You Won't Have Obama to Blame for Racial Sins

President Barack Obama

I doubt that anyone, even the most loyal fans of President Obama, will tell you that he has been what you would consider a perfect president. Of course, have we ever had a perfect president in the history of our union? Think about that and let me know, seriously.

I started to think about that as I read a CNN analysis piece that focused on race relations worsening during the Obama presidency. This headline, of course, popped up in my Facebook news feed (along with probably items from the hundreds of pages I have come to "like" during my time with a profile on the social media giant.

I digress.

Have race relations worsened under Barack Obama's presidency? A majority of those surveyed (CNN and Kaiser Family Foundation polling) said, "yes" -- rather emphatically so.

I get why some would feel this way. So, the poll suggested that "racial strife" is getting worse. Poll results further indicated that tensions among Americans of different ethnic/racial groups has increased. About 64 percent of Americans believe this to be true, including 67 percent of whites, 65 percent of blacks and 55 percent of Latinos.

Is it worse? I can appreciate how some people would see it that way. The real question is: Why is it worse (if that is what you believe)?

I do not believe it is worse. I believe that it is simply been brought from the closet to the front porch. Regardless of how you feel, the sentiments of the Tea Party and Black Lives Matter (not necessarily to equate the two, but to make a bigger point) were always there. Certain incidents, however, opened the door for individuals affiliated with these two movements to become more activist and vocal. For the Tea Party, you could argue it was the election of Barack Obama, the first black president. For Black Lives Matter, it appears to be incidents involving black people and the police.

The growing power of social media and video have given certain movements more power than they could have had in even the 1980s.

But, none of this is about Barack Obama. Feel free to try and ultimately fail to link it to the Obama presidency.

The headline of the article I linked, above, asks an important question about who will be blamed for race relations in the post-Obama era. It's a good question, indeed. Because, if you're foolish enough to believe racial issues will vanish once Obama leaves the presidency, then you were probably foolish enough to believe it started the day he became a viable presidential candidate and after he took office.

As Billy Joel once famously sang, "We didn't start the fire. It was always burning since the world's been turning ... No, we didn't light it though we tried to fight it."

Buchanan Goes On The Attack Against President Obama's Mother

Far-right bigot Pat Buchanan goes into the gutter for a pathetic attack of President Obama's mother.

Buchanan is disgraceful.

Simpson Calls Out Homophobia In Politics

This falls in the category of an "ouch" statement for the GOP as one of its own, Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, made some interesting statements on MSNBC as documented by Think Progress:

On MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews today, former Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY), co-chair of President Obama’s debt commission, railed against the social conservatives in the Republican party. He admonished male legislators for voting on abortion issues and “homophobes” like Rick Santorum who say “cruel, cruel things” about gays and lesbians:

SIMPSON: Who the hell is for abortion? I don’t know anybody running around with a sign that says, “Have an abortion! They’re wonderful!” They’re hideous, but they’re a deeply intimate and personal decision, andI don’t think men legislators should even vote on the issue.

Then you’ve got homosexuality, you’ve got Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. We have homophobes on our party. That’s disgusting to me. We’re all human beings. We’re all God’s children. Now if they’re going to get off on that stuff—Santorum has said some cruel things—cruel, cruel things—about homosexuals. Ask him about it; see if he attributes the cruelness of his remarks years ago. Foul.

Now if that’s the kind of guys that are going to be on my ticket, you know, it makes you sort out hard what Reagan said, you know, “Stick with your folks.” But, I’m not sticking with people who are homophobic, anti-women, moral values—while you’re diddling your secretary while you’re giving a speech on moral values? Come on, get off of it.

Mike Huckabee Proves He Really Is No Different Than A Glenn Beck When It Comes To Use Race To Incite Anti-Obama Hate

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This is an excellent discussion on MSNBC that gets to the roots of the racially charged comments being spewed by Mike Huckabee.

This shows a darker and more sinister side to Mike Huckabee than I ever thought existed. This is incredibly disappointing. I always knew he was a far-right guy, but this is a sad turn of events that exposes him as someone who is willing to use race to stir up his far-right base.

Mike Huckabee is now clearly in the category of an Andrew Breitbart and a Glenn Beck (maybe not to that extreme, but certainly comfortable on that wing of the political spectrum).

The Credibility Of Howard Kurtz Continues To Crumble

Howard Kurtz, who hosts the CNN show Reliable Sources (I continue to question the appropriate nature of that title some of the time), makes you scratch your head some Sundays in disbelief.

Frequently, Kurtz engages in what I will call phony impartiality. As part of this phony effort, Kurtz frequently covers for the bias of Fox News by ridiculously trying to portray MSNBC as the sort of liberal equivalent.

It is a weak equivalency that fails on so many levels. The reporting of MSNBC is not biased (which is more than can be said for Fox News). Fox News is biased nearly 24/7. MSNBC has a liberal prime-time lineup, but it also provides a substantial platform in the morning to Joe Scarborough, who clearly is a conservative. Fox News offers no comparable platform to any commentator who is even close to a liberal (or, for that matter, one who is even a moderate).



This video is laughable as the two talking heads pat each other on the back with their ridiculous comments about MSNBC being this liberal network (something that is false).

The sad thing is that Kurtz is showing his own bias on a show that is supposed to be about, in theory, holding the media accountable.

Who holds Howard Kurtz accountable for his baseless comment?

Strong Comments From Lawrence O'Donnell Regarding NRA's Wayne LaPierre

The Ed Show Points Out Fox News Bias

Here is a sample of some right-wing Fox News bias as described on MSNBC. The attacks on President Obama are, indeed, only beginning.

The noise coming from Fox News, and the attacks, only will intensify as the election of 2012 creeps closer and closer.

The mission of Fox News is clear: tear down Barack Obama at all costs.

The Idiocy Of Fox News, In Its Needless Defense Of Christmas, Attacks The NBA

First off, note the famed Fox/Fox News/Fox Nation tactic ... the screaming and controversial headline with the question mark (designed to absolve them of blame because they're only throwing the question out there).

Media Matters for America picked up on the latest target of our friends at Fox, self-appointed defenders of Christmas and enemies of all who differ: The National Basketball Association.

In its latest effort to defend Christmas (which really needs no defense as it is fairly widely celebrated worldwide), Fox, through its hateful, racist, bigoted, homophobic Fox Nation blog, has targeted the NBA.

Apparently, those scholars over at Fox are unaware that the NBA has long been playing games on Christmas (as do other sports).

To make its case, Fox went to a somewhat bizarre and definitely whiny rant from Los Angeles Lakers coach Phil Jackson (known for both) about having to "play" and "entertain" on Christmas:

The Fox Nation post linked to a story about Los Angeles Lakers' coach Phil Jackson's displeasure at having to work on Christmas Day. Jackson reportedly stated: "It's like Christian holidays don't mean anything to them anymore. ... We just go out and play and entertain the TV. It's really weird." But as the original ESPN.com article noted, the Lakers game this year will mark the 13th time in 15 seasons the team has played on Christmas Day. The Lakers have played on Christmas every year since 1999, when Jackson took over as head coach, and 36 times in all; that record is eclipsed only by the Knicks' 45 game appearances on that day. Not only that, but NBA basketball games have been played on Christmas since the league's inception.

Moreover, five NBA games were played on Christmas in 2008 and 2009 as well. Three were played on Christmas Day 2007, and at least a couple have been played on Christmas since 1991. And guess what else? Sixty-six games were played during Hanukkah this year, from December 1-8, and 47 games during Passover, from March 30 to April 5. I'm sure Fox can do the math on how many games were played this year during Muslim holidays.

Oh, and incidentally, the 3D version of Jack Black's Gulliver's Travels hits theaters nationwide on Christmas Day. The movie will be released by 20th Century Fox (a News Corp. subsidiary, like Fox News). If the NBA is engaged in a "War on Christmas," isn't Fox?

This is yet another misguided effort on the part of the idiots at Fox, who obviously had to reach far to find some way to show Christmas being attacked.

Fox, in typical fashion, took Jackson's words and turned them into an all-out NBA attack sneak launched on Christmas and Christianity.

Is that an NBA attack on Christianity? No.

Is that an NBA attack on Christmas? No.

Is this another pathetic right-wing, made-up Fox story? Yes.

Brian Kilmeade Of Fox News Proves To Be An Idiot Of Epic Proportions

Keith Olbermann has it right with this moron Brian Kilmeade of Fox News.

Fox News Called Out For What It Is: A Mouthpiece For Republican Party

Fox News has always been bias (as I've written here numerous times ... obviously), but Nathan Daschle (Democratic Governors Association) is correct in that now the network is just flat out funding the Republican efforts (specifically the Republican Governors Association) to defeat Democrats.

Again, Fox News is not even faking their far-right bias. The network is disgraceful as proven by its incredible silence.

Strangely enough, News Corp/Fox News is actually paying the Republicans for the rights to promote the GOP.

Eric Boehlert, of Media Matters, is right on the money with his analysis.

Black People Rejecting Fox News And Its Divisive Messages

The ultra conservative Fox News Channel is so quick to brag about its precious ratings at every turn, but some aspects of the network's ratings are quite disturbing according to an article published by the Huffington Post which cites the New York Times.

The disturbing numbers, if true, are probably not all that surprising when you think of how hostile Fox News, with its 24/7 cycle of conservative commentary masquerading as news, has been, historically, toward black people and issues of importance to black people.

I know, you're stunned by that news.

From the Huffington Post:

Fox News may be the undisputed ratings champion in cable news, but not among black viewers.

The New York Times' Brian Stelter tweeted that, according to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News has averaged just 29,000 black viewers in primetime so far this television season (9/09-7/10). That represents just 1.38% of its 2.102 million total viewer audience.

CNN and MSNBC, meanwhile, both have far more black viewers, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of their overall audiences.

MSNBC has averaged 145,000 black viewers, representing 19.3% of its 751,000 total viewer audience.

CNN has averaged 134,000 black viewers, representing 20.7% of its 648,000 total viewer audience.

Is anyone really surprised that black people appear to be rejecting the messages of Fox News? Fox News is getting its ratings, but is doing it by racially dividing this country.

These ratings for Fox News are indicative of a bigger problem for Fox News (the fact that its messages tend to be rejected by a large number of people of color).

Since Fox News is in essence the public relations firm of the Republican party, eventually this trend will spell doom for the GOP if it does not broaden its political base (beyond just whites ... and particularly conservative whites).

Rather Than Blog About Bill O'Reilly's Big Healthcare Lie, I Will Let Keith Olbermann Do The Work

I was going to write an extended blog about Bill O'Reilly's flat-out lie that no one on Fox News talked about how you could go to jail for not buying into health insurance.

This lie is so bad it almost makes you question O'Reilly's mental stability.

Keith Olbermann, of MSNBC, says it best right here: Media Matters for America

CNN Mischaracterized As A 'Liberal Media Outlet' On Booker Rising

The anatomy of a misguided statement from the Booker Rising blog:

Asks liberal media outlet CNN, about alleged racial insensitivity. Included in its article are two black conservative Republicans, who are no strangers to regular Booker Rising readers. "Lenny McCallister is African-American, a Tea Party member and a conservative Republican. He says Republicans 'have to speak out against this stuff because it does not fit our principles, morals or values. At the same time we cannot alienate the most active aspects of the conservative base at this time.' He’s calling on conservatives to help the Republican Party walk that tightrope in a way they did not in 2009."

CNN is far from a liberal media outlet. In fact, CNN at times bends over backward to accommodate guests with a variety of opinions and bends over backward to balance its discussion panels.

To refer to CNN as a "liberal media outlet" as the blog Booker Rising did is ridiculous. It seems almost a spiteful reply to the obvious fact that Fox News is a right-wing outlet (to be fair: MSNBC's prime-time commentators are to the left).

NRCC Words Certainly Are Racially Tinged In Attacking Rep. Charlie Rangel

The National Republican Congressional Committee is fooling no one with its weakly disguised racial attack on New York Congressman Charlie Rangel.

Rangel, obviously, is in major hot water these days. And, it’s clear that his troubles feel like ideal ammunition for Republicans to use as they launch an attack.

But, as MSNBC’s David Shuster points out, there seemed to be a racial motivation in a recent attack on Rangel by the NRCC.

Here is the transcript from MSNBC as posted by the right-wing outfit NewsBusters:

SHUSTER: I want to ask you about some of the criticism of Governor Paterson, particularly the National Republican Campaign Committee. They issued a very provocative press release over the weekend. They attacked Charlie Rangel. And we mentioned Charlie Rangel and David Paterson and the problems in New York. But, they mention Charlie Rangel as “the crooked Harlem Democrat.” They could have called him the crooked, New York Democrat. They could have called him a crooked Democrat. Why crooked Harlem Democrat? And did you see that as being racially tinged?

DOUG WILDER (former governor of Virginia): Well, this isn’t the first time that these people have reached beyond and over the top. Look at the ad that was being run by the Finance Committee, so-called Finance Committee in the Republican National Committee, depicting the President in the most unflattering capacity that they did showing his picture in grease paint, et cetera. You’re absolutely right. Were they trying to send that message? Was it racially tinged or not is not the issue. The issue is, could it be interpreted that way? And if it could be interpreted that way, don’t do it. You can say any number of things about what he’s done without having to it even have the inference of race at all.

SHUSTER: Former Virginia Governor Doug Wilder, thank you for joining us today. Nice to see you.

Here is one excerpt from a story posted on the NRCC Web site:

Notoriously corrupt Harlem Democrat Charlie Rangel’s recent admonishment by the House Ethics Committee has caused a stir among the nervous House Democrats who have accepted the Ways and Means Chairman’s tainted campaign contributions. Now, Democrats like Michael Arcuri have found themselves in the eye of an ethical storm. Not only has Arcuri accepted $14,000 in dirty campaign funds, but he has twice voted to sweep his party’s corruption problems under the rug by letting Rangel off the hook. With House Democrats quickly abandoning the embattled chairman, will Arcuri finally follow suit?

Here is the other excerpt from the same NRCC story posted on its Web site:

“Charlie Rangel has been embroiled in an ethical storm for years, but that hasn’t stopped Michael Arcuri from lining his campaign coffers with his tainted money,” said NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain. “Now that Rangel has finally been busted for his ethical wrongdoings, Arcuri has egg on his face for repeatedly protecting the embattled chairman. After accepting $14,000 in tainted campaign donations from the Harlem Democrat and twice voting to let him off the hook, Arcuri is tied to this scandal whether he likes it or not. Will Arcuri try to salvage what’s left of his political career and finally abandon Rangel and his campaign money?”

Are you still having a hard time with accusations of an element of race in these charges?

If Republicans want to call him crooked … whatever. But, the emphasis on Harlem (with the racial baggage that comes with it) is difficult to ignore.

Media Matters for America counters the expected argument of “what’s wrong with calling him a ‘corrupt Harlem Democrat?’”

Here is part of the counter by MMA:

This NRCC press release criticizing Rep. Suzanne Kosmas doesn’t refer to her as a “New Smyrna Beach Democrat.” This one criticizing Rep. Michael McMahon for not calling for Rangel’s resignation refers to McMahon as a “New York Democrat” rather than a “Staten Island Democrat” — even as it calls Rangel a “Harlem Democrat.” This release twice calls Rangel a “Harlem Democrat,” but this one about Earl Pomeroy doesn’t say anything about a “Bismark Democrat,” and so on.

It does make you wonder what was in the hearts and souls of the people who wrote and approved that NRCC press release.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “I forgot he was black tonight for an hour”

MSNBC host and commentator Chris Matthews has a habit of making comments that make you shake your head in disbelief.

Matthews offered yet another in regard to President Obama’s State of the Union speech:

MATTHEWS: You know, I was trying to think about who he was tonight, and it’s interesting: He is post-racial by all appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he’s gone a long way to become a leader of this country and passed so much history in just a year or two. I mean, it’s something we don’t even think about.

I was watching, I said, Wait a minute, he’s an African-American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is President of the United States and we’ve completely forgotten that tonight — completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don’t think terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard — a very subtle fact. It’s so hard to even talk about; maybe I shouldn’t talk about it, but I am.

Well, Chris, we almost forgot how foolish you can be, but then you typically bring us back to reality.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/27/matthews-obama-black/

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201001270078

Michael Steele To Sen. Harry Reid: Check Yo Self!

“Money” Mike Steele, the Republican National Committee’s chairman and leader of the right-wing’s reluctant exploration of hip hop culture, was back on the mic again. This time, he was in a conversation on an MSNBC show and last seen essentially running and screaming away from Donny Deutsch, who called out Steele for his comments directed at Sen. Harry Reid. Steele’s comments were part of an orchestrated effort to play the so-called race card while accusing Democrats of playing the so-called race card. It is, to say the very least, a very interesting strategy.

Here is an excerpt from a Think Progress story that features strong comments from Hip Hop Mike (as The Field Negro aptly calls him):

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, co-host Mika Brzezinski called Reid’s remarks “unfortunate.” Her guest, RNC Chairman Michael Steele, said Reid needs to “check himself” and ripped him for being “out of touch,” “clueless,” and “ignorant.”

Wow, Hip Hop Mike was setting it off.

Those are quite the strong comments, including, ”check himself?” It seems Hip Hop Mike is at it again trying to fire up his crew with some straight-up off-the-hook comments.

I thought we squashed these beefs with 2Pac and Biggie.

Check out these thoughtful, scholarly and measured responses from RNC Chairman Michael Steele:

DEUTSCH: I’m still trying to understand why the analogies he’s made are wrong. Obviously, the issue here is that any great change throughout history has the naysayers saying “it’s not time, it’s not time.” So why was that an irrelevant analogy?

STEELE: I won’t even dignify that with a response.

DEUTSCH: What do you mean, dignify? It’s a question, it’s a genuine question.

STEELE: Next question.

DEUTSCH: It’s a genuine question.

STEELE: Next question. Come on. I’m sorry, sir. I’m not going to sit here and say it’s an appropriate comparison to slavery.

DEUTSCH: He’s not. He’s comparing it to dramatic change, and the naysayers to change.

STEELE: Whatever, whatever. Next question.

DEUTSCH: That’s a great response. Very, very intelligent, brave response.

STEELE: It is. As was your question.

Hip Hop Mike went a little too far back in his youth… back to like kindergarten with his responses. Come on, Hip Hop Mike. It’s time to grow up and not running screaming from debate in a childish display of weakness.

Hip Hop Mike got punked by Donny Deutsch.

What would the homies think?

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/12/09/steele-deutsch-questions/

Chris Matthews Apologizes For Irresponsible Comment About President Obama, West Point

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who hosts “Hardball” on the network, made what a large number of people considered to be a highly offensive and inexplicable statement about President Obama’s speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Matthews said that the president went into “the enemy camp” for his speech at West Point. Obviously, you don’t need advanced college degrees to know and see the offensive nature of such a statement. Matthews, rightly, came under fire for those comments.

Here is what Matthews originally said:

MATTHEWS: I didn’t see much excitement. But among the older people there, I saw, if not resentment, skepticism. I didn’t see a lot of warmth in that crowd out there that the President chose to address tonight and I thought that was interesting. He went to maybe the enemy camp tonight to make his case. I mean, that’s where Paul Wolfowitz used to write speeches for, back in the old Bush days. That’s where he went to rabble rouse the ‘we’re going to democratize the world’ campaign back in ‘02. So, I thought it was a strange venue.

That is reprehensible and just plain stupid. At the very least, it was a poor choice of words.

Wednesday night, Matthews was back on the air to issue what could arguably be considered an apology:

MATTHEWS: But first. I’ve gotten some very tough calls from parents of cadets and from former cadets at West Point and about my saying last night that the President going to speak up there to maybe the “enemy camp.” I was talking about the skepticism I saw on the faces in the crowd as President Obama spoke also of course about how West Point was where President Bush went in 2002 to make his most hawkish speech before the Iraq war.

Now I’ve heard too many politicians say things like, “oh that was taken out context” to explain something they wish they hadn’t said let me just say to the cadets, their parents, former cadets and everyone who cares about this country and those who defend it: I used the wrong words and worse than that I said something that is just not right and for that I deeply apologize.

As those who watch me regularly probably got right away, my point was that the military up at West Point was probably a skeptical audience for President Obama given his strong position against the war in Iraq and generally more dovish image. I was wrong to make that conclusion based on the lack of applause or apparent enthusiasm in the ranks of officers and cadets last night. Cadets, one former cadet and a friend of mine just told me, aren’t supposed to show that kind of reaction to a speaker.

He, a former cadet, reminded me that soldiers, including those now in training to face the enemy, want wars to be fought effectively and ended as quickly as possible. I had no reason to assume that the cadets at West Point or their officers who were present last night are more hawkish than the president. People who have watched me over the years know, I think, of my strong devotion to this country and strong gratitude toward those who serve in the military. It’s because our military is so good and true I want the civilians that make the policies and set the missions to get them right, in this country’s best possible interest. And by the way, it’s something we’re allowed to argue about in this country. Whenever I meet someone with a service record I always say, “thank you for your service.” They know I say it, and I hope they know I mean it.

It’s good that Chris Matthews apologized for his comments. He could have done what Bill O’Reilly would do and make excuses, blame the victims and bring on someone like Juan Williams to defend him against a charge. Fortunately, Matthews did not do that and issued a solid apology for his words.

First For President Barack Obama: Conservatives Act Like He Is First Leader To Lobby For Olympics

As we know all too well, Barack Obama is considered the first black president (the first non-white male) of the United States of America. It was a historic first, but it appears some conservatives do not think it was the last historic first for the new president. It seems many conservatives are just plain up in arms over the belief Barack Obama now has become (are you ready for this?) the first president to ever go overseas and lobby to host the Olympics.

I mean … surely no other president or leader of a nation has done that before. Perhaps conservatives see this as another case of President Obama getting uppity and acting like he is … the president? Hmm. What could be going through this man’s mind … acting like he is president of the United States of America and fighting for the people of the nation he leads.

From Think Progress:

Brazil, Spain, and Japan — the other three 2016 finalists — all sent their country’s leaders to Copenhagen, as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow pointed out on NBC’s Meet the Press today. Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks said that he was proud Obama had “put his country ahead of his own personal prestige”:

MADDOW: In 2012, London got the Olympics after Blair tried for them. In 2014, Russia got them after Putin tried for them, and in 2016, all four finalists sent their head of government or head of state to make the argument. Obama did nothing unreasonable, and it would have been a shock if Chicago won. For them to be cheering America’s loss here on the right, I think is sort of disgusting. [...]

BROOKS: Nonetheless, I have to say, I’m with Obama on this. He took a risk, he comes away somewhat humiliated, but he took a risk for his town, he took a risk for his country, he put his country ahead of his own personal prestige, and he lost one. I actually don’t mind it. I think he was all right on this.

We should be all proud of the work so many people from the U.S. Olympic Committee and elsewhere did to try and bring the Olympics of 2016 to the U.S. Obviously, a lot of conservatives were rooting against the U.S., but the greatness of the country will win out over the self-interested conservatives who seem only believe strongly in patriotism when a Republican is in the White House.

Congratulations to Brazil, but shame on those in the U.S. who rooted against their country due largely to political bias.

Republican To Republican … JoeScarborough Calls Out Tim Pawlenty On Death Panel Claim

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican who is fighting to keep himself in the national spotlight for a possible run at the White House in 2012, looked downright pathetic while interviewed by a fellow Republican, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. The subject was this ridiculous notion of so-called death panels that far-right conservatives have been aggressively pushing. This partisan showing will come back to haunt him if he does attempt to put together a campaign for the White House. He is going to be called out for using the politics of fear and distortion to campaign against health care. Scarborough appropriately spanked Pawlenty for these scare tactics about death panels and repeatedly tried to get the governor to explain where in the bill death panels were talked about. Then, Pawlenty (blindly partisan) was pretty much schooled by Scarborough on the differences between a so-called death panel (a scare tactic) and end-of-life counseling and had to concede that there is really no death panel stuff in this proposed legislation (although he does try to continue to imply there is something indirect … still a scare tactic).

Media Matters for America:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909110004

Non-Whites Tend To Reject Fox News

Reading a story published by the Washington Independent confirms what will likely not be a big shock to a whole lot of people who follow much of what is going on with cable news these days. Fox News performs well as it draws nearly all Republicans/conservatives to its right-leaning broadcasts. Left-leaning MSNBC, as one might expect, runs strong with liberals. CNN tends to be more popular with those who consider themselves independent. I would imagine CNN also gets some conservatives and some liberals who want a bit of a break from the more partisan approach to news that is popular on Fox News and MSNBC.

But, the Washington Independent article opens up a different kind of argument as it discusses who are the viewers who gravitate toward Fox News. Those who appreciate Fox News most tend to be white, Southern and Republican.

The biggest swing region in the poll? The South. In Southern states, 46 percent of viewers say that Fox News is “extremely reliable” or “reliable.” Only 6 percent of them say that of MSNBC, compared to 26 percent who say it of CNN, a huge shift from the days when CNN was derided as the “Communist/Clinton News Network.” And non-white viewers really don’t like Fox. Only 5 percent of African-Americans, 11 percent of Hispanics, and 8 percent of other minorities consider the network reliable, while a majority of every one of those groups trusts CNN and sizable pluralities trust MSNBC.

Interestingly, this research sows that only five percent of blacks, 11 percent of Latinos and eight percent of other minorities consider Fox News “reliable” with respect to its coverage and commentary. Frankly, it surprises me that the number is even that high for Fox News.