Pretty good clip here of Bill O’Reilly on the Jay Leno Show last night.  In it O’Reilly dishes everything Glenn Beck, and says Beck “thinks rats are invading the White House sent by Satan.”  Look, we all know Beck is bat-shit crazy.  O’Reilly’s assertions just belabor that thinking in a more playful manner.  In fact, I’m willing to bet Bill likes having Beck at Fox to deflect from his own ego-maniacal arrogance.  They’re made for one another.  Check out the clip.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I sat riveted in my chair for a good 20 seconds before I realized this was one of the most futile exchanges I’ve seen in a while.  Debating whether or not American citizens should have Miranda rights is anathema to American ideals.  Throwing the baby out with the bath water.  I’m amazed that conservative fervor toward combating terrorism, blinds them to the very tenets of freedom they champion so strenuously.  Anyway, watch Beck and O’Reilly have at it:

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Here she is on her planet.  It must be lonely at the bottom.

Oh yeah.  She led a protest of Fox News for not covering the Barack Obama “birther” thing.  Four people showed.  That is the power of nuttiness!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Heres’ how this verbal tete a’ tete came about:

Wow.  Here’s Ballentine, exhulting his emasculating smackdown on Twitter.

It’s really a shame that Ballentine felt the need to resort to school yard racist insults. The desperation of a man who’s run out of ideas perhaps? The problem is it weakens Ballentine’s case as some de facto authority on matters of race (Did he ever have one?) It also reveals a clear rift in the black intelligentsia: Those that disagree with the monolithic thinking of the black liberal, is doomed to dwell in the big house with Massa.

It’s the age of Obama people! Kill this noise!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

News Corp Head Rupert Murdoch announced Sunday that they have fired left-leaning political commentator Marc Lamont Hill. Hill, a professor at Temple University, was often used as a foil to conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly on his show the O’Reilly Factor. I always thought Hill’s views brought some measure of balance to an extraordinarily slanted network. Here’s The Hollywood Reporter’s take on the Hill dismissal:

Asked about the White House’s recent suggestion that Fox News is acting like an arm of the Republican Party, Murdoch simply said at a shareholders meeting that the criticism has “tremendously increased their ratings.”

White House officials have recently stepped up pointed criticism of Fox News in blog postings and media appearances.

Murdoch also said that Hill has been fired. He revealed the move after a shareholder had raised the question of how Hill was hired, citing his “reputation of defending cop killers and racists.”

Hill, a frequent guest on “The O’Reilly Factor” and other Fox News shows, has been the target of increasing criticism on the blogosphere for alleged sympathies to controversial figures including Assata Shakur and Mumia Abu-Jamal. Though Hill bills himself as an expert on hip-hop culture, he also drew fire for serving as a liberal foil for various Fox News personalities on subjects far from his stated area of expertise.

Hill also recently defended ousted White House official Van Jones on “On the Record With Greta Van Susteren.”

I guess Fox News doesn’t tolerate these types of combustible personalities, who offer strong, controversial opinions…

Glen Beck, July 28th 2009:

Hypocrisy, thy names are Rupert Murdoch, and Glen Beck.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Happy birthday to the most dominant news network on television. If only they would use their powers for righteous purposes, and not propagandist fire-breathing. Still, it is important to recognize the milestone. Rupert Murdoch has turned the network from fledgling upstart, to global behemoth in a short period of time. Here’s a look at Fox News in honor of their birthday, and because I’m feeling generous and not a smart ass. For a change.

Okay.  I’m still a smart ass.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

“I want, not for personally for me, but for working Americans, to have a option, that if they don’t like their health insurance, if it’s too expensive, they can’t afford it, if the government can cobble together a cheaper insurance policy that gives the same benefits, I see that as a plus for the folks,” – Bill O’Reilly

Hannity and Beck are gonna be so pissed!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

This is Harry Alford.  He is the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce.   Recently Mr. Alford had a verbal altercation with senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), over his assertion that the new Cap and Trade legislation will cost jobs and lost wages for American workers.  Senator Boxer tried to refute his claims by citing the support of other black organizations to the bill.  Let’s just say that Mr. Alford took exception to her line of defense:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE_jGD5nZ6U

I’m not quite following senator Boxer’s reasoning here.  Is she implying that all black organizations think in lock-step with one another, so Mr. Alford’s opposition runs counter to black monolithic thought?  Or is she honestly quoting other Black leaders just as a counter to Mr. Alford’s political ideology?  Hmmm… what does Bill O’Reilly think? Mr. Alford appeared on the O’Reilly Factor last night to discuss the confrontation with senator Boxer.  Here are some excerpts of the interview:

O’REILLY: All right, but they say Cap and Trade and all the green windmill stuff and all the stuff that they want to do will create more jobs, will help all Americans – including African-Americans – and you seem to object to their point-of-view.

ALFORD: Well, we got the Charles Rivers Associates Group to do a study for us. They’re a very reputable group. And it showed that, in the end, if this Cap and Trade hustle were to be delivered to the American people, in the end we would have 2.3 million less jobs than we do now. It does not make sense to have less jobs, higher cost of energy, and still the world is in the same predicament carbon emission wise.

O’REILLY: All right, so your position kind of mirrors my position. It’s interesting. Now, you’re not an ideological group, the Chamber of Commerce, right? I mean, you’re just a business-

ALFORD: Nonpartisan, nonpartisan, not for profit. We espouse capitalism and entrepreneurship.

O’REILLY: Okay. So now, you’re presenting your objection – which I think is [an] absolutely valid objection – to the Cap and Trade – you call it a “hustle,” I call it “Cap and Con.” So we’re pretty much on the same page. And Boxer, in order to debate you, puts up the NAACP, a liberal group, who thinks that Cap and Trade and the other green industries is just terrific. Now, you say that’s a racial deal. Explain that further.

ALFORD: It was pure race. It was like down there in Mississippi back in the bad old days when one black preacher would rise up against the big boss. He’d go find another black preacher to fight against that black preacher. You know, it was ugly. And she jumped, she opened up a mud pit that I wasn’t going to jump into.

O’REILLY: Well, you shocked her. You stunned her with that analysis. And she had no answer to it. She kept saying he’d be proud, he’d be proud. I mean, it was almost comical. But you stunned her because I don’t think, Mr. Alford, and maybe you see it differently, I don’t think Ms. Boxer had any intent to bring racism into the debate. She just wanted to win the argument and said, “Well, look, I’ll use the NAACP, I’ll take it out of context to throw the guy off his game.” I think that’s what she was doing.

ALFORD: Actually, Bill, I think it’s her persona. I don’t think she can help herself. When she gets caught up in a rut like that or up against the wall, race comes out. You know, she’s the brainchild of Anita Hill attacking Clarence Thomas was Barbara Boxer. You go back to Election 2004 and all of that garbage against Ken Blackwell, the secretary of state of Ohio, saying he rigged the election, that was Barbara Boxer.

While I think Bill O’Reilly never misses a chance to exploit the shortcomings of liberals in any capacity, this exchange between Boxer and Alford is troubling to me.  It didn’t quite sound like political ideology over race in my opinion.  Then again, I’m not privy to the inner most thoughts of Barbara Boxer, and I would stop short in calling her a “racist.”  With that said, I would like more of an explanation from her about her intent.

The days of identity politics never seem to die, even in the post racial society.  I am shocked though, that senator Boxer didn’t lobotomize Mr. Alford for repeatedly referring to her as “ma’am.”[digg=http://digg.com/politics/The_Post_Racial_Society_Not_for_Harry_Alford_wright]

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Oh boy.   Bill O’Reilly is a crazy guy.  I don’t mean crazy in the “it would be cool for me to put a tribal tattoo on my face crazy”.  I mean crazy in the sense that he believes no one in his television audience is smart enough to discern lies from truth, crazy.  I’ve watched the guy for a few years.  Growing up in Connecticut, I had the privilege of watching O’Reilly in his formative years as the host of  “A Courant Affair”.  Even then, his audacious style and overbearing hubris were on display, as evidenced by the now infamous youtube clip that’s been circulated.  Yet he always struck me as a quick-witted, knowledgeable journalist despite his antics.

That is until his reign as the preeminent prime-time talking head on cable television.  The O’Reilly Factor is the top-ranked program on Fox News Channel, and the most watched news program on cable.  His audience expects him to deliver the truth in a “fair and balanced” way, which usually means skewed on a conservative curve, lest they fall in line with mainstream media reporting.  O’Reilly’s job here is less hard journalist, and more agitator and rabble rouser for his audience, all done under the illusion of fairness.  Now calling it fair and balanced in my opinion, means reporting on issues and stories equally from both sides of the spectrum.  I don’t believe that’s the case, but that’s not the issue here.  What is at issue, is the veracity with which you report on the news.  Your credibility as a man with an extreme amount of power and sway, rests on you making the truth the news, and not making yourself the news.

Take the issue of the murder of  Dr.  George Tiller, a late term abortion doctor who allgegedly was killed in Kansas by a pro-life supporter.  O’Reilly railed against Dr. Tiller for years as seen  Here.  The issue here isn’t necessarily what O’Reilly’s views on Tiller were, but his views on other media outlets for their coverage of Tiller’s murder, and the lack of coverage of other similar events.  In O’Reilly’s view, liberal media bias was clearly on display with their “positive” coverage of Tiller and “negative” coverage of the anti-abortion movement in the form of alleged murder suspect Scott Roeder.  O’Reilly went as far as to say that another tragedy, the murder of Private William Long at an Arkansas Army recruiting station, was barely covered by one media outlet because they were too busy soft peddling their coverage in favor of Tiller and the pro-choice movement.   Check out the clip and determine for yourself.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuFp3G_OFxU

Being an agitator can be be a good thing, but you better make sure you check your facts first.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.