Tag Archives: Fox News

Sports news

Media love "Deflate-gate"

Howard Kurtz, savvy media critique that he is, has posited the theory that the media are hyping up the “scandal” involving deflated footballs and whether the New England Patriots cheated their way into the Super Bowl because, well, it’s good for ratings.

Writing on FoxNews.com, Kurtz wonders precisely why the media have become fixated with this story. The Patriots, after all, clobbered the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC championship game this past weekend. The notion that they purposely deflated footballs to make them more catchable had zero bearing on the outcome of the game, according to Kurtz.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/23/deflate-gate-why-media-are-overinflating-football-flap/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn

The media might start concocting conspiracy theories any moment now and might start ascribing all kinds of evil intent on the Patriots.

Kurtz has one idea on what might be driving this media interest. He writes: “Much of the sports media can’t stand Bill Belichick, the Patriots coach. He openly treats reporters with disdain. He’s become a symbol, fairly or unfairly, of sports arrogance and immorality.”

What’s more, as Kurtz says: “At his presser yesterday, Belichick looked nervous, defensive, ticked off to be there, as if he were undergoing a root canal. When he got done with a halting monologue denying any knowledge of ball tampering, he gave one-sentence answers to a few questions and cut it off.

“Every good scandal story needs a villain, and Belichick is it — especially because he was fined $500,000 in the 2007 Spygate incident, where the Pats secretly videotaped the Jets’ defensive coaches’ signals.”

In the grand scheme of serious public policy issues, this one ranks — oh, I don’t know — perhaps nowhere.

But it does involve entertainment celebrities, aka known as highly compensated professional football players.

It’s all too bad. My fear now is that with the Super Bowl now barely more than a week away and with all the pregame hyped planned prior to the game, the media are going to overlook what could be an exciting sporting event between two talented football teams.

Instead, they’ll seek to solve the mystery of, “Who in the hell deflated those footballs?”

 

national news

Huckabee turns into a goofball

Honest to goodness, I never thought of Mike Huckabee as a right-wing goofball — until just a couple of days ago.

Maybe I missed the warning signs. He went wildly off the rails, though, with some kind of weird critique of President and Mrs. Obama’s parenting skills. Former President Carter came to the Obamas’ defense. Huckabee, who left his job at Fox News to explore another run for the Republican presidential nomination, needs an intervention … maybe.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jimmy-carter-defends-obamas-parenting-wake-huckabee-attack

The former Arkansas governor and one-time Baptist preacher said the Obamas deserve criticism because — hold on, now — they let their daughters listen to Beyoncé. President Carter, who also has some credibility as a man of deep religious faith, said the “president is doing a good job” raising his daughters in the fish-bowl environment in which the family is living.

The first daughters, Malia and Sasha, are being poisoned by their exposure to Beyoncé’s raunchy lyrics and her dance moves, which Huckabee says are more appropriate “in the bedroom.”

Huck did offer a tepid disclaimer to the blistering he gave the first couple when he said they are “are excellent and exemplary parents in many ways.” Ah yes, “in many ways.”

That’s like saying, “I love that death, but …” Without fail, whatever comes after the word “but” is going to drop the hammer with a negative assertion of some sort.

The Obama daughters are growing up to be fine young women, just as the Bush twins — Barbara and Jenna — have done and just as virtually all children who come of age while living in the White House have done.

Stick to public policy, Rev. Huckabee, particularly if you’re going to run for president of the United States of America — again.

 

national news

University students should listen to George Will

Here we go once again: Liberal educators, politicians and students don’t want to hear a voice from the other end of the political spectrum, so they’re launching an effort to ban that voice from their campus.

Please. Stop this nonsense.

Conservative columnist George Will has been invited to deliver the commencement speech at Michigan State University. Alumni, students and some administrators have decided Will’s world view isn’t welcome there. Specifically they object to his recent statements about sexual assault among female college students.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/12/10/us-senator-denounces-michigan-states-decision-t/201841

I’ll stipulate that I disagree with Will’s view that “victimhood” has become some sort of badge of honor. The threat of sexual assault is real and it needs to be dealt with in a serious manner.

Indeed, I generally disagree with just about everything Will says in his column or in his role as a Fox News “contributor.”

There. I’ve declared my bias.

But universities — institutions of higher learning — do themselves a terrible injustice when they prohibit all points of view from being heard on the issues of the day.

Democratic U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, an MSU alumna, has weighed in with her objections to Will’s appearance at her alma mater. She said Will’s “statements on sexual assault are inaccurate, offensive, and don’t represent the values of our state or MSU.”

So … what?

Let the man speak and then challenge his assumptions. Debate them. In the open. Intelligently. Let’s have a full airing of competing ideas on sexual assault.

Universities are supposed to be open to wide ranges of thought, ideology and philosophy. Isn’t there some inscription on some wall at the East Lansing campus that suggests that the university is a place where everyone’s views are welcome?

How about fulfilling the university’s mission and letting a noted conservative commentator speak his mind to students who are able to draw their own conclusions about whether he is right … or wrong?

 

national news

Garner case is not about taxation

Conservative talking heads keep trying to change the subject while discussing the case involving Eric Garner, the black man choked to death in New York by a white police officer.

It’s reprehensible for them to try to turn the argument to something as ridiculous as taxation.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/12/08/hannity-to-tavis-smiley-about-the-role-of-race/201804

The video link attached here is difficult to watch. It features Fox News commentator Sean Hannity arguing with PBS commentator Tavis Smiley over the grand jury’s decision not to indict the New York police officer who choked Garner to death. It’s difficult because the two of them keep arguing over each other, each trying to outshout the other. Perhaps the funniest part is when Hannity (a white guy) tells Smiley (a black guy) that he needs “to be educated” about how African-Americans should react to the Garner case and the one involving Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.

But in the midst of the verbal melee, Hannity — quite predictably — tries to suggest the real villain here is a government that insists on taxing cigarettes in an effort to get as much money as it can.

What the … ?

Garner had been approached by the police for selling “loose cigarettes.” He was selling them individually, I guess to make a few bucks on the side. I presume that’s an illegal act, which is why the cops were hassling Garner in the first place.

Well, he argued back, telling the police he wasn’t doing anything wrong. One of them grabbed Garner in a chokehold, wrestled him to the ground, ignoring Garner’s “I can’t breathe” pleas.

Garner passed out and then died.

And Hannity — along with other right-wingers — wants to say the real villain is a tax policy that prohibits people from selling cigarettes in the manner that Eric Garner sought to sell them?

I cannot believe the crassness of such an argument.

 

national news, political news

GOP adults start to tamp down 'I-word' talk

Yes, the Republican Party has some actual grownups in its midst.

Some of them are beginning to speak up against the rough talk of the kids within the party about impeaching President Obama if — and when — he issues that executive order on immigration.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/republicans-immigration-impeachment-113027.html?hp=c1_3

Frankly, I don’t quite know how to respond to that tamping down of a possible rebellion.

The president is expected Thursday to issue an order that delays deportation of about 5 million illegal immigrants. Congressional GOP leaders have threatened all kinds of mayhem if/when he goes through with it. Some of those threats include impeachment — which is about as stupid an idea as anything I’ve heard in years.

One of the grownups, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, said this: “Impeachment and shutting the entire government down takes the focus away from him to us, There are some people in the conferences that will have their 15 minutes of fame over this. But the rest of us want a Republican Party that can compete across the board in 2016.”

Another of them, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, said this: “Nobody’s talking about the ‘I’ word like the White House and others. They would love for us to take the bait. We’re not going to take the bait.”

Actually, I should point out that some of the young Turks within the GOP caucus have said it, too, along with their friends in the conservative mainstream media, such as columnist/Fox News talking head Dr. Charles Krauthammer.

This is nonsense, but it does give Democrats and other friends of President Obama some ammo to shoot back at the GOP chuckleheads.

Therein lies the source of my mixed feelings.

 

 

 

 

 

national news, political news

'W' stays on the post-presidency high road

It well might have just tortured Fox News blowhard Sean Hannity to hear his talk-show guest refuse to criticize President Obama.

Then again, perhaps Hannity knew the response he would get from former President George W. Bush.

Whatever the case, President Bush has chosen to remain on the high road nearly six years after leaving the White House.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/george-w-bush-why-refuse-135613369.html

Bush said he doesn’t “think it’s good for the country to have a former president undermine a current president; I think it’s bad for the presidency for that matter.”

Then he added: “Secondly, I really have had all the fame I want. I really don’t long for publicity. And the truth the matter is in order for me to generate publicity … I’d have to either attack the Republican Party, which I don’t want to do, or attack the president, which I don’t want to do. And so I’m perfectly content to be out of the limelight.”

What a concept. A former president following the lead set by his father, another former leader of the Free World, in refusing to mix it up with those who come along after them.

Take heed, former Vice President Cheney. He’s been popping off repeatedly ever since he moved out of the VP’s mansion.

Indeed, this unofficial vow of silence that former presidents take has more or less been followed since the founding of the Republic. I say “more or less,” because President Bush’s immediate predecessor, President Clinton, has been pretty vocal in criticizing Republican critics of Barack Obama, although I cannot recall Clinton torpedoing George W. Bush’s foreign-policy decisions during W’s presidency.

Let’s not ignore President Carter, who on occasion has shot darts at all the men who assumed office after he left the White House in 1981. He does pick his shots, though.

But in my memory of former presidents, which dates back to Dwight Eisenhower, it’s been the custom for former presidents — and vice presidents, for that matter — to stay quiet and let their successors suffer the barbs that others toss at them.

It’s an appropriate thing for these former leaders to do. They belong to an exclusive club. Only they know all the ins and outs of the world’s toughest job.

As we all understand, we can have only one president at a time. For a former president to take a seat in the peanut gallery and “undermine a current president” is very bad form, indeed.

Well said, President Bush.

 

national news, political news

Huckabee to get boot from Fox?

What might conservative media talking heads say if former Vice President Al Gore had an on-air contract with MSNBC and then began talking out loud about a possible run for the presidency of the United States?

They would demand the network get Gore off the air. And they would be correct.

Well, a leading conservative voice on the Fox News Channel is considering yet another presidential campaign bid.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is the Fox talking head. To its credit, Fox is considering yanking its contract with Huckabee.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/223921-fox-takes-serious-look-at-huckabees-political-activity

The network should move quickly. Get the ex-governor off the air and let him proceed with his pre-presidential campaign planning without benefiting from the exposure he gets from his cable news network talk show.

Fox has had this dance with other politicians-turned-contributors. Former U.S. Rep. and House Speaker Newt Gingrich once had a Fox gig. Then he ran for president in 2012 and Fox let him go. Same for ex-U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, another contributor who ran for president two years ago.

It’s one thing to have has-been pols, such as former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, on the payroll. She won’t seek national political office again — I hope.

But these returning politicians present another problem for a network seeking to maintain its so-called and highly debatable “fair and balanced” reputation.

Let’s quit the charade, Fox execs. Cut the governor loose. Surely you can persuade Sarah “Barracuda” Palin to fill the void.

 

 

International news, military news

This SEAL is making me angry

Forgive me for the mild case of potty mouth language I’m about to inject into the blog post, but …

Robert O’Neill is starting to piss me off.

O’Neill is the former Navy SEAL who shot Osama bin Laden to death on May 2, 2011 — allegedly.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/seal-claims-killed-osama-bin-laden-expected-die/story?id=26830046

He’s now speaking to Fox News about the dangerous mission he and the rest of SEAL Team Six executed in the middle of a moonless night in Pakistan. The order given by the commander in chief was as straightforward as it gets: Kill the world’s most notorious terrorist.

They did it with cool precision.

Now comes O’Neill and at least one other SEAL who offer supposedly conflicting accounts of who — precisely — pulled the trigger on bin Laden.

O’Neill told Fox News that, by golly, he “expected” to be killed on the mission.

He said this in an interview set to air this evening, according to ABCNews.com: “‘We’re going to die when the house blows up. We’re going to die when he blows up. Or we’re going to be there too long and we get arrested by the Pakistanis, and we’re going to spend the rest of our short lives in Pakistani prison,’ O’Neill said in an interview for a Fox News Channel special set to air tonight. ”

Well, duh?

Of course the mission was fraught with maximum peril. That’s supposed to be a serious news flash?

What’s so maddening about all of this, of course, is that O’Neill is breaking a long-standing code among SEALs and, for that matter, special operations forces of all the military branches — and that includes Army Green Berets, Joint Delta Force units, and Air Force commandos. It is that you do not speak openly about these highly classified missions. More to the point, you do not take credit for the successes accomplished by the entire team.

Here goes one of those SEALs, a highly trained warrior who helped execute  a mission of intense personal danger to all the men who took part. He’s doing precisely what the code says he shouldn’t do: basking in the glory of a mission that captivated the world.

It was a team effort, correct?

 

 

 

national news

Why give air time to these gasbags?

Someone will have to explain to me why talk-radio blowhards — mainly on the right, of course — keep getting so much attention for the preposterous things they say.

Come to think of it: Why am I even commenting on this?

I guess I have to get something off my chest.

Mike Gallagher is one of those blowhards who appears on Fox News on occasion to spout off on things of which he knows nothing.

Such as how women think about getting catcalls from men on the street.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/10/31/foxs-mike-gallagher-only-unhappy-women-complain/201399

Gallagher, of course, is not a woman. I’ll assume he’s never been one. Then again, you know what they say about those who assume. Whatever.

He dismisses the concerns that women have about men who shout out catcalls at them. He wishes women would do the same thing to him.

He says “there’s nothing sexually harassing” about a guy calling out to a woman and telling her “she’s good-looking.”

OK, dude. You know not a single thing of which you speak. Looking at these matters from your perspective might play well in the men’s locker room, but in the whole rest of the world that includes women — who have their own world view on how they should be treated — it comes off in in an entirely different light.

Mr. Gallagher, I shall now quote a high-profile Republican governor, Chris Christie, who recently got a heckling from a non-fan: Sit down … and shut up!

 

medical news, national news

Right-wing media attack getting out of hand

Right-wing mainstream media talking heads need to get a grip on this Ebola story.

Some of ’em are yammering about demands for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Tom Frieden to resign.

For what?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/14/foxs-cdc-smear-campaign-calls-for-directors-res/201146

Two of the “stars” of this trash Dr. Frieden cavalcade are Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham. They haven’t listen too intently to what their colleague Shepard Smith said on the air recently, that the Ebola “crisis” in the United States isn’t a crisis at all, that we have little to worry about and that — here it comes — we shouldn’t politicize this issue by seeking to lay blame on medical professionals who are trying to do their job.

That hasn’t stopped Blowhard Bill and Laura the Lip from firing off their criticism of Dr. Frieden.

Ingraham likened Frieden to “Baghdad Bob.” Remember that guy? He was the idiot propagandist who proclaimed that Iraqi forces were defeating American troops in 2003 — as Americans were rolling into the Iraqi capital city.

There’s no need at all to demonize Frieden in the manner that some on the right are seeking to do. Indeed, even O’Reilly’s own Fox colleague Greta Van Susteran has proclaimed Bill-O is wrong to criticize Frieden’s work as head of the CDC.

Let’s calm down, shall we?