The Disinfo-Babes

Fairness? Accuracy? Fact checking? Antiquated notions for Outfoxed gal Melanie. Updated! More ignorant bluster, from the M-T hound.

They're smart as a whip, those newshounds (another fine product of the Outfoxed syndicate). And scrupulously fair and honest. Take, for example, Melanie, who railed about a segment on George Soros. She adopts a variant of the invisible man technique, describing the critics cited in the report, and mentioning the statements included by representatives of Soros's Open Society Initiative and USAID. Then she adds:
Miller ended his report by saying that "critics" say "your tax money is being used to subsidize a billionaire's personal political agenda."

Only Melanie "forgot" to mention that Soros himself is quoted at the end of the report:

MILLER: And while our request to speak with Soros was declined, today on NPR Soros accused what he called "vocal political groups" of being out to persecute him, and indirectly his foundations....

Why is this not mentioned? Is Mel trying to hide the fact that Fox wanted to interview Soros, and Soros refused? Is Mel trying to hide the fact that even so, Fox included a quote giving his side of the argument?
Next came Jeff Birnbaum of the Washington Post and a Fox News "contributor," who reinforced everything said above.

Come again? He reinforced everything? He reinforced Soros's statement as well as those of the critics? He reinforced the comments from OSI and USAID? Gee, Melanie, can you vague that up a little?
Jeff Birnbaum ended his piece by saying that his "guess is there will be a lot of chatter about that here in Washington."

Wrong again. That was a comment in the middle of his interview, which then went on to discuss campaign finance laws and how they apply. Why does Mel lie about this? Who knows? Trying to figure out the twisted agenda of the curs based on the things they leave out and distort is like trying to read month-old tea leaves.

But even when she isn't deliberately lying, Melanie's ignorance can still produce an embarrassing humiliation for the newspoodles:
Go to the New Jersey Republican party's site at There you'll find a page titled "Fox News Info-Babes." The "Fox News Info-Babes" page falls under the headline, "Republican BABE of the Week!" If you click on "Republican-Babe-of-the-Week Winners," you'll find the "Fox News Babes" there too, apparently as previous recipients of the "Republican-Babe-of-the-Week" award. Comment: So, now can we cut the crap about Fox not having ties to the Republican party?

Just one slight problem, Mel. That ain't the New Jersey Republican Party's site. You can find the New Jersey Republican Party's site at Oops.

So what is the site that Melanie is falsely claiming to be the Party's site? A profit-center for a New Jersey entrepreneur, loaded up with dozens of photos of "babes". (Melanie of course is only concerned about the handful who are identified--and not all correctly--as "Fox News Babes".) And--surprise--it has no connection whatsoever with the Republican Party of New Jersey or any other state. Oops again.

It apparently beyond Melanie's limited comprehension to note that this site opens pop-ups all over the place, in addition to the ads that clutter each page. Does she really think a non-profit organization like a political party is going to run webpages of this sort? Is that ace media critic Melanie oblivious to the New York Times article about You know, the one that makes it crystal clear that it is not the state party's website, despite Melanie's false claim? We realize that would require something like, oh, three minutes of research, but getting the facts straight has never been an objective of the newsliars.

So now can we cut the crap about the newshounds (aka the DisInfo-Babes) having even one iota of knowledge regarding anything they write about?

Update: Just so you don't think we're picking on Melanie, we'll direct you to another Outfoxed gal who never lets the truth get in her way. Marie-Therese, as part of a commentary surrounding a sloppily-transcribed O'Reilly segment, has this nugget of information to impart about the indictment of fundraiser David Rosen:
O'Reilly whines that the elite media ignored this story. However, when the indictment was filed last January, FOX News didn't cover it either!

What exactly is M-T's source for this claim? Does she have documentation? Or is she adopting the "research" techniques of that crack investigative journalist Melanie--misty water-colored memories? Whatever her excuse, M-T's "facts" are yet again M-T of any truth or veracity. Fox News of course did cover the indictment. Fox News Channel reported about it on the air. In fact Fox was on the story months before the indictment was announced, with an exclusive report on the pending investigation.

Fact-checking? Documentation? Accuracy? When it comes to the anti-Fox terriers, such concepts are truly howlers.

posted: Mon - May 9, 2005 at 10:33 PM       j$p  send