The Ugly Truth about Fox News Democrat Tammy Bruce I'm posting the transcript of a brief but revealing on-air conversation with Fox News Democrat Tammy Bruce who was guest-hosting for Larry Elder’s talk radio show last Friday. I’ll use that conversation to discuss a broader and more important issue: People posing as progressives and Democrats whom we need to turn our backs to (My short list of pseudo-Democrats includes Bruce, Alan Colmes, Zell Miller, and Susan Estrich).
Here’s the back story on Bruce: I first heard of Bruce when she was promoting her first book, The New Thought Police on Dennis Prager’s radio show. She portrayed herself as a lesbian Democrat who was upset about the intolerance on the left (no disagreement there—much of the left that professes to be tolerant is tolerant only on its own terms). She then defended Dr. Laura against the supposed lynch mob on the left which opposed her homophobic views. I thought this was strange and I thought it was even more odd when I found out that Bruce’s column was carried by two members of the Scaife Internet Network (more on this later). I wrote an open letter to Bruce because I wanted to know what her deal was (the open letter elaborates on the preceding points).
Later, I found out that Bruce was a news analyst for the Roger Ailes’ Fox Propaganda Network. Then I read the recent series on Bruce in the Daily Howler (click here and read between 12/16 to 12/19). I concluded that it’s time for someone to tell Bruce to get her raggedy ass out of the Democratic Party. I felt it was up to me to step up and be the one to tell her where she can go—but I wanted to do it in a polite way and give salient reasons for my wish. I’ll discuss these reasons more after the transcript.
Before I go any further, let me answer potential objections about telling someone to leave a political party. I believe that the Democratic Party should be a big tent full of divergent views on issues. However, when a person purporting to be a Democrat, 1) devotes her energies largely to slamming the Democratic Party in unconstructive ways; and 2) gives credibility to people who want to destroy the Democratic Party through any means necessary, then it’s appropriate to tell that person to get bent.
First things first: here’s the transcript of the on-air conversation (I posed as Joseph from LA):
BRUCE: Let’s got to Joseph. Joseph, welcome to the Larry Elder Show. You’re on with Tammy Bruce.
SCOOBIE: Hello, Ms. Bruce.
BRUCE: Hi there.
SCOOBIE: Let me just say: the GOP needs people like you. And I say that as a Democrat because the difference between me and you is that I believe that people like Roger Ailes and Chris Ruddy should be exposed and discredited, whereas you take money from them to give these hatchet men-
BRUCE: Before Joseph, before we go on the ad hominem attacks here, and without getting--because you won't be able to give me details about exposed for what it is—-exposed what?
SCOOBIE: I can back up everything I say about your friends Chris Ruddy and--
BRUCE: Exposed what?
SCOOBIE: These are hatchet men who were involved in a giant dirty tricks operation--
[BRUCE MUTES SCOOBIE; MUTING IS A COMMON TACTIC OF TALK RADIO JOCKS]
BRUCE: Oh please. And there’re going to be black helicopters over your house in one second. I try to provide some kind of reasonable forum in which people with who--you can disagree [and] you can talk and you can discuss things. And there’s nothing I say that you don’t where it’s coming from or where I'm coming from. And, you know, if I'm going to talk about Howard Dean, I’m going to read my own words about him to you—that's what I'm going to do. [Note: I got past the screener by telling him that I wanted to respond to some of Bruce’s comments on Howard Dean’s foreign policy statements] Chris Ruddy, by the way, is a friend of mine. I like him a great deal. He runs NewsMax.com which is where my column runs—and I’m proud of that. NewsMax.com is a site you should go and enjoy and learn things—whether you agree with it or not. It’s just disappointing. It's disappointing when there’s so much we could in having a decent conversation. Part of why I took this call was that Mike had—I’m sure at some point this fellow had said that I was misrepresenting Howard Dean’s views. Well, I've just given you quotes from Howard Dean. So, is Howard Dean misrepresenting Howard Dean’s views? It's bizarre, is what they are. That's all. It's not even like I disagree. They're bizarre. They're as bizarre as claiming that there is this worldwide conspiracy and I just can't-- Save that for the overnight programs about spaceships and black helicopters. Save them and the rest of us will get on with the business of saving this nation.
When the caller after me complained that Dean supporters were "like a cult" and cited my call to support this (Note: I’m a Wesley Clark supporter). Here is how Bruce’s responded:
BRUCE: ...There's the individual like the person we heard from before who--and this is what I challenge in both of my books--are generic statements that are meant to not be dealt with in detail--that are supposed to--and this is what the left does--is name-calling and generic ad hominem statements about attacking individuals instead of dealing with details.
REALITY: Let's discuss my request and the reasoning behind it as well as Bruce's nonresponse. Bruce spends most of her time in print and on TV posing as a Democrat but is receiving money from and aiding those whose agenda is to destroy the Democratic party. In my call, I cited Roger Ailes and Christopher Ruddy. Bruce's column also appears in FrontPage Magazine run by David Horowitz. Ruddy and Horowitz are key components of the Scaife Internet Network. Ruddy was an important part of the ghoulish attempt by the right to pin the death of Vince Foster on the Clintons. So was Ailes (click here) and G. Gordon Liddy (Bruce is a regular on Liddy’s hate radio show). Also, Bruce is supportive of Sean Hannity whose hatred of Bill Clinton is so great that he spread both Sudanese and Moonie propaganda in lame attempts to discredit the former president.
If Bruce wants to give credibility to this rogue’s gallery of wing nuts, it's a free country. I also have a right to point out that she’s a media whore and ask her what her problem is. I thought it was a little ironic when she suggested I was deluded for pointing out Ruddy’s and Ailes’ misdeeds; the fact are obvious to anyone who bothers to look at their words and actions.
UPDATE: A reader reminded me that Bruce's "good friend" Christopher Ruddy was also involved in a Scaife-subsidized attempt to implicate the Clintons in the Ron Brown's death. What a dick. Also, on my short list of people who should leave the Democratic Party, I forgot to include Ed Koch, washed-up nobody and contributer to Ruddy's NewsMax who is endorsing George W. Bush in 2004. No surprise there, right after President Carter bailed out New York City under Koch's incompetent rule, Koch was cozy with candidate Ronald Reagan during the 1980 election campaign. Carter's press secretary Jody Powell later called Koch one of the biggest political ingrates in history. If you want a good primer on Tammy Bruce, check out the articles in the Daily Howler December 16 through 20.
10/04 ADDITIONAL UPDATE: True to form, Bruce supported the Swift Boat Liars and Carlton Sherwood during the presidential campaign. I confronted Bruce about Sherwood's journalistic misconduct on her show. Click here for a transcript and more details.
11/04 UPDATE: C-SPAN viewers who saw Tammy Bruce at Florida State, click here for an amusing post.
Flash: Talk Radio Phone Prank Today! A few minutes ago, Tammy Bruce got scoobied. I will have a transcript and follow-up column later. The screener was so concerned that after Bruce muted me, he got on the phone with me and chewed me out and told me that he might get fired because he let me through to talk to the right-wing shill who poses as a Democrat. By the way, I'm laughing my ass off right now.
Merry Christmas It's a half day at work, then it's going to be a San Diego Christmas. I'll probably post through the next few days and certainly on the weekend. I enjoyed this. Also, here's my favorite Christmas article.
A Wuss No More I finally went and saw Kill Bill over two months after I wussed out on seeing it. I thought it was very good but not great. I liked the animation. Put animation in a film and it will usually get me excited. By the way, my favorite film of the year is an adaptation of a comic book, American Splendor. See it. Also, attention Angelinos: my favorite film of 2002 (and favorite all-time film) City of God is playing at the AMC Beverly Connection. See it. You won't regret it.
Today I didn't feel the earthquake but many of my co-workers did. Jack Chick is going to rule the world: when I got back from my lunch break and entered the building where I worked, the building's security guard was reading Gladys--which is one of my favorites.
Luxuries Now that I have a regular job, at least for a while, I have the ability to buy luxuries. Here are a few luxuries that I have largely denied myself for the past few months:
1. A trip to the 99 Cent Store without being concerned about getting too many items.
2. Organic produce (I have a top-of-the-line juicer).
3. Yoga classes (great place to meet women).
4. A clunker car from the auto auction (last vehicle I had was a 1989 Dodge Caravan that I bought at auction for $350).
5. Some wardrobe items from the thrift store (yesterday, I got an almost new pair of Nike Air Force 1 hightops for $1.50).
6. A gym membership. I need to hit the weights so that I can be chiseled for Spring Break.
7. A Learning Annex class--or maybe two.
8. A weekend in the Promise Land (also known as San Diego).
9. A trip to the Arc Light Cinema (expensive, but they don't tolerate people who talk during the film).
10. A cheese sandwich from Canter's Deli (I like provolone on toasted sourdough with lettuce, tomato, onion and with a pickle and mayo on the side). That's good eatin'
11. Jack Chick's Alberto Series.
I hope I don't sound too extravagant.
One other note: Thanks to all who have contributed to this site. It will be a very slammin' Christmas for me.
Sweet My prediction for the GMAC Bowl: Miami University RedHawks 23, University of Louisville Cardinals 14. Actual score: Miami University RedHawks 49, University of Louisville Cardinals 28.
I'm posting later tonight, I promise. UPDATE: D'oh! I fell asleep. I'll post on Saturday.
Yo Sorry about the dearth of posts this week but I found a somewhat real job. It's temporary but it will more than pay the bills for a couple months (no need for the Ramen Noodles--or as my friend calls them, "Roman Noodles") . The Howler really has Tammy Bruce's number this week; he did his homework. As I write this, my Miami RedHawks are kicking butt in the GMAC Bowl (check it out on ESPN2). I will post tomorrow and over the weekend extensively.
Some People Just Don't Know When to Quit In my previous post, I linked to a post that detailed how Joseph Farah had prostituted his journalistic integrity by becoming a Scaife-paid hack and pleasing his delusional patron with outrageous and paranoid conspiracy theories about Vince Foster's death as well as promoting the infamous "Clinton body count" urban legend popular with Freepers, the black helicopter crowd, dittoheads, and other fuckwits on the hard right. (In case you're too lazy to scroll down, here is the post; read the part about Farah carefully).
One thing that hasn't changed is that Farah is still trying to raise questions about the circumstances surrounding Foster's death long after fellow Foster conspiracy nuts like Roger Ailes dropped the issue and hoped that people had forgotten about their descent into hate-filled lunacy. Read Farah's most recent article on Vince Foster. In it, Farah writes: "Color me a 'conspiracy theorist' if you wish." Yeah, that and "major league dickbag." Call Joseph Farah toll-free at 1-800-496-3266 and tell him he is wrong.
Robert Bartley's Legacy of Shame It's not nice to speak ill of the dead. However, in the case of the Wall Street Journal's Robert Bartley--whom former colleagues James Taranto and Peggy Noonan respectively called "a journalistic giant" and "freedom's best friend"--it is appropriate. The only difference between Bartley--who headed the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages--and Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass, is that Blair and Glass lied to help their careers--Bartley lied to undermine democracy and smear political opponents. It was fitting that George W. Bush gave Bartley the Presidential Medal of Freedom; a fraudulent president gave a fraudulent journalist this award because the fraudulent president's idea of a patriot is someone who helps him out--and Bartley's fraudulent journalism aided Bush big time.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial page under Bartley was the most scurrilous editorial page of any newspaper not owned by a South Korean businessman who thinks he's God. It was fitting that when Bartley stepped down, Paul Gigot took over (Gigot, if you'll remember, applauded the GOP-led operatives who violently prevented vote-counting in Miami-Dade County in 2000--Gigot called the anti-democratic thugs "bourgeois rioters"). During Bill Clinton's presidency, the WSJ editorial page printed every nutball conspiracy theory out there--such as the notorious Mena conspiracy; at least bottom-feeders like Joseph Farah and Christopher Ruddy could say that they were motivated by a paranoid billionaire's money to prostitute their journalistic integrity. What was Bartley's excuse? I could go on about the editorial page under Bartley; one anecdote amused me: on the same day the Journal's editorial page applauded Bill Sammon's book, Sammon was being exposed as a journalistic fraud.
Bartley was a man who didn't care about the destruction he caused to journalism or to American institutions. When David Brock--at long last--came clean and told the truth about the smear campaign of which he was a party, Bartley dismissed him as "the John Walker Lindh of contemporary conservatism" rather than engaging in any self-reflection. This lack of self-reflection is what has mystified me about the older members of the right's smear machine: when you get to the point in your life in which the years you have lived are longer than the years you have to live, you usually decide that life is too short to be an asshole. Not true for Robert Bartley. What a waste of talent.
I Disagree with Randy Newman I don't love LA. In fact, I don't like the city in which I live much at all. Don't get me wrong. There are a lot of things to do in the City of Angels. It's a great place to visit but I just don't want to live here. This city is sapping my creative energy. I don't fit in here and I think that's a good thing. I'm in Babylon.
I got back from a job interview in San Diego (and I am praying to God that I get the job). SD and I are on the same page--big time. A day in SD really recharged my batteries. It was a bittersweet experience because I knew that I had to go back to LA. If case I don't get the job, does anyone know anyone in SD who has a spare guesthouse? I don't mind doing a Kato Kaelin.
UPDATE: One cyber woman who has a crush on me (click here and scroll down) is disappointed that I'm looking to move to SD. She would also be disillusioned to hear that I now have a conservative haircut (I need it to get a real job). Also, because I have been on the computer blogging and looking for jobs instead of working out, I am losing my bod. I'm not Jack Black yet, but I no longer have 8 percent body fat.
But How Old Is She in Human Years? I'm going to be away on Monday, so I'm posting this today. Wish Ann Coulter a happy 42nd birthday (her birthday is December 8th). Egreetings has some nice e-cards. I'm sure her administrator will forward your gretting: tom@anncoulter.org Do it today so that you don't forget.
I will post tonight and over the weekend. In the meantime, this week the Daily Howler has been smokin': check it out. Today, the Howler takes on Krauthammer.
D'oh I was going to post tonight but some things came up (I might get a steady gig). If any reader finds a good column by a blogger on George W. Bush's award to Robert Bartley, please e-mail me.
Posting Tonight I'll post tonight. To you people who complained that I have not posted enough recently: bite me. I'm getting ready to go to I job I hate. One small note, I checked on Sitemeter and someone came onto this site because they used the Google keywords "Kelly Brock Nude" I never heard of this person or her music but she does look fine based on her official web site picture.
How The Mighty Have Fallen That's how I feel regarding my failure last night to crash the premiere after-party for Tom Cruise's new film The Last Samurai. I wasn't even in the ballgame. The main problem was that I was told that the premiere was at Mann's Chinese Theatre, but it was held at Mann's Village Theatre in Westwood. Duh.
Bofore that, I went to a meetup for Clark supporters at Canter's Deli in the Fairfax district. I told the group about how easy it is to start a blog and also how important it is to take on the right's media--namely hate radio. Talk radio jocks have it in for Clark because they know that he would have a great shot of picking off Bush if here were the Democratic nominee. In September, when Clark announced his candidacy, I documented on this blog how hate radio was earning its name with its vicious attacks on Clark, his military record, and his patriotism (click here and scroll down). Right now, I'm working a flunky job to pay the rent and I simply don't have the time to monitor talk radio as I had in past months; I expressed my hope that someone would take up the slack and monitor talk radio for its disinformation on Clark.
A Sedated Bill O'Reilly? I was going through some old unlabeled videotapes that people had used to record TV shows. On one of the tapes was a portion of the show Inside Edition from about a decade ago. Bill O'Reilly was the host and he appeared to be sedated compared to his present cranky old man persona. He was soft-spoken and reasonable; he was like an Irish Alan Colmes. Apparently, when O'Reilly moved to Fox, he knew his new audience of mouthbreathers wouldn't buy that act so he's doing his old man on a barstool act.
Prediction Miami University 30, University of Central Florida 10. If the 16th ranked Miami University RedHawks win and the 10th ranked University of Miami Hurricanes lose to Pittsburgh on Saturday, then it would be the first time since the 1970's that Miami of Ohio is ranked higher than Miami of Florida in the college football polls (click here to see the current rankings).
UPDATE: Actual score: Miami University 56, University of Central Florida 21
2ND UPDATE: Miami University is ranked 15th in the latest USA Today/ESPN poll. Miami of Florida beat Pittsburgh so Miami of Florida is still ranked higher than Miami of Ohio.
Quiz What's wrong with this op-ed? There are several things, some of them obvious, some of them not. E-mail your answers. I'll write about it in a few days.
Hannity’s Racial Outrage Those of you familiar with my blog know that Dr. Laura and Bill O’Reilly creep me out. Sean Hannity doesn’t; he just irritates me. He’s similar to the character Bob Williams (see addendum) who is a twerpy know-it-all; the big difference is that Bob Williams is entertaining and Hannity isn’t.
Well, this week, when Michael Jackson played the race card by portraying his arrest as racist, Hannity was right to criticize the singer. However, it would have been nice if Hannity practiced what he preaches.
Addendum: Bob Williams is a character who has appeared in recent Chick tracts. He is a nauseating (but amusing) fundy shill whose pat answers have the power of making people go on their hands and knees in prayer in public places (such as the reformed Mason who sees the error of his ways and prostrates himself in a Seinfeldesque diner in the Chick tract "Good Ol’ Boys"; the sinner shouts “God, forgive me! I renounce the ‘Brotherhood’ and I turn my whole heart to You, Lord Jesus! I don’t want to go to hell!”). In "The Nervous Witch", Williams tells an ex-witch (with a straight face: “Samantha, the [Harry] Potter books open a doorway that will put untold millions of kids into hell.”). In "Gladys", Williams greets the unrepentant witch from The Nervous Witch with “Hi, Holly. We’re still praying for you.” In "Sin City", Williams casts out the demon of a homosexual minister, Reverend Ray. To access all of these tracts, go to Chick Publications’ tract list. Final thought on Bob Williams, I wonder when Chick created this character whether he knew about Robert Williams, a prominent underground cartoonist.
GLASS HOUSES: When we saw Shattered Glass this weekend, we were quite surprised by how strong the film is. Yes, there are a few massive flaws, flaws we plan to discuss next week. But we strongly suggest that you see this film—remembering, of course, that Bernie Goldberg is every bit as big a dissembler as Stephen Glass ever was. Why did Glass get canned while Goldberg gets puffed? Good question! Next week, we’ll discuss it. By the way: Ten months after Glass got fired, his former editor, Michael Kelly, wrote “Farmer Al” for the Washington Post. It was as big as any fraud Glass produced—and a thousand times more consequential. But Glass was expendable; Kelly wasn’t. More on these topics next week.
One more thing, Glass's journalistic dishonesty generally was about mundane things. He created stories out of whole cloth for the purpose of benefiting himself. On the other hand, Kelly wrote blatantly dishonest pieces such as the fraudulent "Farmer Al" story to harm others. Kelly will not be missed by anyone who cares about journalistic integrity.
Predictions I got chewed out by a fellow Miami U. alum because I only gave predictions for Ohio State games (I have degrees from both Miami U. and Ohio State). That was fair because the RedHawks are ranked 18th in the country. So here are today's predictions:
Miami University 34, Ohio University 9.
Ohio State 17, Michigan 13
UPDATE: Actual scores: Miami University 49, Ohio University 31.
Michigan 35, Ohio State 21
Giving the Devil His Due If you’re familiar with this site, you know that Bill O’Reilly is not one of my favorite people (scroll down). I think he’s full of it and, on a personal level, he really creeps me out. However, to his credit--unlike Fox News colleague Sean Hannity and others--he didn’t demagogue Ted Kennedy’s “neanderthal” comment; on today's Radio Factor, he simply told the truth; O’Reilly simply said the obvious: that Kennedy used the term to refer to judicial nominees’ philosophy and that it was not a racial slur directed at any particular person. Spinsanity has a good post on the matter.
The Virtue Twins: Limbaugh and Bennett Over the weekend, I will do a post on the William Bennett and Rush Limbaugh and how the mainstream media missed the real scandals of these two. In the meantime, read Rogers Ailes on the lame defense of Limbaugh by Bennett.
Did You do Your Homework Assignment? Scroll down and read Tuesday's post, "Do I have my head on straight or what?" Call Bill O'Reilly and tell him he is wrong. Bill O'Reilly's phone number is (212) 301-3697. I realize that unless you're in the New York City area, it's a long distance call; however, if you're like me and you have a Sam's Club phone card, it's only about two cents a minute.
The Irony. Oh, the Irony! David Horowitz's FrontPage Magazine has an article by Valerie Plame outer Robert Novak titled "Democrats Ruin the Intelligence Committee." The subtitle: "Playing politics with our national security."
Do I have my head on straight or what? In case you missed it, over the past week or so, Bill O’Reilly has been attempting to portray the publication of books by members of the left (which he calls “defamation books”) as a coordinated dirty tricks operation similar to the Nixon plumber's unit. “So we’re talking about a really dangerous trend,” O’Reilly warned radio listeners today, “where the folks are going to be watching this brutal thing play out and a lot of people who are not well informed are going to be forming impressions based on rank propaganda, defamation, and slander and libel and nobody’s there to stop it.” I assumed that when O’Reilly referred to the smear books, he was referring to recent books by Joe Conason, David Corn, Michael Moore, Molly Ivins, and, of course, Al Franken. O’Reilly has been very vague about the specifics of this “unprecedented” dirty tricks operations such as some of the alleged slanders by these authors.
Last week, I called his radio show (scroll down to my 11/13 post) and tried to address how his current and former colleagues (namely Roger Ailes, Christopher Ruddy, and Joseph Farah) were involved in a real and unprecedented dirty tricks operation that involved transparently false allegations—such as the infamous “Clinton Body Count” and various paranoid conspiracy theories surrounding the death of Vince Foster. Unfortunately, with his mute button, O’Reilly sealed off discussion before it could begin (what a pussy).
What is ironic is that today O’Reilly pooh-poohed Scaife. He also made the astounding claim that Farah’s WorldNetDaily and Ruddy’s NewsMax (both run by Scaife-paid operatives who instigated Vince Foster hysteria and the Clinton Body Count—e.g., click here) were tame compared to left-wing web sites.
If you think this is wrong, call O’Reilly at 212- 301-3697 and tell him what you think. One phone call is all I ask.
Thank God! The Los Angeles transit strike is over! It's been hell for those of us without cars to get around LA. It's tough trying to get a job when you don't have transportation other than gypsy cabs. I'm all in favor of unions but I agree with Calvin Coolidge who said, ".. there is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere, anytime."
Instant Analysis: Rush Should Get a Refund I just listened to the first hour of the first day Rush Limbaugh got back from drug rehab. The treatment failed at least when it came to humanizing the talk radio jock: Limbaugh is his same nasty self. He even used some of the psychological mumbo jumbo he learned in treatment to slam Democrats: He said that Democrats hate themselves and that's why they hate Republicans.
That's too bad. At least Limbaugh is marginalized enough that people aren't taking him seriously. I realize a survey showed that loyalty among the ditto-monkeys is almost as high as ever. However, with people outside the choir, it's a whole different story.
Defending The Defenseless? Yesterday, I was listening to Bill O’Reilly’s radio show (the co-host of the day was Fox & Friends’ E.D. Hill) and he asked listeners why Hillary Clinton was so popular. So I called up and was put on hold by the screener (I told the screener I was “Toby from Glendale”). Here is our brief conversation plus O’Reilly’s tiresome diatribe before my call:
O’REILLY: ...I don’t know what the woman [Hillary Clinton] has done. And she talks a good game, you know, but she’s managed. She doesn’t come on The [O’Reilly] Factor or anybody else’s program. She’s managed. And I’m going to myself: Look, forty percent of America is willing to fall on their swords for her. They’ll buy her book [Living History]. The book doesn’t say anything. Come on, it doesn’t say anything, but here’s twenty-five dollars. I’ll vote for you for president. You’ll be the most powerful person in the world—based on WHAT? Toby, Glendale, California, tell me, Toby.
SCOOBIE: Hi. Hillary appeals to moderate Democrats like me because she’s effective at taking on the right. And you’re absolutely wrong that her book doesn’t say anything. For instance, in her book, she does a good job of tearing into your boss, Roger Ailes for his—
[O’Reilly potted down my audio and was able to talk over me (click here and scroll down to O'Reillyus Interruptus). The end of my sentence, which the radio listeners didn’t hear was “hateful conspiracy-mongering.”]
O’REILLY: It’s ridiculous!
SCOOBIE: No it’s not [very faint because my audio was potted down]
[O’Reilly disconnects Scoobie]
O’REILLY: [yelling] That’s what you got out of the book—that she tears into Roger Ailes for a conspiracy?
E.D. HILL: [chuckles]
O’REILLY: [Yelling] You’re a nut, Toby. [calmly] With all due respect.
E.D. HILL: [chuckles]
O’REILLY: [Yelling] You’re a nut. That’s why you like her: because she tears into someone who can’t defend themselves [sic]? Come on. 1-877-9-NO-SPIN. We’ll be right back.
REALITY: My statement and O’Reilly’s nonresponse raise some important issues. First things first, here is what Hillary wrote about the defenseless Roger Ailes in Living History: “...Roger Ailes, then President of CNBC and now running Fox, accused the Administration of ‘a cover-up with regard to Whitewater that includes...land fraud, illegal contributions, abuse of power...suicide cover-up—possible murder”(ellipses in original). This statement was not an anomaly. Far from it: it was part of a pattern of behavior by Ailes and other O’Reilly associates during the Clinton administration. As I’ve pointed out numerous times on my blog, Roger Ailes was an important component of what journalist Trudy Lieberman called, “The Vincent Foster Factory”—a dirty-tricks operation in which operatives acted like impartial journalists to spread the paranoid tale that the Clintons were responsible for the death of Vince Foster (Lieberman’s article for the Columbia Journalism Review focused on the activities of two Scaife-paid alleged humans, Joseph Farah and Christopher Ruddy, both of whom, like Ailes, have written paychecks to O’Reilly; O’Reilly’s column used to be carried by Farah’s WorldNetDaily and is currently carried by Ruddy’s Newsmax). Also, Ailes was executive producer of Rush Limbaugh’s short-lived television show in which the host fanned the flames of paranoia surrounding Foster’s death. Ailes also appeared on Don Imus’s radio show and touted Ruddy’s laughably incompetent “journalism” on the Foster issue: "The guy who's been doing an excellent job for the New York Post [Chris Ruddy]...for the first time on the Rush Limbaugh show said that...he did not believe it was suicide.... Now, I don't have any evidence.... These people are very good at hiding or destroying evidence." Let me get this straight: I am to be considered a nut for exposing Ailes’s loony conspiracy theories?
...[T]he DNC is also peddling some of the smear books that defame Americans in the worst possible way... Now the danger is that DNC Chief Terry McAuliffe is using and paying professional hit men to demean and denigrate political opponents. That's exactly what President Nixon did when he used the plumber's union to harass his opponents.
As far as I know, O’Reilly hasn’t named any of these alleged smear books, but I’m guessing that O’Reilly considered the following newly released books in the smear category:
1. Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right by Al Franken.
2. The Oh Really? Factor by Peter Hart (I just read this book; it’s fantastic).
3. The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception by David Corn
4. Joe Conason’s Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth 5. Michale Moore's Dude, Where's My Country? 6. The Great Unraveling by Paul Krugman.
Although nonpartisan watchdogs like Spinsanity found some major flaws in Moore’s book, the basic premises of the other books can withstand careful scrutiny. Why is this the case? Because these authors--unlike O’Reilly’s former and current associates—based their arguments on substantive issues instead relying on Scaife’s paranoid delusions and political dirty tricks.
Could someone let me know what basis O’Reilly had for calling me a nut? Perhaps it was my words. Or perhaps it was that he could sense in my voice that he really creeps me out (click here; O’Reilly also kind of reminds me of the relative everyone has met at family reunions as a kid who said things like, “When I was your age, I used to walk in snow fifteen miles each way to school and my parents were too poor to buy me boots”). I also do have to confess that O’Reilly’s whole essence pisses me off--especially when he jerks people around with his “no-spin zone” bullshit. Hank Hill summed up my feelings when he said he didn’t have a problem with anger; he had a problem with idiots. In fact, I’ve made the case previously that mocking the hard right is a sign of mental health.
Finally, on the topic of people who can’t defend themselves, is it possible to make a nuttier claim than the one O'Reilly made about Ailes not being able to defend himself against Hillary Clinton’s allegation in Living History? Roger Ailes is the king of slime and defend. Fellow right-wing operative, the late Lee Atwater, said that Ailes had “two settings: attack and destroy.” Ailes is now the nation’s most powerful political operative who runs the nation's most-watched cable network. If Ailes had a legitimate beef with what Hillary wrote, he possesses a huge microphone to blast her. However, Ailes didn’t bother to address what Mrs. Clinton wrote. It reminds me of the situation that occurred with David Brock when he came clean about his involvement with the right-wing smear machine in Blinded by the Right; at first, operatives like David Horowitz tried to slime him, but when those efforts backfired, they ignored what Brock wrote and hoped that he went away.
If anyone wants to know O’Reilly’s attitude about people who truly can’t defend themselves, here’s part of the transcript of Al Franken’s recent speech before the National Conference of Media Reform:
Bill O’Reilly was on Terry Gross’s show Fresh Air and he walked off. He said he was treated unfairly. He was asked tough questions. [mocking O’Reilly in a whiny voice] Teacher! Teacher! Defund them!
[Audience laughter]
He went on the air the next and said that PBS and NPR get a billion dollars from Congress.
[Audience laughter]
He just makes things—is this on the radio?--makes stuff up.
[Audience laughter]
He just pulls it directly from his bum.
[Audience laughter]
Now the NPR ombudsman was so scared that he criticized Terry Gross for asking too tough questions. And I don’t’ know if he listened to the same interview I did or maybe he just doesn’t know O’Reilly because O’Reilly lied throughout the interview. And I’ll give you—and one that made me kind of angry. She asked him about this Harpers article where he had interviewed Jeremy Glick. Amy Goodman talked about the people in the World Center and Jeremy Glick had lost his father in the World Trade Center and signed a petition against the war in Iraq--and that really made O’Reilly mad. He said, “I want this kid in here. I want to talk to him.” So he had Jeremy Glick on, who’s a Ph. D. candidate at Rutgers and Jeremy was against the war and he said that Bush had ... funded the mujahedeen and those kind of things. O’Reilly got very anger and told him, “Shut up! Shut up!” Sound familiar? [Franken earlier in the speech mentioned how O’Reilly told him to shut up at the book fair in Los Angeles]
[Audience laughter]
And he turned off the kid’s mike and that was end of the interview. This is on radio, right? He said according to Glick, who told Harpers and O’Reilly hasn’t denied this—he told Jeremy, “Get the f out of here or I’ll f-ing tear you apart!”
Now Terry Gross asked him about this and O’Reilly said, “Did you read the transcript of the interview?” [Gross] said, “I read the Harpers thing.” [O’Reilly responded] “Yeah, well that’s what the elite media does. They didn’t have the whole transcript. They took it out of context--that’s what they did. You see, this kid said some outrageous things. He said that...Bush the Elder and this president had orchestrated 9/11. Well as a journalist, it was my duty to ask if he had any proof and he didn’t. [huffily] And that’s defamation.”
[Audience laughter]
Well I had written about this in my book and I read the transcript and Jeremy Glick never said anything of the sort...Jeremy is a Ph.D. candidate at Rutgers who makes his money by writing...He e-mailed me and said it’s hard to get a gig when people think you’re a conspiracy nut. Here’s a guy who’s a powerful guy who attacks a kid with no platform. The question is: What do we do about that? It’s why I wrote my book.
[Audience applauds]
We have to take what they say and expose it and use it against them. My job is to do ju-jitsu. When they lie, use it against them. Hold them up to scorn and ridicule. Because what they want us to do is, “Shut up!” They want you to “Shut up!” But don’t shut up.
[Audience applauds loudly]
Don’t shut up! Stand up! Stand up and fight! Stand up and fight! Everyone here: stand up and fight! Thank you!
[Audience applauds loudly]
Note: for an audiotape copy of Franken’s entire speech, call Democracy Now at 1-800-881-2359 and order the audiotape of the 11/10 show.
I'm Back--With a Vengeance In case you were listening to Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor, I was the caller "Toby from Glendale." I will have a transcript later (teaser: O'Reilly called me "a nut" for pointing out factual information). I was able to get two and a half sentences in before the grumpy old dude hit the mute button (what a pussy). The important thing is that I was able to get my point out to listeners.
I had difference plans for reentering the blogging world. I had planned a different--and more spectacular--stunt. With luck, that will occur in the near future.
So check out the site later. And if you enjoy the site and haven't contributed to the site, how about throwing me a few bucks (I haven't got a job offer yet but I have some good prospects--see previous post).
A Note to Fans of Scoobie Davis Online I’m going on hiatus out of necessity. My flunky job is ending and the real job I was expecting has not been offered to me. Plus, the last check I received was not as big as I thought it would be. So right now, I’m scrambling to get a gig.
That hurts because blogging is one of my joys in life. Obviously, a lot of you out there like my site because October was my biggest month for hits (I exceeded my previous record by over 17,000 hits). What I am asking is that if you have found this site to have been of use to you, then please do the following: Click here and contribute to my Amazon Honor System account. A small contribution will go a long way.
I’m retooling for 2004 and I have big plans to throw some monkey wrenches in the hard right’s smear machine on a level that goes way beyond my previous efforts—trust me, I have big plans. For those of you new to this sight, let me tell you a little about what I have done and who I am.
If you’re not familiar with this web site, here are just a few of the highlights:
Prior to 2002, I was a well-paid administrator who came to Los Angeles because I was writing, acting, and doing other creative projects. I have always been interested in politics, but during the 1990’s, I found that hate radio and Scaife’s “journalists” were engaged in a massive effort to smear Bill Clinton that extended to his family (at the risk of sounding like an ad hominem argument, I suspect that at least part of the reason for Rush Limbaugh’s drug addiction was his inability to live with himself—I know if I were in his shoes, I couldn’t). During the 2000 race, I was appalled at the way in which the right’s smear machine was trying to portray Al Gore as a pathological liar—with the help of members of the supposed liberal mainstream media. Seeing the beneficiary of media bias, George W. Bush, carrying Bernard Goldberg’s absurd book Bias (read comments about it in Al Franken’s Lies and Alterman’s What Liberal Media?) added insult to injury.
I was sick and tired of how the hard right has been riding roughshod over decency during the past decade and how the right-wing smear machine had not been meaningfully addressed by the media (e.g., Ann Coulter’s intellectually dishonest Slander received favorable reviews in The New York Times, Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times). It was right after the publication of Bias that I told my boss I didn’t want to work there anymore and I turned to blogging. I see myself in the role of doing the job that Howard Kurtz is paid to do (but is not doing). It’s been a rough two years financially, but I think I’ve made a difference. Doing flunky part-time jobs and taking public transportation in LA (which I can’t do now because of the transit strike) is not glamorous but not too many other people out there are doing what I’m doing. I live in the McArthur Park area of LA (and if I don’t come up with next month’s rent, I’m going to be living in McArthur Park). Nevertheless, I’m glad I made these choices in my life.
Does This Memo Outrage You? I'm back and I'll have an important post tomorrow. I listened to the last part of Sean Hannity's radio show today. Hannity's panties were in a bunch because he received what was allegedly written by a Democratic member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:
1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.
For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.
The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]
2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.
In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.
The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]
3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.
The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:
A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:
B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.
In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.
SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.
The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.
Hannity was waving the bloody shirt on his show, mentioning that troops were in harm's way. One important thing to keep in mind: this is the same Hannity who regarded the act by senior administration officials of outing an undercover CIA analyst as a "nonstory." So let me get this straight: the act of exposing an individual responsible for preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is no big deal, but pushing for an independent investigation of this and other administration misdeeds is the worst form of treason. What a hack.
Note: I got the transcript of the alleged memo from the wing nut web site Newsmax
Every Democrat Should Read This Review In The New York Review of Books, Paul Krugman reviews Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose's Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America and Joe Conason's Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. While all of it is must reading, here is the paragraph of Krugman's review that grabbed me:
Incidentally, some squeamish liberals have condemned Conason for these tales, saying that we should limit ourselves to policy, not go after personality and past history. But I'm completely with Conason on this. After all, today's right wing flourishes in part by using the personal to distract voters from policy. Is a conservative politician a reliable friend of the privileged and well-connected? Never mind, let's talk about his sterling family life. Is a liberal politician spectacularly successful in his conduct of economic policy? But he had an affair! Even if you think that public debate ought to be about policy, not persons, it's necessary to defeat this strategy—and if exposing the dissonance between personal pretensions and reality is what it takes, go for it.