Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Richard Prince Blogs About ABC Legitimizing Radical Michelle Malkin

I know far-right blogger Michelle Malkin has a book coming out, but ABC providing her a platform to help her sell books on a panel with far more credible individuals is puzzling at best and indefensible at worst. Was it because she was selling a book and making the media rounds to drum up publicity for the shots she is taking at the Obama Administration? Like some other bloggers, I too found it almost shocking to see her on ANC’s “This Week” trying to talk politics with George Stephanopoulus, Cynthia Tucker, Al Hunt and Gerald Seib. In that group, the almost irrationally-partisan Malkin sticks out like a sore thumb just hit by a hammer.

Here isRichard Prince’s take on Michelle Malkin in a blog titled: ABC’s “This Week” Legitimizes Michelle Malkin:

It’s been 10 years since Michelle Malkin, then a Seattle Times editorial writer and columnist, disparaged Unity ‘99 in her column, saying, “I am not a brown jelly bean. . . . For better or worse, I want readers to know me for my ideas, ideology and idiosyncrasies — not for my Filipino heritage. This is why, after more than a half-dozen years in the newspaper business, I refuse to join race-based organizations such as the Asian-American Journalists Association.”

Malkin moved to Washington and wrote such works as “In Defense of Internment: The Case for “Racial Profiling” in World War II and the War on Terror” (2004)

By and large, however, Malkin was considered a rather fringe, Ann Coulter-type character — until Sunday, when she was invited to share the reporter’s roundtable of ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos, with mainstream veterans Cynthia Tucker, Al Hunt and Gerald Seib.

It was her first time. “She’s a provocative conservative voice with a new book,” ABC spokeswoman Emily Lenzner explained to Journal-isms.

“There’s no shortage of wingnuts out there, so why would George Stephanopoulos invite on someone too crazy for even Bill O’Reilly?” John Amato asked on his Crooks and Liars blog.

“Only people with a Malkin brain would believe and push across the notion that Americans would rather collect three hundred dollars a week on unemployment insurance rather than get a job that supplies benefits and pays a salary,” as Malkin did on “This Week.”

“The Huffington Post adds:

“‘Everybody just sort of looked at Malkin, like she was INSANE, and George Stephanopoulos very politely said, ‘Uhm . . . I don’t know if I follow that.’ To which Malkin replied: ‘BUT IT WAS A CLINTON ECONOMIST, BLARGLE!’ Stephanopoulos was still a bit dumbfounded, wondering why anyone in their right mind would take unemployment benefits ‘when a job was available.’”

Certainly she is a provocative voice with a new book, but is this where the bar is set to earn a spot on a show that is supposed to be as prestigious as ABC’s “This Week” is nowadays (selling a book and coming across as provocative)?

To some extent, she tried to hide her partisanship (or at least turn down the volume on it), but it was apparently too difficult for her.

Crooks and Liars gives an example of how obsessed she has become with attacking the Obama Administration (in an interview she did on Fox News with another right-wing extremist, Sean Hannity):

Especially the complete and utter loss of perspective:

HANNITY: Now that you’ve done all this research — and I’ll let the audience, because you really, with great specificity and detail, go into the corruption — how corrupt is this administration compared to others?

MALKIN: Well, I think you have to judge them by their rhetoric. And if you look at the gap between the rhetoric and the reality, this has to be one of the corrupt, most corrupt administrations in recent memory.

Hmmm. I dunno about you, but when I look at the levels of corruption within an administration, I look for actual things like, you know, corruption. Things like Halliburton and Enron.

Apparently, Malkin has a short memory for presidential administration scandals.

I wonder if Malkin will measure Dick Cheney’s rhetoric against the reality of Bush Administration scandals.

Remember these words from Cheney:

We can restore the ideals of honesty and honor that must be a part of our national life, if our children are to thrive. When I look at the administration now in Washington, I am dismayed by opportunities squandered. Saddened by what might have been, but never was. These have been years of prosperity in our land, but little purpose in the White House. Bill Clinton vowed not long ago to hold onto power “until the last hour of the last day.” That is his right. But, my friends, that last hour is coming. That last day is near. The wheel has turned. And it is time. It is time for them to go.

George W. Bush will repair what has been damaged. He is a man without pretense and without cynicism. A man of principle, a man of honor. On the first hour of the first day he will restore decency and integrity to the Oval Office. He will show us that national leaders can be true to their word and that they can get things done by reaching across the partisan aisle, and working with political opponents in good faith and common purpose. I know he’ll do these things, because for the last five years I’ve watched him do them in Texas.

George W. Bush came to the governor’s office with a clear view of what he wanted to achieve. He said he would bring higher standards to public schools, and he has. Walk into those schools today, and you will see children with better scores, classrooms with better discipline and teachers with better pay.

Uh, right.

What say you Michelle Malkin? …

How about the gap between that rhetoric and these scandals (to name a few):

Halliburton’s Corruption
Iraq’s Decline
Weapons of mass destruction
Mission Accomplished
Abu Ghraib Prison Torture
CIAPre-9/11 Intelligence Failures
HHS Deceptive Ad Campaign
HHS Scully Scandal
Government-wide Accounting Problems
Real Costs of the Iraq War

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Peter Johnson Jr., Fox Legal Anaylst, Makes Idiotic Comments

The lengths to which Fox News will go to demonize President Obama (in any way possible) never ceases to amaze me. Fox had Peter Johnson Jr., who was described as a Fox News Legal Analyst, on the air to trash President Obama by mischaracterizing a comment he made about doctors and patients exploring their health care options in regard to surgery vs. pain killers. Johnson ran with it and tried to portray President Obama as wanting the government (this is the tired Fox News anti-Obama narrative) to control whether old people live or die. The president was talking about procedures that will not or may not help a patient (a procedure that might be unnecessary). He was talking about arming doctors with knowledge that will help them make a more informed decision about health care. This is not about government control (but, that does not fit the Fox News strategy of painting President Obama as a socialist, a social engineer, as a person who wants the government to control everything, etc.).

Here is a quote from Johnson while appearing on the right-wing show Fox and Friends:

“Is that what this plan is about? To save money by killing old people?”

Johnson takes the president’s words and spin them to have the worst-possible meaning he could manage. Such comments are irresponsible and reprehensible. It’s amazing a legitimate news network (if you consider Fox a legitimate news network) would allow someone to come on, distort words and use fear against old people.

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906250008

lisabeth Hasselbeck: See, What Had Happened Was …

Elisabeth Hasselbeck, one of the hosts of ABC’s “The View,” seems to have gotten herself into a little trouble related to alleged plagiarism.

BOSTON – The author of a health book has sued Elisabeth Hasselbeck, accusing the co-host of ABC’s “The View” of plagiarism.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Massachusetts, alleges that Hasselbeck lifted “word for word” content from a book written by Susan Hassett, a self-published author on Cape Cod.

Hassett said in the lawsuit that she sent Hasselbeck a personal note and copy of her “Living With Celiac Disease” book as a courtesy after the television celebrity disclosed she had the illness last year.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

In the same story, there is this excerpt:

Hasselbeck said in a statement that the allegations are baseless and she worked “diligently and tirelessly” on the book and was disappointed by efforts to discredit her work.

Well, we’ll see how this one plays out.

Yahoo News:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090623/ap_on_en_tv/us_people_hasselbeck_plagiarism

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Republicans Are Attacking ABC Over Something That Hasn’t Even Happened

President Obama will be on ABC news during a prime-time special that is being called “Questions for the President: Prescription for America.” Right wingers are already whining about it and some have referred to it as an infomercial for the president and asserted that he will not be challenged. This is the kind of prejudice that makes no sense. The Republicans need to stop whining and work a little bit harder to get their alternative plan (if they have one) for health care reform. Taking shots at the President’s plan while not offering an alternative one seems to serve no useful purpose. Republicans can take a platform of their own and get their own message out and their own plan out. But, that is kind of difficult to do when you’re whining about the media.

Here is part of the Fox News report:

Opponents of President Obama’s proposed health care reform are blasting ABC News for refusing to air opposing ads during a prime time special next Wednesday, just as a new study finds ABC News coverage of the president’s health care plan is favorable by a ratio of 3 to 1.

The prime time special — called “Questions for the President: Prescription for America” — will be a nationally televised event during which Obama will answer questions presented by audience members selected by ABC News. The network has refused to accept advocacy ads during the hourlong show.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele accused ABC News and anchor Charles Gibson of making Obama’s case for “nationalized” health care “without any opportunity for opposing views to be aired.

That is quite a statement for something we’ve not yet seen.

More from the Fox story:

In a fundraising e-mail aimed at raising nearly $100,000 to buy air time for a counterprogram, Steele said the RNC’s request to add its views to the debate during the special was “flatly rejected” by ABC News.

“What are the Democrats and their media allies afraid of? The truth?” he asked in a fundraising letter to supporters. “That is outrageous! And we will not take it!”

But ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider told FOXNews.com that it has been a “longstanding” policy not to accept “advocacy” ads.

Schneider explained that the policy was established decades ago and only local ABC affiliates air issue ads.

If ABC is truly being consistent (with its ad policy), then Republicans should quit whining. It sounds as if they can go to local affiliates and do what needs to be done. That should be their approach if they are truly interested in something other than creating a controversy out of nothing … or, a nontroversy. In this country, to the victor goes the spoils. The Democrats won big in November and they have the bigger megaphone (just as Republicans did when George W. Bush was in office the previous eight years).

Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/18/critics-attack-abc-news-refusing-air-opposing-ads-obamas-health-care-special/

Fox News Host Steve Doocy Continues Attacks On President Obama

Steve Doocy, of Fox News, is back on the attack against President Obama. This time, however, ABC is the pawn caught in the middle of the controversy. ABC has tremendous access to President Obama for a big interview it apparently will air. Doocy called ABC the “All Barack Channel.” Like several other hypocrites at Fox, Doocy has the nerve (I was going to say audacity) to criticize ABC for its coverage of President Obama after Fox had tremendous access of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Doocy has a history of smearing the president (or, is it just a bias?). He was a part of a false report advanced by numerous conservatives (including many on Fox News) that said President Obama attended a Muslim school, a madrassa. Normally, I would not spend much time fussing over a false report, but this one seems to have been driven by an ideological bias against Barack Obama (when he was a candidate for the presidency).

WOLF BLITZER: CNN did what any serious news organization is supposed to do in this kind of a situation. We actually conducted an exclusive first-hand investigation inside Indonesia to check oout the school that Barack Obama attended as a little 6-year-old boy.

Here is the transcript from Media Matters:

From the January 19, 2007, edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends First:

DOOCY: When people find out this stuff, they’re going to go, “Why didn’t anybody ever mention that that man right there was raised as — spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father — as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa?”

KILMEADE: Yeah, is that a problem? Evidently, when he was a little kid, he went over to Indonesia and went to a madrassa. He — in his two best-selling books, he doesn’t really mention this in detail, says, you know, I went to — mostly raised secular but went to a Muslim school, went to a Catholic school, and then a little bit later on, he would become a Christian, almost like a born-again Christian. But Barack Obama had a father born in Kenya who was a Muslim.

[...]

DOOCY: Is it ancient history or do you think madrassa matters? Josh joins us from Colorado. Good morning to you, Josh.

CALLER: What’s up?

DOOCY: What do you think?

CALLER: I think that, ultimately, this will probably be one of the main reasons he’s not elected.

DOOCY: Just the fact that his father was a Muslim, he was raised as a Muslim for awhile, and went to a madrassa school in Jakarta?

CALLER: Right. I mean, where — you’d think that could possibly give him, you know, better insight on the enemy, maybe he doesn’t really consider terrorists the enemy.

DOOCY: All right, Josh.

KILMEADE: Well, we’ll see about that. Yeah, Josh says that. Larry from Tennessee, where do you weigh in?

[...]

CALLER: Hi, good morning. Yes, I think it does matter. The fact that he omitted it must mean that he feels that somebody is going to have an opinion, and President Bush certainly comes under scrutiny, so why shouldn’t he?

KILMEADE: Well, he didn’t admit it. I mean, that’s the issue is that –

CARLSON: Well, she said he didn’t.

KILMEADE: Yeah, says he didn’t come out, and say, look, I was — was over in Indonesia for five years was — or roughly five years, went to a madrassa. And there is some reports that Wahhabism was the curriculum there –

DOOCY: Yeah.

KILMEADE: — which is a problem because they start with “We hate America” and work their way back from there.

DOOCY: Well, the way it was framed in one of his biographies, he said quote, “I was sent first,” this is in Indonesia, “to a Catholic school and then to a predominantly Muslim school.” He doesn’t say, “I went to a madrassa, where they taught Wahhabism.” He simply says, “I went to a predominantly Muslim school.”

From the January 19, 2007, edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends:

DOOCY: And in today’s Insight Magazine, which is a publication of The Washington Times, they talk about how Barack Obama, raised as a Muslim by his stepfather, also who was a Muslim, eventually an atheist, in Jakarta, Indonesia. And, you know, what have we heard about — coming out of the madrassa schools over in Indonesia? This is huge.

KILMEADE: It’s big about his background. It’s also interesting. He had two best-selling biographies. It did not come up — was not directly addressed. He also — they also found out that some of the characters in his biographies are composite characters, which he did not say up front. And if you think that Barack Obama is under some scrutiny now, just picture what’s going to be happening if he continues to lead over in Iowa and in New Hampshire, like he’s doing in two of the polls.

Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200701300007

The Boston Channel:
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/politics/10836367/detail.html

Fox News Hypocrisy Over ABC’s Coverage Of President Obama

Fox News has spent most of this week crying about the coverage President Obama is getting from the media (I know, that’s not exactly breaking news). This is the same network that had practically a direct line to the White House (and tremendous access to President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney) … not too unlike the Batphone that allowed Batman and Commissioner Gordon to stay in direct contact.

Here is the summary of a Media Matters story:

SUMMARY: Fox News hosts and guests have criticized a scheduled ABC exclusive broadcast from the White House, but they failed to mention the extraordinary access Fox News had to President Bush and other officials, using those opportunities to lob softball questions and provide a platform for Bush administration talking points.

Media Matters has displayed some examples of the very positive treatment Bush and Cheney received from Fox News during their tenure.

Here is a sample that involves Bill O’Reilly:

  • On the October 16, 17, and 18, 2006, editions of The O’Reilly Factor, host Bill O’Reilly airedportions of his October 16 interview with Bush, which consisted of such “tough questions” as whether Hillary Clinton is “soft on terrorism,” whether “the anti-Bush press” is responsible for popular opposition to the war, and whether Bush was aware that critics “are trying to destroy you.” O’Reilly also asked Bush, “[Y]ou work hard, right?” In his introduction to the October 16 interview segment, O’Reilly stated that “[b]ecause every presidential interview is finite,” he would concentrate on “what is happening now.” Absent from the interview, O’Reilly stated, would be any questions that “look back,” because, “What good does it do to rehash WMDs?” According to the on-screen text, “Looking back doesn’t do anybody any good.”

Here is a more general Fox News sample:

  • On October 13, 2007, Fox News aired “Dick Cheney: No Retreat,” which was described as “an exclusive interview” with Cheney and teased as “a rare glimpse into the life of the vice president.”

Here is a sample involving Brett Baier:

  • On February 2 and February 3, 2008, Fox News aired a documentary titled “George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish,” after, as Fox itself described, “FOX News’ Bret Baier was granted unprecedented access by George W. Bush as the president begins the final year of his extraordinarily consequential tenure.”