The Foxiness Of Projection

Having been at work most of last night as further news unfolded about Keith Olbermann, I feel I need to respond to at least some of it, as most of it has ended up as either rank speculation or nothing more than sophomoric prattling disguised as intellectual discourse.

First, here's Glenn Beck - the man that recently donated a HUGE amount of money to the US Chamber of Commerce. And let's not forget that that action was predicated on the fact that they were doling out money to help bolster the campaigns of conservative, Republican, candidates.

--- clink link to watch clip ---



Beck is most certainly the last person that should be deriding Olbermann for his stance on not voting but giving donations instead.

I'm not going to try and reconcile how the two are different means of socio-political action, but I do think that there is a separation between the two. Though that difference is subtle, Beck would rather take the approach of that of a spoiled rich kid taunting a classmate. To put it a more blunt way, Beck's only ammunition is to either fabricate to insight fear or too mock the messenger rather than address the message. Classic conservative posturing.

Hot Air's mysterious Allahpundit took the predictable route of saying "Fox is more news than MSNBC" - a stance somewhat akin to sticking your thumbs in your ears, wiggling your fingers, while sticking your tongue out and making a mouthy drone. How "professional" of him.

In his response to Olbermann's suspension and the completely unfounded accusation that Keith won't be back - from an anonymous source on less - he referenced a challenge laid forth from the same man that gave Olbermann the temporary boot. That challenge was to show where MSNBC openly "fundraised" for Democrats.

The link provided was to Olbermann stalker Johnny Dollar who referenced less than a handful of examples from Ed Schultz and one from Keith. And while the guests on those specific shows do mention their respective websites, this is nothing in comparison to what the "fair and balanced" folks at Fox"News" do every night. Fox"News" openly encourages their guests that are currently engaged in campaigns to openly ask for support. Then again, that's nuance that conservatives don't seem to understand.

But this is ultimately about the continued war between Fox and MSNBC. For former quite literally coddles to conservativism while the later has booted hosts for even lesser offenses than what Obermann has done.

Michelle Malkin, in full on purse-lipped rage might as well have put her foot in her ever gaping maw as she went on a none-to-clever tirade about "disclosure". Really, Michelle?

Olbermann’s sanctimony and hypocrisy only compound his core failure to disclose the donations before Election Day — especially during the show in which he hosted one of the beneficiaries of that cash.

Whatever NBC’s guidelines may be, it was the basic journalistic failure of the Murrow wanna-be to disclose the donation on the night he hosted one of his cash recipients that seals his fate and undermines whatever iota of credibility his station has left.

So, financial contributions are "free speech" unless an individual does it.

In terms of Malkin's accusations - and actually everyone within the modern conservative movement - that all news networks that aren't Fox are somehow "in the tank" for liberal causes is not only preposterous when even given a rudimentary glance, but that narrative is completely destroyed when considering what MSNBC has done to it's more left-leaning commentators in the past.

To end, here is Racheal Maddow's response to all of this:



Even thought some of the people that I follow on Twitter, some of those in the liberal/progressive blogosphere, and some within my community that I have discussed this with are saying that it's not right for Maddow - or any Democrat - to simply say "well, if Fox does it we can to" is to clearly be missing the point that Racheal put forward; a point that can be seen daily when one watches Fox"News".

What this boils down to is Fox openly campaigning for their Republican and hosting events to raise funds, MSNBC is simply at fault for not attacking their Democratic guests for mentioning their campaign websites on air.

Another distinction that should be noted is that Fox does not have an "ethics" policy like MSNBC does. Also, MSNBC doesn't operate under the false premise of "fair and balanced", and has a clear separation between their news and commentary. But also, isn't that something that Olbermann's detractors are clearly not admitting - that his show is "news and commentary"? After all, those exact words are part of his intro.

To end, I'm not going to remove the fact that Olbermann violated alleged company policy by not disclosing his financial contributions. Also, I'm not going to pretend that this isn't at least fractionally connected to Comcast's take-over of NBC Universal - even though that process is not fully complete. This action by Phil Griffin is clearly one to curry favor with his new bosses prior to their complete placement as NBC Universal owners.

Regardless of what happens to Olbermann, MSNBC management has made a poor decision and conservatives are equally as ignorant to claim some sort of moral victory in this.

And What Of Children's Rights?

In which we see that Beck has little concern for the rights and needs of children.

Click the rather appropriate picture below to play the clip from The Right Scoop.



While the conversation does devolve quickly into the bizarre realm of the dangers of vaccination, I think this is something that needs to be discussed in regards to Beck's influence and his own abilities as a parent.

While Beck immediately walks it back enough to say that if it were cancer then it may be a problem where does he draw the line?

Is an eye at 10 months old going to lead to an arm at 3? Both legs at 10? What about your ability to speak? To hear? And all this predicated under the notion that because the parents have a right to practice their "faith"?

In Beck's eyes, the needs of a child are greatly outweighed by the "rights" of the parent.

Restoring Honor folks, one child's medical condition at a time.

Extreme Infighting : Part I

I awoke this morning to find that Christine O'Donnell had won the Republican primary in Delaware. And as I made my standard 45 minute commute to work, I started to wonder how the modern conservative movement and their media masters at Fox"News" would react.

When I got home, this is what I found - a political party divided.

As Morning Edition on NPR began at 5am, I could have swore I heard that the GOP wouldn't fund O'Donnell's campaign. Sure enough, I was correct, and Fox"News" morning princess Gretchen Carlson was completely confused on how this could be possible.



But it wasn't until I saw video and heard audio from Limbaugh's daily blubber-fest that I started to put the pieces together.



For starters, Limbaugh must have a very short memory, as Karl Rove has been speaking out against Democrats far more forcefully than he did of O'Donnell last evening. Secondly, I thought the Tea Baggers and the Republicans were two different entities?

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air fell directly into lock-step with Limbaugh ( you're shocked, I'm sure ) and reiterated the point that all Republicans shouldn't blindly follow O'Donnell to the polls in November and vote for her simply because she is - well - a Tea Bagger.

This morning, O'Donnell was a guest on Fox and Friends and she didn't mince words when speaking about political acumen that all conservatives once praised nor his past as "The Architect" of Bush's presidency which all conservatives continue to pine for like a lost lover.



When you bite the hand that feeds you, the result you are hoping for usually doesn't tend to happen. Are Kilmeade, Carlson, and Doocy setting themselves up for a verbal lashing from Rove when they have him on next? Only time will tell.

And the fine folks at Fox"Nation" - that corner of the internet where Fox and their followers can remove the "fair and balanced, non-racist, we are diverse" mask and let their true light shine have taken up contextual arms against Rove as well. From the comments section, you get the sense that conservatives there are about to demand that from now on, Glenn Beck refer to Rove as a "traitor" who now stands with the "progressives".

Here's one of the videos they link, in which Rove stands by his statements against O'Donnell.



When one looks at why Rove is questioning O'Donnell as a person that can "lead" as a conservative Republican, it's precisely the way that Rove and virtually all conservatives have viewed and continue to view Obama. The double standard here is not only revealing but louder than just about anything I have heard from the conservative movement in quite a long time.

And if O'Donnell is hoping to win based on "principle" over who retains power in both houses on Congress, she's probably the most naive candidate in modern Republican history. People fell for the Scott Brown narrative based on this exact same line of thinking - are they going to actually fall for it again?

Sure, one could present the argument that she won last night, but we have to look who she won against. I would actually be surprised if Republicans - and that's who is going to be voting against the Democrats in November, not the Tea Baggers - come out in strong enough numbers for O'Donnell. In that respect, I happen to agree with Karl Rove.

----------------------------------

Here's an aside that I think bares mentioning: if the Tea Baggers were allegedly formed to be separate from the Republican party, it appears that they are finally showing some signs of being honest to that initially laughable meme. And in that respect, they are giving the Democrats a greater chance come election day in November.

Hype And Hysteria

In which we see Beck and his "I'm so happy to be here Mr. Beck can I wash your undercarriage" side-kick drone on like a bad comedy duo about something that Palin and Beck are going to be doing on - wait for it...................Sept. 11th.



And we are to believe that this is the same man that said "oh, it's just a coincidence that my rally at DC is on the anniversary of the famous speech by Martin Luther King Jr. at the same location"?

Also, this from the man who is one of the figure-heads of the movement that proclaims with shrieking tones that no one should co-opt Sept. 11th 2001.

And while there is the theory pushed ( and then immediately denounced within the same piece ) by prominent conservative blog Hot Air that this will finally be the day that Palin will tell the world the horrific news that she is going to run for President, I find it quite odd that they would even postulate this.

Sure, the back-peddle within the same piece says precisely what most sane people would also say - that a conservative co-opting Sept. 11th to make an announcement like this would be even greater than what Glenn Beck just did last weekend; or even equal to the press release that Park 51 was going to be built in Manhattan. There are certainly more comparisons, but are we really to believe that conservatives would become enraged even if the "Mother Teresa" of their movement decided she wanted to build her own personal bathroom on the epicenter where Towers 1 and 2 fell?

But is this nothing more than Part II of the Beck/Palin "Let's Use The Anniversary Of Something Important To Make A Rambling Speech About Something That Will Do Nothing But Boost Our Q-Score" Tour? If so, I'm guessing the next date will be in Hawaii on December 7th, only the two will be a few miles away from the USS Arizona - but only if Jan Brewer declines to show up.

What is this all about really? The rallies, the hype, the hysteria, the constant media attacks that don't seems to make much sense the further we get away from Jan. 20th 2009. Are people like Beck and Palin so enamoured with image, fear, and a distorted view of history that they have completely lost the plot?

The answer, I'm guessing, is yes.

Rating Worship At The Altar Of Beck

The sophomoric taunts and stereotypical "mine's bigger than yours" dribblings of Beck and crew have ceased to become just sad - they are just plain pathetic now.



While it would be far to easy to destroy the notion that because Beck has a larger audience that he must have all the facts, I think it's a far better approach to point out that childish nature of the conservative movement.

All too often, we hear conservatives speaking about their responsibilities, their mature approach to governance, or even that they are more "grown up" than their liberal/progressive counterparts. But when we see and hear people like Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, and even elected conservative officials do nothing but belching out rhetoric that is sub-par when compared to "your ugly and your mother dresses you funny", one has to wonder what it is that draws so many people to them and accept what they are stating.

I've often stated that people, by nature, often want to feel like they are a part of something. It's that herd mentality that causes people to gravitate to the most popular kids in high school - to do and say and act as they do in the hopes that they will be seen as equals. For anyone to want to be seen as an equal to Glenn Beck should give anyone with higher brain functions pause.

Beck, on virtually a daily basis, is known to throw tantrums, scream and make silly noises to show his "passion" and "love" for America. And while it's sometimes fun to point and laugh at Beck's twitching machinations, there's always the response to his thesis of the moment when people like Olbermann, Maddow, or any non-conservative pundit, anchor, or commentator takes him on. The idea of debating issues on merit is sorely lacking within the conservative realm, as they prefer to act like the spoiled brat in grade school who taunts people to make up for their own inadequacies in life.

Such is the case with the clip above, as it's quite likely that Beck knows he would be on the losing end of the argument had he tried to put up a contradictory position to what Olbermann was stating. And it's funny, since this is allegedly the same position that Beck takes up on a nightly basis - how freedom of religion and honesty in reporting issues at hand should always rule the day in America.

Late To The Party - Again

So, after mulling it over for a few hours last night and this morning, I'm actually going to give my few cents on Rep. Weiner's best impersonation of a British Parliamentarian for the CSPAN audience.



But it didn't stop there, as King and Weiner were on Hannity's radio program not long after the two were interviewed on Fox"News".



And while conservatives - from Limbaugh's specious theories to Michelle Malkin's sidekick invoking former Soviet rulers on down to Allahpundit's all too predictable, faux-intellectual, analysis of the moment - are more than willing to spin any direction they can to get away from the very simple fact that they refused to help those they they claim to idolize, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these are the same people that invoke the deaths of nearly 3000 people as often as most of them brush their teeth.

It's become reflexive nature for conservative Republicans to block any and everything a Democrat does - be they liberal, progressive, moderate, or even one of the alleged "Blue Dogs". This, to me at least, is the moment where it's really turned around on them and shown them for who they really are.

If you take a look at what Limbaugh and Allahpundit had to say about this, you'll notice that they are framing this episode as Democrats trying to shove in amendments regarding immigration when, in point of fact, this was about preventing Republicans from larding up the bill with what Karoli at Crooks And Liars calls "poison pill amendments". And that's precisely what they would have done. Democrats tossed up what should have been an easy ball for Republicans to hit out of the park and since they didn't get to manipulate the outcome, they opted to hurl the bat into the stands and run off to the dugout and cry.

The various aspects of this legislation and how conservatives screwed it up ( again ) aside, I think that it's high time that Weiner let his passion be shown. Conservatives can't handle the fact that Democrats have that fire for their country burning inside them, so their only option is to paint their opposition as completely unhinged lunatics. Sure, it works for their base, but it doesn't extend beyond that. Unfortunately, that's far too often all the traction that the meme du jour needs - the right conservative parroting something that ultimately amounts to nothing. How do you think Andrew Breitbart has made it as far as he has?

It's a shame that not more Democratic Representatives don't have Mr. Weiner's passion.

Karma And Irony In It's Purest Form

Even though this is Glenn Beck we're talking about, this really shouldn't be framed as a joke.



I particularly like the part where he takes the predictable jab at healthcare reform and then complains, in jest really as he doesn't need to worry about the price of healthcare, that the doctor is going to charge him a ridiculous amount of money for essentially telling him nothing.

And then cut to 2:44 for the obligatory "tearing up". This is where Beck delves into his conservative preacher schtick.

To be completely honest with the three people that actually read my blog, I'm not entirely sure I believe Beck. It's just this sort of thing that plays to the base instincts of not just conservatives, but all of us. It's the pity-party narrative. But Beck, being the showman that he is, won't just stop at telling his audience that he could completely loose his sight within the next 12 months, he has to tie in healthcare reform, religion, and family.

From my perspective, if this is actually true, I see this as something that can be embodied in one word - karma.