combat situations and knows the military issues and certainly knows more about this stuff than critics who want to peck at him. We’d think of him as an elder statesman who’s always been straight with everyone and just wants to look out for “the folks”, and that his experiences have taken him to some awful places in order to do that. Unfortunately, the reality of O’Reilly’s career would tend to indicate something else. Just watching the various tapes of his performances (“We’ll DO IT LIVE!!!”) and listening to the various recollections of his co-workers and supervisors, we can see him for who he’s always been. His behavior at CBS is consistent with his behavior on Inside Edition, which is consistent with his attitude even today. And that, sadly for him, will be his real legacy.