Did Someone Say Ratings?

One can almost smell O'Reilly's Pavlovian response to hot-button issues. If he thinks that it will get more people to watch him, and facts be damned, he will exploit, spin, and offer up his own particular style of "reporting" in order to keep something alive for as long as he can. The dead horse meme almost doesn't apply to O'Reilly, since his ability to keep something going has reached new and obsured lows.

You can always tell when Bill doesn't want any opposition on an issue by the guests that he has on to discuss whatever topic he's latched onto at the time. When it's Hillary Clinton, he has on Dick Morris. And, when it's anything media related, he has on Bernard Goldberg to offer up some verbal ego massaging.

So when it came time to discuss the "birther" nonsense, Goldberg was back to offer his own brand of idiotic analysis.




So if Dobb's is peddling such ratings poison with this manufactured controversy, then why does it look like O'Reilly is going to have Dobbs on his program?

After slamming the birthers story during Monday's show (though defending Dobbs' right to free speech), O'Reilly wants Dobbs to join him on the O'Reilly Factor. Last night, after a segment answering viewers' questions on birthers, O'Reilly added: "By the way I think we're going to have Lou Dobbs on this program tomorrow. That should be interesting."

I hardly believe that O'Reilly is merely championing Dobbs' right to free speech, as this is shaping up to be a conservative firestorm of an issue and O'Reilly, with complete disregard to the fact that his own network is perpetuating this myth as gospel-truth, thinks he has something to gain from jumping into the fray.

And to add another element to this equation, if one is to believe O'Reilly and Goldberg's preposterous theory that the "birther" story is somehow being maintained by the Obama administration, then why is O'Reilly willing to continue talking about it?

Even if the later were true, that elements within the Obama White House were keeping this story going in order to further damage the conservative movement, do you really think that's going to stop O'Reilly from talking about it if it will make his numbers look better?

"Battleship" Bernie Is Ready To Throw Down!

The bulk of lunatic-fringe, conservative writers are laughable - at best.

Bernie Goldberg is a catagory all his own.

His latest tome of nonsense is entitled "A Slobbering Love Afair". It is intended to be about the media's "fascination" with Obama. To be fair, I haven't read it. However, there are already mentions of "artistic liberties" that Goldberg has taken with quotes in order to solidify what is most like an embarassingly flacid thesis.

I have read his previous work. And, if "Slobbering" is anything like it, I'm sure that it will be easy to pick apart and mock.

But now, on to the good stuff.

Recently, Goldberg was on O'Reilly's program - as Bernie loves to ride on Bill's coattails as much as he possibly can - and they were discussing the previous guest, Media Matters, and Bill's bash of Helen Thomas.



Does O'Reilly really believe that George Soros is behind everything?

He does give conspiracy theory a whole new glow, doensn't he.

Oh, and Goldberg thinks that people that don't buy into his poorly constructed schtick are "humorless". Well, I do find humor in Bernie trying to make a serious point and coming off like a rank amateur who couldn't even hold a job at CBS.

But, there was another side to this night that was mentioned by David Neiwert of Crooks and Liars.

The Go-Cheney-Yourself approach to discourse is no doubt what wins Bernie Goldberg so many fans on the right who snap up his books and hang on his every misbegotten word.

Including, it's quite clear, that fellow who last July walked into that Unitarian church in Knoxville and started shooting: Jim David Adkisson.

The killers manifesto reads:

This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn't get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered. I hope others do the same. It's the only way we can rid America of this cancerous pestilence.

Come to think of it, has anyone heard Goldberg talk about the fact that this guy "brought it", and menitoned him by name?

Worst In The World v. 6.7 - 6.9

Rush Limbaugh

Bill O'Reilly

Bernard Goldberg

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Bill O'Reilly

Charles Krauthammer

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

1st Choice Liquor Store In Queensland, Austrailia

Phil Gingry ( sp? ) of Georgia

Rush Limbaugh

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The Foxy Business Of Punditry

It's common knowledge that Fox"News" loves them some Republicans in power. They will, and have, done just about anything a "news" organization can do in order to distribute as much propoganda as possible.

When it comes to Barack Obama, it's even more evident that they are willing to do or say just about anything.

But, when it turns out that John McCain should be part of the conversation, the pundits, analysts, and "experts" don't seem to see how that is relevant to the discussion.

During the 1990s, while he served as chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), McCain distributed several grants to the Palestinian research center co-founded by Khalidi, including one worth half a million dollars.

A 1998 tax filing for the McCain-led group shows a $448,873 grant to Khalidi's Center for Palestine Research and Studies for work in the West Bank. (See grant number 5180, "West Bank: CPRS" on page 14 of this PDF.)

The relationship extends back as far as 1993, when John McCain joined IRI as chairman in January. Foreign Affairs noted in September of that year that IRI had helped fund several extensive studies in Palestine run by Khalidi's group, including over 30 public opinion polls and a study of "sociopolitical attitudes."

Of course, there's seemingly nothing objectionable with McCain's organization helping a Palestinian group conduct research in the West Bank or Gaza. But it does suggest that McCain could have some of his own explaining to do as he tries to make hay out of Khalidi's ties to Obama.

More from Seth Colter Walls here.

Of course, Sarah Palin has to be defended as well on Fox - for now.

In the continuing saga of "guilt-by-association" on Fox"News", Republican Micheal Steele finally came out and admitted that he thinks it's not relevant because a "liberal" - Alan Colmes, asked the same question of Palin that he is asking of Obama:



You can find more on this and the above story from Newshounds.

Given the fact that Fox is willing to dive head-first into the shallow end of the pool, people began to realize that they would eventually slip-up and have a "guest" or use a "source" that was, to put it mildly, not the best choice.

This happened when Sean Hannity used Andy Martin, a known anti-semitic racist, during his epic "Obama Has Radical Associations Be Afraid" program. Rather than checking to see if his guest had a dark past of his own, he just ran with it because it was another chance to try and make Obama look bad.

Fox finally came out and said that it was a "bad choice". But, so far, Hannity doesn't seem to be bothered with it. After all, he's still getting his paycheck every week.