Yesterday, after Griff Jenkins botched his day-long attempt to crash an ACORN gathering, commenter Ferg at Daily Kos summarized the high point of Griff’s day:

Fox news guys whines about 1st amendment for 4 minutes while dodging questions about Fox propaganda from Adam, and while standing on a red bath mat in a tuxedo.

What did Griff Jenkins have to show for his work yesterday? Apparently, just this:

The sad reality is: that was the best part of our interaction that Jenkins could highlight to save face. (It was evidently the best part of Jenkin’s entire day that he could highlight…and will highlight again tonight on Glenn Beck.)

But I have to ask: How can it be satisfying to be Griff Jenkins? What on earth motivates someone to stand outside on a bathmat all day waiting for moments like the one above. How do you wake up in the morning and think, “I want to do that again!”

Here’s another moment that makes me ask what motivate’s him, from Wonkette’s DC teabagging coverage:

After wading through a sea of mud to reach the nothing on the other side, we saw these Fox News equipment bins, with a River Cuomo clone casually guarding them. (PSST: WE WANTED TO STEAL THE BINS!)

This guard was, as it happened, Griff Jenkins, but we did not recognize him. We did not recognize the most important celebrity at Teabagging Central!

We tried to spark a conversation with this lonely Fox News Equipment guard and asked, completely earnestly, “So are any famous Fox personalities going to show up today?”

He was silent for a few seconds and then mumbled something about Greta maybe coming later, but with the rain and the cold, ya know…

Wow. Griff, I’m sorry…but that sucks.

So, why do it? Why have Glenn Beck sending you out to do weird, embarassing stuff that moves the ball forward on no real agenda (did your conversation with me accomplish much for you, Griff? How about that picture above of you in the rain — did it move mountains?)

Maybe someone else has an answer. I don’t.

Also on Open Left.

I seem to recall that Bill O’Reilly got incensed over “hate speech” on liberal blogs. Does he ever read Fox Nation where the latest race baiting thread has a photo of Michelle Obama next to Carla Bruni, the wife of the French President. The Fox Nation readers are invited to “caption” it.

I seem to recall that Bill O’Reilly got incensed about the disrespectful treatment of Sarah Palin in an Emimem video. Does he ever read Fox Nation where racist (and other stupid and hateful) comments about our First Lady are just part of the terrain of a “nation” where ignorance, hatred, and racism are the “American Dream.” Stay classy, Fox Nation!

To see Fox’s history of attacking the Obamas, visit Fox Attacks.

(Also on News Hounds)

On Thursday, June 4, 2009, Glenn Beck devoted his entire show to attacking ACORN with what seemed to be reruns of past segments. But – lo and behold! – the show also included Beck’s get-together with BFF Bill O’Reilly from May 28 in which they seemed to finally be admitting that their evidence of any ACORN badness is pretty thin. But they didn’t let little details like lack of proof or factual verification stand in the way of a good smear. Beck even threw the Obamas into it, while also admitting it was pure speculation. Rock on!

Most real journalists catch wind of some corruption or something out of whack with some company or organization, do some investigating, and then, if it proves there’s something there, report on it. But Beck and O’Reilly, along with many of the Fox Newsies, have decided, for whatever reason (bigotry, desire to keep the minorities powerless, greed, pick one or all), that ACORN is corrupt (see my previous posts here, here and here). And, having made that decision, they reported on it. Then they belatedly tried to investigate it and got nowhere. And they reported on it some more. So, they then had ACORN people on to talk about it, got nowhere, but kept reporting on it. Now, according to them, the only way they’re going to get their proof of ACORN’s corruption is if ACORN provides it to them by opening its books. Remind me again why ACORN – or any right-minded organization – would do that? (Beck also admitted, however, that they might be able to prove something if some other news organizations were to join forces with FOX in its vendetta – basically do the heavy lifting.)

O’Reilly pontificated that President Obama “got into the Chicago left-wing machine of which ACORN is a part . . . .”

“Yes, Jeremiah Wright,” Beck helpfully interjected.

“That’s when you saw Reverend Wright,” O’Reilly trudged on, “When you saw the other nuts from the Weather Underground, he was in there. Now, some people believe that he believes the way they do, some people believe that. Some people say, ‘No, he was just using them to advance his career.’” I’m not gonna argue whether President Obama had dealings with Ayers or ACORN or not – I happen to believe that, even if President Obama had involvement with ACORN, so what? He was a community organizer; ACORN is the largest grassroots community organization in the country. And Bill Ayers, former radical or not, is a well-respected, nationally known educator.

“That stuff is riddled in his past,” Beck said indignantly. “And his wife is much more . . . I do, I don’t have any evidence, it’s what I believe.” Rock on!

“But you can’t prove . . . .” O’Reilly interjected.

“Bill, I don’t think anybody is going to be able to prove any of this stuff until the media pressure becomes so overwhelming that this organization cracks open,” Beck said earnestly.

“This theory . . . didn’t come from the right, it came from people inside of ACORN. They are left, they’re left, they’re inside,” Beck insisted. But if you have these “inside” contacts, how come all you can do is speculate? Could it be because these “inside contacts” are two disgruntled, not very forthcoming former ACORN board members who filed a lawsuit against ACORN without authorization? Could it be because you use people like Anita Moncrief – who never even worked for ACORN and was fired from Project Vote for theft – as a credible source? And isn’t it a bit of circular logic for you guys to rely on a thief like Moncrief to prove ACORN is corrupt, but you call ACORN corrupt because it has employees who stole from it by engaging in voter registration fraud?

“But it’s the bigger picture of how powerful are these people, what is their intent?” O’Reilly speculated, then, answering his own question, “I’ll tell you what their intent is – to make us into Denmark, to make us into a cradle-to-grave entitlement where everybody has the same, take from Beck and O’Reilly, give to Lenny and Squiggy, that’s what they want. Now if Lenny and Squiggy are heroin addicts, who cares? It doesn’t matter, you take from the people who work hard, you give to the layabouts.” O’Reilly, here’s a tip, for future reference: If you want to avoid being called “racist” and “bigot,” you might want to re-think that whole “poor people are heroin addicts and layabouts” thing.

And then Beck engaged in his closing monologue which seemed to be contemporaneous (not included in the video below): “ACORN fell . . . right into our view during the campaign. Accusations of voter fraud raised a lot of eyebrows, they had a lot of coverage and they weren’t too happy about it.” (Emphasis mine). Should I erect a billboard across the street from Fox News? It’s VOTER. REGISTRATION. FRAUD. As far as we know, nobody voted fraudulently as a result of fraudulent registration. Mickey Mouse didn’t show up with an ID and cast a vote.

Beck went on to say, “For many of our competitors on other networks, the election and inauguration of Barack Obama put the ACORN story to bed. Perhaps it’s hibernating in the halls of NBC and CBS and the NY Times [if so, maybe Fox should follow suit] – they don’t seem to have any real interest in learning the truth about who’s behind this organization and how corrupt it may be.”

“I guess . . . they don’t really care about how this organization hopes to change the way this country exists,” Beck continued earnestly. “Well, I do care. Fox cares. I think you care. Our efforts have led to accusations of racism . . . whatever. Left-wingers and ACORN supporters have accused us of covering the story to fire up your anger, and, you know, hope to get better ratings . . . whatever. All the charges that really have no merit. But the best offense is a good offense – for me, uncovering the truth is really all that matters here. Seeking the truth is all the justification that we need. For those who question our agenda, I offer this: We’ll continue to investigate.

“ACORN, open the books, let us see all of the tentacles, ignore our calls, fail to answer our questions if you want, stand in our way if you have to, but getting between Americans and the truth is not really a good place to be, because Americans will finally get the truth.”

Comment: I’m really impressed by how boldly you asked ACORN to throw open its books so you can hope to be able to prove something they MIGHT have done that you’ve already reported that they DID however many times – and now you need ACORN itself to help you pull your story from the ashes? You know, there’s a big difference between uncovering the truth and manufacturing what you want the truth to be – and at this point, you guys must be pretty desperate to uncover something or you’re gonna look like terrified, up-the-creek-without-a-paddle fools.

All in a day’s work on Fox News. Rock on.

(Also on News Hounds)

As part of the “culture war,” Bill O’Reilly must be a commissioned officer in the anti-choice storm trooper division. In “looking out for us,’ he knows what’s best for women and as such, is very concerned about their reproductive organs.

His dismay about the demise of the white, Christian, male power structure indicates that he would love to go back to those halcyon days when big daddy knew best, and submissive mommy stayed home, baked cookies, and had nice, white babies; the good old days when uppity women, who denied their mission as mothers, bled to death or were maimed for life as a result of back alley abortions and “homemade” remedies for unwanted pregnancy (served em right, eh, Bill?); those happy days when women accepted the “shame” of an unintended pregnancy, dropped out of school, and gave their babies up for either adoption in a nice white home, or not so nice orphanages where abuse ran rampant.

Because the late Dr. Tiller (and the women who accessed his service) defied Bill’s 50’s world view, Bills continues his justification of his jihad against Tiller and those stupid, silly women who have late term abortions.

Earlier this week June 3rd, America’s Daddy began his segment with the usual vitriol against the NY Times and the “liberal media” saying that they believe that “aborting fetuses at any time should be the law of the land.” Beside him was an anti-choice (and I use the word because the anti-abortion movement seeks to deny women the right to choose their own reproductive decisions) poster of a fetus, sucking its thumb, against a backdrop of the American flag. Bill read, with venom in his voice, part of the NYT editorial which “glorifed” Dr. Tiller. He also showed a photo of a rabbi who described Tiller as a martyr. (Hmm, Jews are overwhelmingly pro-choice. Was this a bit of the anti-Semitism shown by the “pro-life” side?)

In introducing his discussion with former NOW President and attorney, Patricia Ireland, Bill summarized how late term abortions were understandable in “catastrophic” circumstances but Tiller performed abortions “for much less than that.” (And Bill, how exactly do you know that?) Ireland explained that the state can prohibit abortions past the first trimester with the exception of the woman’s health or life. Bill’s disdain for women was shown in this comment: “It’s gotta be more defined than health because health can be a migraine headache.”

When Ireland replied that Bill’s comment was “demeaning,” he took a right turn into lala land when he claimed that he could “prove” that Tiller went “far beyond serious health consequences.” Ireland said that although she believed life begins a conception, we have to respect the lives of the women as they are “existing” life as opposed to “potential life.” Bill then worked in the perfunctory smear of Tiller when he referred to a “doctor who was aborting viable fetuses for any reason, if you had the money, Tiller would do it.” (This is outrageous, as Bill’s accusations have never been proven.)

“Proof” of this, for Bill, was the testimony of Doctor Paul McHugh who obtained Tiller’s records and claimed that he didn’t think records “substantiated substantial health impairment” on the part of those seeking an abortion. McHugh claimed that some of the women said that “they wouldn’t be able to go to concerts…” Bill, not surprisingly, said that he believed Dr. McHugh’s contention that “anything was an excuse to abort a late term fetus.” Ireland mentioned Tiller’s acquittal and said that you can’t compare Tiller’s act to Hitler or Mao.

O’Reilly, voice getting louder talked over Ireland and demanded to know what she would call them if “what Dr. McHugh says is true.” When Ireland said that it was not true and demeaning to women to say that we have late term abortions because we can’t go to concerts, Bill talked over and asked if she was calling McHugh a liar. The issue then degenerated into Bill repeating the “are you calling McHugh a liar” strategy. Bill interjected that he “knows women in a panic might do anything.” When Ireland said that Tiller’s records said that these things didn’t happen, Bill turned the onus of the debate on her by saying “how do you know, have you examined the records” to which she answered in the affirmative and added that Kansas would not have allowed that. She cited specific medical reasons for late term abortion. Lawyer/Doctor Bill said that “it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, in Dr. “Killer’s” case that wasn’t what he was doing.”

Comment: O’Reilly has already mocked those who have late term abortion as airheads who, if they didn’t like the Glen Beck show, would just go in and out to have their abortion. This kind of rhetoric shows a total distain and lack of concern for women whose abortion procedures amount to more than “go in and out.” But Bill was able to get some validation by playing the McHugh tape.

A little background here: As part of a witch hunt against Dr. Tiller by rabid anti-abortion Kansas Attorney General Phil Kline, McHugh was commissioned to review medical records for possible infractions of the law. The next Attorney General, Paul Morrison ended the investigation, in June 2007, with no charges filed. After McHugh released his videotape, Morrison threatened McHugh with legal action if he didn’t cease and desist talking about the case. Morrison (who didn’t believe McHugh) stated that Tiller’s “clinic provides high-quality medical care and complies with state law.”

None of this was acknowledged by Bill O’Reilly who continues to wage war against Dr. Tiller and women who have late term abortions. But calling George Tiller, “Dr. Killer” – stay classy, Bill!

(Also on News Hounds)

On yesterday’s (6/4/09) Your World, Fox News contributor Tucker Carlson joined host Neil Cavuto to discuss the good news that Wal-Mart is hiring 22,000 workers “without any government stimulus at all.” Rather than analyze or investigate the circumstances of the hires, Fox used the news to take a swipe at the Obama administration – and America’s workers – by suggesting that this had proved the government stimulus package was unnecessary. The “fair and balanced” segment featured a host and guest with, essentially, the same opinion.

“It’s great news, of course,” Carlson said. “This is sort of like Henry Ford raising salaries in the middle of the depression. It’s something that ought to be heralded and celebrated, not that it will be.” Actually, it’s nothing like Henry Ford. Wal-Mart is adding jobs, not giving raises. And Wal-Mart is not exactly known for offering generous salaries. Business Week reported in April, 2008, that Wal-Mart workers earn an average of $22,500 annually. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the threshold of poverty in 2006 for a family of four was $21,200.

Ford, on the other hand, was known for raising his workers’ pay to $5 a day at a time (1914) when $2 a day was considered a good wage. In 1932, when Ford lost $74,000,000, Ford lowered his workers’ minimum wage to $4 a day, then upped it to $6 in 1935. Time reported, “The Detroit automaker was praised as an “inspired millionaire,” accused of shrewd self-interest, damned as a dangerous Socialist.” Somehow, I don’t think anyone will be damning Wal-Mart as a dangerous Socialist any time soon, especially not on Fox. That term seems to be reserved for President Obama.

As a banner with the “Cavuto mark” of a question asked, “Is Walmart putting govt stimulus to shame?” Tucker acknowledged, “Frankly, Wal-Mart has a lot of enemies… This is an obvious American success story. This is the largest retailer in the world. It’s run out of the United States by Americans. This is something about which you can feel proud as a patriot.” Except that the vast majority of this American retailer’s stock is made in China.

Cavuto didn’t clarify matters; he just took a swipe at unions. “You know the environment, here, that Wal-Mart is the poster child of all things evil to workers, that it has not treated them fairly, it’s so aggressively trying to stop them from unionizing. You know the rap and the charge, that it’s all but made them indentured servants.” I guess Cavuto figures he’s got his cushy job far from the poverty line, why should he worry about anyone else struggling to make ends meet?

Carlson also seemed to think Wal-Mart jobs were just peachy for America. “These aren’t dead end jobs. These are people who need a job now…most will have health care.” Yes, most will, probably. The Washington Post recently reported that 52% of Wal-Mart workers utilize Wal-Mart health insurance. But the company charges its low-wage workers a substantial portion of their income for medical coverage and many workers have chosen low-premium, high-deductible plans that analysts say provide less coverage for preventive and primary care.

So instead of a stimulus for good-paying jobs with full benefits (and it’s doubtful either Cavuto or Carlson are going to be supporting any kind of public health care coverage any time soon), American workers (except for Cavuto and Carlson, themselves) should settle for squeaking past poverty levels and bargain basement health coverage.

(Also on News Hounds)

Andy Cobb (you can read more about him here) found inspiration in our post about Glenn Beck’s incest fantasy, which he delved into at great length in his book, The Real America. Now Cobb has brought Beck’s words to life!

Glenn Beck threw a sanctimonious hissy fit yesterday when a representative from ACORN had the nerve to suggest he is afraid of black people. Of course, Beck and Fox can demonize ACORN and minorities all day long, but my, how sensitive Beck’s widdle feewings get when the tables are turned. In the clip, Beck angrily brags to his audience (which he always self-importantly addresses as “America”) that he threw out guest Scott Levenson of ACORN for saying, during the commercial break, that Beck is afraid of black people.

Interestingly, Beck seems to have understood that as an accusation that he hates black people. But if it was really as ridiculous an accusation as Beck claimed, wouldn’t he have just dismissed it without getting upset? And if it’s so important that Beck wanted to address it, why not have the guy back and prove him wrong to “America?” Meanwhile, Beck’s record of hostilities to ACORN and people of color is well documented. No amount of self-righteous posturing is going to erase it.

Below is Beck’s hostile interview with Levenson in which he is repeatedly interrupted and talked over. It’s worth noting that during this interview, “fair minded” Beck repeats the tired falsehood that ACORN received stimulus funds.

H/T reader Abby for the tip.

Hey, kids! Do you ever get tired of Fox News’ crops? I don’t mean the food they might be literally growing, in Glenn Beck’s Doom Room, in preparation for Imminent Socialist Panic. I’m talking about the way they manipulate video to make it look like people are just straight up saying the opposite thing they actually said. Well, it’s been bothering the media critics at Media Matters For America for some time, and they have, for a long time, been cataloging “examples of Fox News hosts and correspondents cropping comments by progressives and Democratic political figures in a manner that misrepresents them.” A new mash-up video offers some side-by-side examples of what they’re talking about.

Some constructive criticism? I think the third example — Obama’s “empathy” criteria for Supreme Court justice — isn’t the best example of a Fox cropping. While it’s certainly true that Major Garrett’s statement, “That aggravates those who feel that justices should follow the Constitution and legislative intent,” seems to neatly ignore the fact that Obama’s next statement was “I will seek someone who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our Constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process, and the appropriate limits of the judicial role,” the fact is, just about every news organization honed in on the “empathy” part of the statement. It became the sound bite from that press exchange.

Oh, those family values folks at Fox News! On yesterday’s (4/30/09) Live Desk, Trace Gallagher and Julie Banderas were all agog over the prospect of Miss California, Carrie Prejean, speaking at the National Press Club on behalf of the conservative National Organization for Marriage. But Fox was obviously more interested in her view than her views. Because about a minute after Prejean started speaking, the screen split and a still photo of Prejean in a bikini, about twice the size of the real Prejean, appeared. It remained for the rest of the clip, about two more minutes. With video.

Before Prejean spoke, the banner on the screen read, “Miss CA speaks about supporting traditional marriage.” Fox News called its video “Following her Faith.” But clearly, Fox had something besides marriage and faith on its mind.

(Image after the flip.)

(Also on News Hounds)

Media Matters put together a must-see compilation of the right-wing media’s fearmongering about swine flu. Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Neil Boortz, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Savage and the Fox News crew are always eager to manipulate the news to support their hate-filled xenophobia, so the swine flu epidemic has really kicked their anti-immigrant rhetoric into overdrive. The winner for the most absurd (and dispicable) attack I’ve heard so far has come from Savage, who claimed this was a terrorist attack planted in Mexico by Islamic fundamentalists.

At AlterNet, Joshua Holland gets into the dangers of the right-wing media using this crisis to peddle their hateful rhetoric.

According to Holland:

It would be easy to dismiss these ill-informed rants about immigration as unworthy of analysis because they’re shared by a very small (if very loud) minority of the population. But, as in Europe during the Middle Ages, this kind of hate talk can have deadly consequences.

Claims that Mexican immigrants (legal or otherwise) are disease-carrying pests aren’t merely offensive, they constitute “eliminationist rhetoric” — the idea that a group of people, usually portrayed as less than fully human, are destroying the country from within and need to be excised from the body politic.

In the four years between 2003 and2007 (the most recent year for which complete data are available), the FBI reported increases in hate crimes against Latinos year after year, and experts say the trend is continuing.

The Savages, Glenn Becks and Malkins of the right-wing media may be clownish, but to the extent that they’re helping shape a climate in which all people with an outward appearance similar to that of a migrant from south of the border face discrimination, if not outright peril, their shtick is anything but funny.