Question for MSNBC’s Progressive Hosts re. The Network’s In-House Bigot: Pat Buchanan
July 27, 2011 No CommentMarkos tweets : MSNBC’s Phil Griffin loves having a white supremacist at the office. t.co/jgLvxXO What has Markos so fired up. Oh, it is about Pat Buchanan’s defense of Norway’s alleged right wing terrorist Anders Behring Breivik’s disgusting acts of violence. Yes, Buchanan went there : As for a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries, on this one, Breivik may be right. Jamo has a good post on MMFA pointing out how this is not the fast time Buchanan has emerged as “ the Devil’s advocate .” We just flagged MSNBC few weeks ago for their serious Buchanan problem for his appalling vitriol directed at supporter of same sex marriage . Yet as Markos observes : This stuff has a home on the fever swamps of the right. Remember, this is an ideology that despises multiculturalism, thinks torture is okay, and “empathy” is a dirty word. And if you don’t like it, well, they have lots of guns. So much so, that the country literally ran out of ammunition to sell after Obama was elected in 2008. Yet rather than be shunned from polite circles, he’s been given a permanent cot in the MSNBC green room. Apparently, MSNBC President Phil Griffin loves having a white supremacist around the office. If MSNBC bosses like Phil Griffin had any sense of moral decency Buchanan would no longer be on their payroll. The questions progressives should ask pose to other progressives who have shows on MSNBC: are they OKAY with having a white supremacist walking around in MSNBC? Are they going to going remain quiet if MSNBC does nothing to hold this individual accountable? (My twitter feed is @murshedz)
Continue reading …Media Ignore Alarmist Liberal Ad Warning Kids Will Die if Congress Trims EPA Budget
July 26, 2011 No CommentBroadcast and cable networks have failed to cover a liberal interest group's exploitative TV spot claiming any cuts to the EPA would be equivalent to spoon-feeding toxic particles to infants, even though the proposed cuts would only pare back funding to pre-recession levels. The video, released in March amid debates in Congress to curtail the EPA's regulatory authority, has since re-emerged as a commercial on MSNBC. While depicting an adult feeding a small child helpings of baby food from jars labeled dioxin, mercury, and arsenic, a narrator frets: ” If the EPA wasn't cleaning millions of toxic particles out of the air, they'd be going, well, somewhere else…Protect the EPA. Protect our kids .” Despite the impression left by American Family Voices, the group responsible for the advertisement, that cuts to the EPA would kill children, the numbers tell a different story. In February, President Barack Obama proposed an FY 2012 budget of $8.9 billion for the EPA. In April, House Republicans passed a budget (the Ryan Plan) that would trim EPA funding to 2008 levels, or approximately $7.5 billion . If baby food wasn't contaminated with dangerous amounts of arsenic in 2008, scaling back EPA funding to those levels in 2012 could hardly be construed as fatal to infants. Yet the media are allowing American Family Voices (AFV) to get away with such hyperbole and MSNBC is pocketing the ad revenue without scrutinizing the spot on any of its news programs. AFV has a history of advancing liberal causes on a wide range of consumer issues. Shortly after Mike Lux, president of Progressive Strategies, a liberal political consulting firm, founded AFV in 2000, the group started assaulting President George W Bush with allegations of corporate corruption. “I was outraged at the idea that Bush was going to do a big speech and pound his chest and say he is in favor of corporate responsibility when he is closer to the corporate world than any president since Ronald Reagan,” accused Lux, a former aide to President Clinton. AFV ran TV ads in 2002 claiming, “Bush played a key role at Harken Energy – they used Enron-style accounting to hide losses.” Since then, according to AFV's website , the group has focused on railroading the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, accusing then-Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) of collaborating with Tom DeLay in a money-laundering scheme, and supporting the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Just like AFV has a history of attacking conservative politicians and promoting liberal policies, the media have a history of ignoring controversial liberal political ads. Back in May, ABC, MSNBC, and CNN, among others, avoided covering – for as long as they could – the Agenda Project's offensive Medicare video showing a Republican politician steering grandma and her wheelchair off a cliff. –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
Continue reading …Netflix users are so unhappy about the company’s plan to raise prices and separate DVD subscriptions from streaming packages that up to 15% are planning to ditch the service entirely, a survey finds. As many as 2.5 million dual-service subscribers are heading for the door, reports MSNBC . Those staying…
Continue reading …Voters in America’s most populous state are likely to find the question of marijuana legalization on their ballots again next year. Supporters of the “Regulate Marijuana Like Wine” initiative have been given permission to start circulating petitions to get the measure on ballots next year, AP reports. The measure would…
Continue reading …Mika Brzezinski: Why Can’t Republicans ‘Think Outside the Box for the Good of the Country?’
July 25, 2011 No Comment
MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski asked the co-host of “Morning Joe” Monday if Republicans holding the line on the debt ceiling are “so stuck to their little contract and the Tea Party that they cannot even think outside the box for the good of the country.” Somewhat less surprising, Joe Scarborough gave a pretty good answer (video follows with transcript and commentary): MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Usually you’re good at seeing someone’s angle. Like you know what their angle is. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh, I see their angle. BRZEZINSKI: What’s the angle here? Who’s, I don’t get it. SCARBOROUGH: They believe. I mean, these Republicans believe this is the only opportunity to… BRZEZINSKI: Are they so stuck to their little contract and the Tea Party that they cannot even think outside the box for the good of the country? Pretty pathetic question from Brzezinski, although not at all surprising given her extreme liberal bias. Many of these newly-elected Tea Party Congressmen and women left successful careers to fight for the good of the country. Mortgaging our children and grandchildren's future with piles of debt that will inevitably drown the nation's economy is not for the good of the country. What's in the country's best interest now is for spending to be restrained so that America can pay its bills over the long haul while retaining its AAA credit rating. The suggestion that right-thinking Republicans at this moment in history are doing anything that isn't for the good of the country requires what Hillary Clinton called a willing suspension of disbelief. Fortunately for viewers, Scarborough – when he was finally given a chance to answer – did a pretty good job: SCARBOROUGH: Can I finish? BRZEZINSKI: Seriously. SCARBOROUGH: Can I finish? BRZEZINSKI: Sorry. SCARBOROUGH: You ask a question, I’m going to finish. BRZEZINSKI: Sorry. SCARBOROUGH: No, the, they understand one thing. BRZEZINSKI: Alright, what do they understand? SCARBOROUGH: They’re dead right about this. This is their best chance for quite some time to actually get real debt savings. And I think they’re concerned like I would be very concerned right now that there’s going to be fuzzy math in these deals, that Barack Obama’s not going to be serious about entitlement reform. Indeed. Such concern is magnified by what happened in December when a budget agreement was made with spending cuts that in the end were far less than advertised. Having witnessed that seven months ago, fiscally conservative Republicans are saying “No mas,” and are finally holding the line. Whether or not Brzezinki understands this, it is exclusively for the good of the country. If Mika and her ilk were at all honest about this current impasse, they'd realize the President's insistance that any deal carry the debt ceiling into 2013 has nothing to do with the country's best interest. This is exclusively political, and a desire on the part of the current White House resident to not have to address this issue in his reelection year. If Obama was a Republican preventing a short-term fix to this problem exclusively for his own political benefit, Brzezinski and her colleagues would be absolutely skewering him for not thinking “outside the box for the good of the country.” Why the double standard, Mika?
Continue reading …MSNBCs Wolffe Suggests Obama Reasonable & Grownup, GOP Irresponsible Children
July 24, 2011 No Comment
Continue reading …
Well, Cenk Uygur is out and Al Sharpton is in for the 6pm eastern time slot at MSNBC and Uygur explained on You Tube why he didn’t take the deal MSNBC offered him for a weekend time slot with twice the money he was being paid for his weekday show instead. Bottom line is that he felt some pressure not to be too hard on the Obama administration and they said they were having trouble booking guests because they thought he was being too aggressive with them and didn’t like the tone of some of his interviews. Cenk had nothing but praise for some of his fellow prime time hosts on MSNBC and expressed his gratitude for being given the opportunity to host during the time he had on the air there, and thanked his online viewers of his radio show for giving him that opportunity in the first place to even get a chance to host at MSNBC. That said, he didn’t want to take a diminished role at the network even if it did mean more money and remain silent about why they were unhappy with his show, despite the fact that it was doing pretty well in the demo they all claim to care about, which is the adults 25-54 demo. Personally, I’m sad to see Cenk leave MSNBC because I like him and have actually talked to him a few times when Video Cafe was first being added to the site here at C&L about featuring some of his Young Turks segments. He’s a friend of John’s and a very nice person and I’m sorry he’s going to be losing that spotlight on MSNBC just as I would be about any liberal or progressive voice we’ve got out there in the corporate media whether I agree with everything that they say or not. We don’t have nearly enough of them to counter all of the wingnut b.s. that makes up the majority of our “news” coverage. That said, I think the Rev. Al Sharpton will continue to do a very good job as a wingnut slayer in his place over at MSNBC. I think the sad thing is, Cenk was never really allowed to do his own show at MSNBC. If he had his druthers, I believe there’s no way in hell Michael Steele and Ed Rendell and a host of other guests he was probably forced to have on there would have been any regular contributors to his show. I think he described it pretty well when he said that commenters said he looked like a lion on his radio show and a lion at the zoo on MSNBC. He talked about saying he didn’t want to be constrained any more with how he responded to guests on his show and made a decision not to hold back with criticisms some time back, but that doesn’t account for the fact that he probably had zero editorial control over who his guests were in the first place as he does on his radio/Internet show, The Young Turks. I honestly think Cenk would be a better fit for Current TV and what Olbermann is trying to do with that network instead. I’ve read that Keith wants to turn them into a news network with more people hosting than himself and since that time, I’ve noticed MSNBC suddenly giving more liberals either guest spots or guest hosting spots or new contracts. We can add to that list Chris Hayes, who I read got a contract but have no idea what it entails, now Al Sharpton who’s going to get Cenk’s spot, and I’ve seen Ezra Klein filling in for Martin Bashir. It made me wonder if MSNBC was trying to get some potential liberal contributors on contract before Current TV has a chance to hire them. I would not be shocked to see either Cenk Uygur or David Shuster who’s already filled in for Keith Olbermann wind up with shows at Current TV and there’s a long list of others that, if I had my druthers, I’d love to see hired there as well if they decided to turn Current TV into a 24/7 news network actually hosted by all liberals who don’t have corporate America breathing down their neck and don’t feel constrained to do the usual false equivalencies and we’ve got to represent both sides even if one side is insane and lying with who they book as guests and constraining them with what they say if they have criticisms of anyone in government. UPDATE: Looks like Cenk is going to be one of Keith’s guests on Countdown tonight . Here’s part two of Cenk’s response on his decision to leave MSNBC rather than take the offer they made him.
Continue reading …PieGate: MSNBCer Floats Conspiracy Theory Murdoch Staged Pie Throwing Incident
July 21, 2011 No Comment
The media's attention on Rupert Murdoch and the British hacking scandal hit a new low Thursday. Filling in for MSNBC's Chris Matthews, Michael Smerconish finished “Hardball” with a segment floating the conspiracy theory that Rupert Murdoch staged Tuesday's Parliamentary pie throwing incident to distract everyone's attention from his testimony (transcript follows with commentary, video pending): MICHAEL SMERCONISH: Allow me to share a lingering thought about what happened in the U.K. with the Tuesday testimony of Rupert and James Murdoch. I’m a bit of a cynic. I’m not a conspiracy guy. I think Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone. I abhor those who float that notion that 9/11 was an inside job. And I lamented the closing of a chapter today in our space program because I know man has walked on the moon. Having said this, I’m having some doubts about the heroic efforts of Rupert Murdoch’s wife to thwart the pie thrower. Now think about it. The whole hearing concerned media manipulation. Parliamentarians were gathered to learn what the Murdochs knew about the hacking and when they knew it. And the testimony didn’t go so well. Both Rupert and James Murdoch may have apologized repeatedly, but steadfastly refused to take the blame. But the story making the most news? It’s the pie and the woman who stopped its delivery. Instead of questions about the veracity of the Murdochs’ testimony, there’s endless chatter about how a man with a checkered shirt approached Murdoch with a foam pie to slam into his face only to have Murdoch’s spry wife lunge toward the attacker and thwart his attempt to harm her husband. I keep seeing headlines like, “Crouching Tiger, Flying Murdoch,” and what’s the accompanying narrative? “Don’t mess with Wendi Deng, Murdoch’s 43-year-old, Chinese-born wife.” So, what should have been a post mortem analysis of the testimony of two media moguls has now been obscured by laudatory coverage of Mrs. Murdoch. And what do we know of the pie thrower? Well, his name is Jonnie Marbles. Jonnie Marbles? I may have lost mine, but come on. This activist and comedian whose real name is Jonathan May-Bowles was somehow able to evade the security of Parliament with his pie and then get within inches of Murdoch? Let me remind you that News of the World once set up Formula One President Max Mosley with prostitutes on their payroll leading to that unforgettable headline, “F1 Boss Has Sick Nazi Orgy With Five Hookers.” What’s a foam pie compared to five prostitutes with cameras in their bras? So now the attention is all on the pie and especially on Murdoch’s half his age wife Wendi Deng. I’m calling it PieGate. I’m wondering what did Wendi Deng know and when did she know it? So, Murdoch concocted a plan where he would be humiliated by getting a pie thrown in his face while testifying before Parliament hoping this would distract everyone from what was said during the proceeding. And this is what MSNBC feels is suitable substitute for what Matthews does five days a week. I guess the joke's on them because they're right.
Continue reading …Video Proves Chris Matthews Totally Distorted Ronald Reagan’s Position on Taxes
July 21, 2011 No Comment
On Wednesday's Hardball , Chris Matthews took a clip from a 24 year-old Ronald Reagan press conference and disingenuously passed it off as the Republican's take on “raising taxes to deal with the ballooning deficit.” Matthew's version was out of context and video from October 22, 1987 proves it. [See below for video. MP3 audio here .] After playing a snippet of Reagan that had nothing to do with taxes, Matthews touted, “That was, of course, the great Ronald Reagan in his own words back in October of 1987 about raising taxes to deal with the ballooning deficit.” The host continued, “Well today, many Democrats in Congress have picked up on Reagan's comments about raising taxes and are using the most revered of Republican' s words against his own party.” What did Reagan actually say on October 22, 1987? He asserted: RONALD REAGAN: …The spending is roughly 23 to 24 percent. So that it is in – it is what is increasing, while revenues are staying proportionately the same and what would be the proper amount they should – that we should be taking from the private sector. And I think that this is something we have to consider, if we're going to maintain prosperity. I will say this, with regard to taxes or sources of revenue: we must not do something that has an adverse affect – affect – on the economy. … But I'm going to tell you, I have not changed my opinion about ever accepting a tax that will have a deleterious effect on the economy, and most tax increases do. Taxing is not the policy, or the problem, with the deficit. The deficit is due to too much spending. Every dollar of increased revenue since 1980 – and that means including our tax cuts -every dollar of increased revenue has been matched by a dollar and a quarter of increased spending. Matthews was not being honest with his audience by trying to portay his brief clip as “the most revered of Republican' s words against his own party.”
Continue reading …Is the White House Programming a News Channel? Host Who Was Most Critical of Obama Says Head of MSNBC Removed Him Because Washington Didn‘t Like His ’Tone’
July 21, 2011 No Comment
Cenk Uygur hosted a prime-time show on the MSNBC after the Keith Olbermann firing resulted in a rearrangement of the prime time lineup. Uygur filled the 6 p.m. Eastern slot vacated by Ed Schultz since late January. In the video Uygur explains he turned down a significantly larger MSNBC contract for a much smaller role because he was told by the MSNBC president that the decision to remove him from primetime… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : The Blaze Discovery Date : 21/07/2011 14:22 Number of articles : 4
Continue reading …