1/18/10 12:31 PM

Fox Haters Week in Review

The line-up: vampires, a "crazy bitch", and The Lone Ranger! They're all a part of the latest action-packed edition of Fox Haters Week in Review.

Shaggy Dog Stories:
You have to wonder about the newshounds; they claim to watch Fox, but most of what they write is stuff filched from other websites or video clips found on the interwebs. So in writing about FNC coverage of the Rifqa Bary custody case, Priscilla plucks out whatever youtube segments are available and makes that her universe of data. She says nothing about reports on Studio B, Special Report, or The Fox Report. How could she? She couldn't find any clips! What, you expect her to actually watch Fox? Maybe if she had she might not concoct a theory based on her ignorance of the difference between a talk show (Fox & Friends) and a news broadcast (Happening Now). Instead, Prissy has her own explanation of why F&F aired a Frank Gaffney interview while Jane Skinner presented a balanced report:

Skinner’s piece was a news item from a later morning show, the audience for either of these segments was probably lower than that of Fox&Friends which gets very high numbers, so what better vehicle to use for the intended propaganda
Priscilla got it backwards. Jane Skinner gets more viewers than F&F. In fact, more people watch Jane Skinner than watch Keith Olbermann, Larry King, Rachel Maddow, or Anderson Cooper. So Prissy's theory that Fox shunted "the intended propaganda" to the show with the highest ratings...is drivel.

While we're on the subject of Priscilla's ignorance, this week she wrote not once but twice of Fox & Friends co-host "Clayton Moore". Yes, she believes the program is co-hosted by the ghost of The Lone Ranger! Of course, someone who doesn't actually watch Fox isn't going to know who Clayton Morris is. After all, it's hard to read that tiny type in those interweb video clips.

A matter of double standards as much as stupidity, this week brought an entire newspooch article devoted to castigating Glenn Beck for a reference to a "coup". Jonathan explains at great detail about forcible takeovers, installing unelected leaders, etc, blissfully unaware of the meaning of metaphor, saving this for his big finish:
Normally, any thinking, rational individual who heard that kind of jaw-dropping nonsense on the radio would literally call Glenn and bluntly say, "are you f**king mad?!" but Beck knows that his audience isn't that bright and will take him word-for-word without cracking open a dictionary, let alone a history book.
If he thinks Beck's audience isn't smart, what must he think of the people who take the biased bassets seriously? After all, they're the ones who approvingly reprinted an article claiming that the United States "is undergoing a coup". They're the ones who defended Clinton because he was fighting a "right wing coup". Really, they must know their readers aren't that bright and will swallow this bushwa word-for-word without cracking open a dictionary. Right, Jonathan?

A Conflict of Ignorance:
Speaking of Glenn Beck, Ellen Brodsky seems to have it in her head that he doesn't have the moral right to criticize Van Jones, or something like that. First she complains that Beck isn't promoting the Beck boycott on his show:
neither Beck nor his producers seemed to feel that relevant enough information to provide the “we report, you decide” network’s viewers.
Ellen says it's "relevant" because Van Jones used to be a member of the boycott-Beck organization. That's right: "used to be". But today she kicked it up a notch, claiming that articles about Van Jones published by Fox constitute a "conflict of interest" because Van Jones was once in the group pushing the Beck boycott! And, in a lengthy screed that somehow made no mention of the words "9/11" or "truther", she spewed that Beck's criticisms are "retribution", adding:
It’s quite possible that Fox would have gone after Jones even if he had not been associated with ColorOfChange.
That's disengenous enough to be a lie. Beck started his criticisms of Van Jones before there was any hint of a boycott from CoC. Both on radio and on television. That would mean it's the boycotters who have the conflict of interest, not Beck. They're the ones engaging in "retribution". So, by Ellen's rules, it's all those newshounds posts promoting the boycott, without revealing this salient fact, that have the glaring "conflict of interest".

At Least Jayson Blair Got Fired:
You know that as soon as Fox Broadcasting announced it would not pre-empt two season premieres for Obama's latest healthcare speech (while referring viewers to the coverage on FNC) the inanity would run rampant. But nowhere was it as deliriously idiotic as at the kennel, as accused plagiarist Julie Driscoll sought to explain it all for those bright newspooch readers:
FBC [Julie's abbreviation for Fox Broadcasting Company] once again announced its decision not to air President Obama’s speech to a joint session of Congress on September 9th. CBS is airing it, as are ABC, MSNBC and PBS.
MSNBC is a cable news channel. It's not the same as NBC broadcast.
But, hey, I’m sure oh-so-patriotic Fox News has something that’s far more important to the public to air in its place . . . like an announcement of a cure for cancer, maybe, or advice for Americans on how to save their homes, get a job or deal with their lack of health insurance after a layoff. Hmmm . . . do “So You Think You Can Dance” and “Glee” qualify as hugely important to the American public?
Earth to Julie: Fox News isn't going to air anything in its place. Fox News is airing the Obama speech. And by the way, Fox News doesn't air SYTYCD or Glee. Those are on Fox broadcast. You do know the difference, right?
FBC was all over Bush, like flies on a rib roast. In fact, Fox was the only network that aired Bush’s homecoming in January.
If FBC was "all over Bush", why is it that they decided not to air President Bush's primetime speech? Besides, the Fox broadcast network did not air Bush's homecoming. FNC did.
Fox won’t air the speech – but I’ll bet you dollars to donuts they’ll air their panels of pundits ripping the speech to shreds.
Really? Fox broadcast has panels of pundits standing by to rip the speech? Are they going to come on right after Glee? Please let us know where you are going to send those dollars. Meanwhile we'll enjoy the donuts. If this is the best original writing Julie can come up with, maybe she should go back to cut-and-paste.

A Cross Word Puzzle:
We've written before about the vile religious bigotry that pervades so many postings by the mastiffs. But we underestimated just how neurotically fanatical hatred can be. It even extends to fashion accessories! So it is that our pal Julie this week hit the mother lode of hang-ups, as she focused (Adrian Monk-style) on a item of jewelry. In one piece after another she could not resist discussing a daring, controversial, one might even say eeevil item of Laura Ingraham's apparel:
  • Crucifix-adorned Laura Ingraham
  • Haven’t you and that crucifix ever been to a funeral?
  • The God-fearing image she tries to portray with that eternal crucifix.
  • the crucifix totally saves the outfit.
  • At least [O'Reilly] doesn’t wear a gold crucifix.
  • The more I look at that crucifix shining on her stalk-like neck...
Obsess much? What is it with the cruciphobia anyhow? Is it something like with vampires?

But these aren't the only cross words. There are also the comments to her posts. And this is where things get really instructive. Here are some of our favorite examples:
  • The only reason Fox hired her is because she is a dumb blond.
  • I wonder if Laura's crucifix burns her.
  • And WHO CARES if Laura Ingraham had cancer and lost all her hair?? Why did she tell everyone??
  • The size of the crucifix=the sadism and brutality of the wearer
  • What a piece of shit she is. I wonder if she felt that way when she got cancer. Maybe we all would have been better off if she didn't have the insurance that so many others lack. That skank deserves to rot in hell.
And then there's Exhibit B: the kennel-dwellers speak on the subject of Michelle Malkin. As with the above, all comments were pre-approved before publication:
  • The last time I saw a mouth like that it had a hook in it.
  • Poor Michelle is a self loathing anchor baby.
  • What a bat-shit crazy bitch. I wonder if her head spins around when she gets on one of the really extreme rants.
  • I saw the segment of Klannity and Malkin The Bitch bugging over the education speech Obama is going to be doing.
  • One can hope that Bitch Malkin gets treated the same way as Coultergeist!!!
  • What a sanctimonious, terse, nasty, obnoxious, condescending, irrational, indignant bitch!
They do seem to like that B-word. Julie considers it a no-no for blogs to permit its use. Undoubtedly she will do a post condemning the newshounds for this. Any day now.

Spot something you'd like to see in the next Fox Haters Week in Review? Send us an email!

Fox Fan
That was a stinging fact check and exposé of NHs shabby yowling, J$!
I wonder if their commenters felt the same about Kennedy's cancer as they do about Laura's. Of course they did, the NHs NEVER have double standards!
September 6, 2009, 9:03:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply

"Michelle Malkin...bitch...crazy bitch...indignant bitch..."
Remember, this is the same site where a commenter called Malkin "the love child of an opium whore from Manila and a syphilistic ape". A few years before that, a commenter called her "a fish-eating tw**". Jeez, the hypocrisy there is breathtaking.
September 6, 2009, 10:40:03 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Good job J$ as allways!
September 6, 2009, 10:48:52 PM EDT – Like – Reply

"If this is the best original writing Julie can come up with, maybe she should go back to cut-and-paste."
Game, set, OUCH!!!!-)
September 7, 2009, 12:00:04 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Nailed the News Poodles again.
This is typical. They have no argument that they can prsent in a reasonable fashion. So they revert to 6th gradge trash talking.
And these people have the unmitigated nerve to call ANYONE a racist or misogymist.
September 7, 2009, 7:45:55 AM EDT – Like – Reply

When Beck started to discuss Jones in the context of the lack of vetting of the Obama czars is an important part of this entire saga.
Even the usually almost fair Howard Kurtz is not being accurate in regards to the chronology.
The juicy connection to the boycott speaks to my partisan devil, however, logically speaking, and to be fair, Beck started this whole thing PRIOR to it personally effecting him. The White House, in having Jones resign, has basically admitted to the fact Beck started with that they did not properly vet the candidates and that he had "radical" ties.
I suppose that fact could not be covered by the hounds and their ilk....Their devils that thrive on "stupid right-wing racists," etc. need constant feeding.
September 7, 2009, 12:54:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply

President Obama just gave a speech in Cincinnatti and it was carried live by Fox News.
Someone call out the HOUNDS!!!!!! Are they aware of this? Souldn't they be out there calling Fox News hypocrits for showing one speech and not showing another? HOW DARE THEY!!!
September 7, 2009, 2:43:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Brilliant FHWiR this week J$. Thank you for all of your research into this. I espeially loved the 'more people watch Jane Skinner than olbermann' line.
Hee Hee. Poor Cankles.
September 7, 2009, 3:33:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply

The Beck Week That Was
Reported by Ellen - Mon 2:24 PM
Looks like the News Poodles really, really, really, really hate Glenn Beck.
September 7, 2009, 3:58:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply

excellent job. more whining about fox Tv?.. cry me a river. what 9 other channels isn't good enough?
September 7, 2009, 4:20:23 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Johnny, in addition to your excellent as always FHWiR I absolutely love the Lone Ranger link.
I've played it a few times already.
The only thing missing is the Merita fields of wheat waving to the William Tell Overture.
Thanks! :+:
September 7, 2009, 4:47:53 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Beck 1 NewsHounds 0
September 7, 2009, 4:50:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply

johnny dollar
Grammie, Priscilla must have a 'thing' for old-time Hollywood actors. Besides her posts all about "Clayton Moore", today she posted one about that guy who resigned from the White House. You know who I mean. Van JOHNSON, as she called him over and over, including in the headline. Unfortunately her blooper was caught and pointed out in the comments, so she corrected her mistakes (without noting the correction of course). But there's still a reference to 'Johnson' in there that she missed. Someone should teach her about the miracle of 'find and replace'.
September 7, 2009, 5:28:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Surely she didn't mean the Van Johnson who played the creepy weak minded nephew in The Little Foxes?
Maybe the confusion is understandable. Van Jones and Van Johson's Foxes character aren't that far apart.
You know I saw Van Johnson used there and I just thought it was another screwed up attempt to make a typical screwed up mutt jab at Fox, The Little Foxes, Van Jones, Van Johnson.
Are you quite sure it wasn't something along those lines?
September 7, 2009, 5:40:19 PM EDT – Like – Reply

johnny dollar | Homepage | 09.07.09 - 5:33 pm | #  
Give her a break, Johnny. Late night drinking can take it's toll.
September 7, 2009, 5:43:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
At least Prissy writes her own stuff, unlike the famous plagiarist Julie. I guess if you're that hungry for hate, you'll take the wheat with the chaff. Unfortunately, all they have is chaff for writers.  
Must leave a bad taste in your mouth after a while, but it can't be much worse than milk bones.
September 7, 2009, 6:21:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply

Julie, the plagiarist is now writing at the Examiner.com - Chicago Law & POlitics Examiner where she likes to refer to tea-partiers as racists....feel free to head over there and report her articles so that the editors will remove her from the site.
September 8, 2009, 12:15:18 AM EDT – Like – Reply

Fox Fan
You're right JT- and check out the comments that make criticism from here look like compliments!
September 8, 2009, 7:11:50 AM EDT – Like – Reply

JT | 09.08.09 - 12:20 am | #  
JT, it's interesting that Julie and her ilk will toss around "racist" after they attack Beck for doing the same thing.
Can you say hypocrite.
September 8, 2009, 8:09:12 AM EDT – Like – Reply