Fox Haters Week in Review!

Smears, distortions, a treehouse, slanders, libel per se, stupidity...and a ‘homophobic lie’. It’s an action-packed edition of Fox Haters Week in Review!

Around the Interwebs

Our pal David Neiwert is at it again. You may recall how he smeared Jon Scott and Megyn Kelly by lying about their coverage of a terrorist attack. And followed up by falsifying Fox’s coverage of the Arizona immigration bill. So it’s safe to say the word ‘discredited’ was invented for people like Dave. (Lately he’s apparently been fending off attempts by Sean Hannity to have him assassinated, but that’s another story.) Neiwert has a new post up, and sure enough, he’s not telling the truth:

Every Republican candidate on the planet -- with the exception of the truly execrable Dan Maes in Colorado -- has gotten lots of free airtime on Fox to promote their campaign. Their opponents -- not at all.

The first clue that this is a pile of excrement: Ellen Brodsky promoted Neiwert’s natterings as a ‘great post’. That in itself is enough to delegitimize it. But unlike Neiwert, we prefer facts to undocumented slanders. Submitted for your consideration, a few of the recent interviews on FNC that David Neiwert claims never happened:

How ironic that David Neiwert, who wrote ‘Friends don’t let friends do Fox’, is now complaining about the lack of Democrats on FNC. The fact that Neiwert lied in doing so is not ironic. It’s expected.

Several sites picked up on our exposé of the curiously symbiotic relationship between MSNBC and Alan Grayson (D). But it was Chris Golas who addressed the Eric Boehlert connection. Boehlert whined that when candidates appear on Fox, FNC is making monetary contributions to their campaigns. Mr Golas takes the Media Matters ‘Senior Fellow’ at his word, and asks:

By hosting Florida Democrat Alan Grayson 60 times has MSNBC essentially made a contribution to his campaign? Depending on current ad rates for MSNBC how much would that be? It would be way more than the so-called 1.2M FNC "gave/donated" to Christine O'Donnell.

Mr Golas also pays special tribute to the TPM genius who predicted Shep Smith would be off FNC by September 2009. Of course Shep just signed a huge, mulit-year contract. Oops.

And then there’s Melanie. Does that name ring a bell? Longtime readers will recognize her from back in the day--she was one of the chief newhounds fabulists. Her record of shameless, embarrassing fabrications is stunning. And now...she’s baaaaack! Mel has struck out on her own. And sure enough, she brings us another falsehood:

Why doesn’t Sean Hannity air his show live? Huh? Because he a [sic] scared. He’s a wimpy ass chicken. I challenge Sean Hannity to take “personal responsibility,” to “man-up,” and to air his show live.

Really, why would someone lie about something that millions of people have seen with their own eyes? Mel, did you really think nobody will notice those LIVE bugs plastered right on the screen? You know, like these?!?

Melanie Killinger-Vowell: still shady after all these years.

Newshound Priscilla Tells a Homophobic Lie?

Finally our weekly visit to the dog pound, where the newshounds persist with their perversely peculiar pans of all things Fox. Well, that’s what they do except when they get distracted by other things. It seems like the site has another agenda, as they are now publishing posts that aren’t about Fox at all! Hmm, what would these be?

Now don’t go thinking that this blatant partisan campaigning reflects any sort of bias on the part of the tail-waggers. Why, their attacks on Fox are absolutely impartial, fair, and accurate. Example: Ellen Brodsky claims:

Fox Nation has deliberately misrepresented the Williams/O'Reilly discussion to suggest that Williams merely answered a question about his feelings when, in fact, he voluntarily raised them... Fox Nation post about Williams called, How Would You Have Answered? misleadingly asks, "How would you have answered the question: When boarding an airplane, does seeing a fellow passenger dressed in the clothing of a devout Muslim make you worried or nervous?"

Brodsky is lying. Fox didn’t misrepresent the discussion; they quoted Juan Williams verbatim:

“But when I get on a plane,” Williams told O’Reilly, “I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Brodsky omitted the entire first paragraph, which includes that word-for-word quote from Williams! The ‘question’ Brodsky referred to comes in the next paragraph, and the reason it’s a question is because it’s a poll!

How would you have answered the question: When boarding an airplane, does seeing a fellow passenger dressed in the clothing of a devout Muslim make you worried or nervous? Share your thoughts, answer our question then click "Leave a Comment."

This is an especially sleazy smear, even for Brodsky, who this week recycled another one of her golden oldies:

What is convicted liar Oliver North doing hosting a news show on Fox?

Aside from the fact that Col North doesn’t host a news show on Fox (picky! picky!), there’s also the slight fact that he’s not a ‘convicted liar’ matter how many times Ellen Brodsky says it:

We’ll explain this slowly, so even Brodsky can understand it. North was convicted on three counts (he was found not guilty on the three counts alleging false statements to Congress), but an Appeals court vacated the finding. (For Brodsky: that means poof! It’s gone! No conviction.) It was sent back to the trial court for further proceedings, where Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, who could have proceeded with a new trial, instead dismissed all charges. (For Brodsky: it is impossible to be convicted on charges that have been dismissed.) Ellen’s smear is not just a’s libel per se: an actionable lie.

And then there’s this:

Megyn Kelly Tells Homophobic Lie?

Another favorite smear word of the mongrels, this time Priscilla. We’ll spare you the bullet list of how many times she’s called someone ‘homophobic’. Suffice it to say, it’s a lot. What’s the lie? Read on:

At the end of the segment, Megyn Kelly clearly said this: “The group behind that play, 'Divine Sister,' is called ‘Rainbow Sash.’ That is a group know for disrupting Mass…” I contacted the group regarding Kelly’s assertions about their organization and they, clearly, denied Kelly’s claims.

Whoa! Well that settles it. If someone denies something, that’s proof it’s ‘a lie’! What unique logic. (Ellen Brodsky is still referring to Ann Coulter as a ‘voter fraud suspect’. Coulter denied it, so according to the bowsers the charges must be a lie, right? Of course Brodsky can get away with this because, despite all the posts she’s made about Coulter’s so-called vote fraud, she has yet to do one telling her credulous readers that these charges were dismissed.)

Prissy decides that Rainbow Sash never disrupted a Mass because...well, because Rainbow Sash said so. Hey, that’s some great investigative reporting there, Priscilla. You should send your article to the Pulitzer committee! But if Prissy had spent just a few minutes learning the facts instead of regurgitating propaganda from an interested party, she might have found that her Great Source wasn’t exactly truthful:

I fervently disagree with the hyper-aggressive tactics of the Rainbow Sash Movement, those LGBT Catholics who as a group visit various local parishes wearing rainbow colored shawls or sometimes scarves (usually at the major Cathedrals around the country, as it gives them the most visibility) and then attempt to disrupt the Holy Mass by doing such things as “stealing” Communion hosts and distributing them to one another, even when it has been publicly announced that they are indeed welcome at the table by merely removing their “sash” during the short 5-10 minute period of presenting themselves for Holy Communion! I personally observed an older female Eucharistic minister (more correctly Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion) who was nearly knocked over during this process, and agree with local Archbishop Emeritus Harry J Flynn that this is undeniably “politicizing the Eucharist.”

How can this be? Prissy’s source insists ‘we do not disrupt Masses’. That was all the ‘research’ Prissy needed. Or wanted. To the credulous lemmings at the kennel, unaware of the truth, Priscilla’s false claim was great journalism:

  • Well done, Priscilla. You did what the so-called "journalists" at [Fox] News don;t do because they know they'd have no story: you checked the facts. --Pegleg Peggy

How often do we see stupidity and utter gullibility all wrapped up in one embarrassingly brainless comment?

Is Prissy going to suggest that the writer who saw with his own eyes Masses being disrupted is also homophobic? That will be a tall order:

I am a same sex attracted Catholic Christian male in my middle 50s. I spent many years outside of the Church, and not a few of those were in various activist roles within the LGBT /GLBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community.

Because a homosexual said Megyn Kelly’s statement is not true (despite facts proving otherwise), Prissy suggests it’s a ‘homophobic lie’. Now a gay man says Priscilla’s statement is not true. Doesn’t that make Prissy’s article a ‘homophobic lie’? You make the call.

Will serial fabricator Priscilla apologize for her smear of Megyn Kelly? Will unicorns dance atop a magic castle made of chocolate?

We’ll give the last word to Greg Gutfeld:

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

blog comments powered by Disqus