F(au)x News: PR Arm of the GOP

Here’s enough reason for Democrats not to trust Fox News, and to correctly describe it as an extension of the republican party:

Journalists strive to report the news, not to be the news. So Fox News should have been a bit embarrassed to headline a story that ended with the Nevada Democratic Party canceling Fox’s sponsorship of a pre-caucus debate.

Then again, Fox is not a typical news organization. [...] Fox’s prime commitment is to the triumph of conservative politics, not to a well-informed public. From hiring hosts to selecting stories to framing questions for discussion, Fox demonstrates its dedication to advancing the ideological interests of the right.

As former Fox reporter/anchor Jon Du Pre put it in the documentary “Outfoxed,” “We weren’t necessarily, as it was told to us, a newsgathering organization so much as we were a proponent of a point of view … we were there to reinforce a constituency.”

[...]

What evidence, forged or otherwise, did Fox rely on in asserting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) attended a Muslim madrassah? If CNN could go to the school and give the lie to the report, why couldn’t Fox? What outside panel was empowered to investigate how Fox could have aired such an outrageously inaccurate report? Who was fired for the inflammatory falsehoods?

A study by a University of Maryland center concluded, “Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions” about Iraq. For example, in 2003, 67 percent of those who relied primarily on Fox wrongly believed the U.S. “found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization.” Only 40 percent of those who relied on print media harbored this illusion, debunked thoroughly by the 9/11 Commission.

Instead of providing “fair and balanced” reporting, Fox has created an audience ignorant of the facts, but fully supportive of management’s ideology.

An audience that decides for itself, based on “fair and balanced” coverage, ought not to reach monolithic conclusions. Yet, in our 2004 polling with Media Vote, using Nielsen diaries, we found that Fox News viewers supported George Bush over John Kerry by 88 percent to 7 percent. No demographic segment, other than Republicans, was as united in supporting Bush. Conservatives, white evangelical Christians, gun owners, and supporters of the Iraq war all gave Bush fewer votes than did regular Fox News viewers.

Jewish Americans Strongly Opposed to the Iraq War

Based on mainstream media (MSM) coverage and on comments by the religious right (read republican party), one gets the sense that the Jewish public is supportive of the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq and of its other policies in that region of the world. Of course, as with anything that comes out of the right wing (read republican party) and its supporters in the MSM, the facts demonstrate a liberal bias that simply don’t support the claim.

The Gallup Poll is reporting: Among Religious Groups, Jewish Americans Most Strongly Oppose War — opposition goes beyond Jewish Americans’ political affiliations.

That bears repeating, because of how it refutes what seems to have been the conventional narrative over the past couple of years, that is: the right wing’s (read republican party) claim that Jewish Americans are abandoning the Democratic party (and their commitment to Progressive values) and joining the republican party due to Bush’s Middle East policies, including the Iraq war. So lemme repeat the Gallup Poll headline and quote from their poll: Among Religious Groups, Jewish Americans Most Strongly Oppose War.

PRINCETON, NJ — An analysis of Gallup Poll data collected since the beginning of 2005 finds that among the major religious groups in the United States, Jewish Americans are the most strongly opposed to the Iraq war. Catholics and Protestants are more or less divided in their views on the war, while Mormons are the most likely to favor it. Those with no religious affiliation also oppose the war, but not to the same extent that Jewish people do. The greater opposition to the war is not simply a result of high Democratic identification among U.S. Jews, as Jews of all political persuasions are more likely to oppose the war than non-Jews who share the same political leanings.

Gallup’s findings:

United States Made a Mistake in Sending Troops to Iraq,
by Religious Affiliation, 2005-2007 Gallup Polls

Of these major religious groups, three show more opposition than support for the war:

• Jewish people oppose the Iraq war by a better than 3-to-1 margin, 77% to 21%. 
• Americans without a religious preference are twice as likely to oppose (66%) as to support (33%) the war. 
• Catholics are somewhat more likely to oppose (53%) than to support the war (46%). 

[...]

[C]loser analysis of the data show that Jewish war opposition goes beyond their basic political leanings. Jewish people are more likely to oppose the war than non-Jews of the same political persuasion. For example, 89% of Jewish Democrats oppose the Iraq war, compared with 78% of all non-Jewish Democrats. 

For the full poll visit the Gallup Poll.

The “Pillars” of Conservatism

Over at the HuffingtonPost Bob Burnett identifies what he calls “ten pillars of conservative political wisdom,” and he advises that Liberals should attack each one of them. Mr. Burnett provides a lot to chew on, I think. Here are the “pillars” of conservatism that we should go after:

1. Government is bad: Conservatives believe the Federal government is unnecessary, except for the military. They maintain that entitlements for the disadvantaged–the poor, elderly, and disabled–are counter-productive, as they foster dependency. Most Americans believe in the necessity for the Federal government and these entitlements. It’s the role of liberals to provide a new justification for government, in general.

2. Competence is overrated: Because conservatives don’t believe in government, they feel the only salient qualification for political office–such as President and Vice President–is ideological purity. As a result, the Bush White House has proved to be the most conservative and least competent Administration in modern political history. Liberals must insist that elected officials have a record of accomplishment; they should believe in working for the common good and know what they are doing.

3. Cutting taxes fixes everything: Beginning in 2001, the conservative Bush Administration reduced taxes, claiming this would reduce the size of the Federal government and a "rising tide would lift all boats." Instead, this ill-considered "panacea" created a record Federal debt and lifted only the yachts of the rich. Liberals need to roll back these tax cuts and take a stand for fiscal sanity.

4. The market will provide: Conservatives believe that, in the absence of Federal programs, the market will solve national problems. America’s healthcare crisis demonstrates that this is naïve: the market doesn’t care about problems that affect the average American. And, the market doesn’t respond to disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina. Liberals should argue that only government can solve certain national problems and resurrect the notion that government provides a "the safety net."

5. Our best foreign policy is a strong military: Even though the US has by far the largest Defense budget in the world, conservatives continue to lobby for billions of dollars for wasteful Pentagon projects. They argue that big is better, that America’s best defense is a strong military. They ignore the fact that our armed forces didn’t protect us on 9/11 and haven’t won the war in either Afghanistan or Iraq. Conservatives also argue that the military is our best instrument of foreign policy. It’s time for liberals to demand a complete review of our defense strategy and foreign policy.

6. The U.S. is at war: Since 9/11, conservatives have argued we’re engaged in a "war on terror." But we’re not. Terrorism isn’t a military campaign waged by countries that don’t like us; it’s a social disease that requires America to use a variety of means to combat extremists. Liberals need to stop calling this a war and begin lobbying for a balanced campaign that includes diplomacy and use of police and intelligence resources.

7. Don’t ask questions: President Bush has consistently argued that it’s not necessary to understand why terrorists want to attack us, all that’s required is knowing they "hate our freedom." However, most experts on terrorism argue that terrorists have readily understandable motives, and we can head off future attacks by understanding what these motives are: for example, they want us to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord.

8. Trust the Commander-in-chief: Since 9/11, Bush and his conservative supporters have argued that the President, as commander-in-chief, has special responsibilities that obviate the necessity for the balance-of-powers logic in the Constitution: because the US is at "war" the President is above the law. Liberals need to attack this notion and roll back legislation that restricts our civil-rights.

9. America can go it alone: A cornerstone of conservative foreign policy is the belief that our allies are stupid and, therefore, don’t care if we act like bullies most of the time. The Bush Administration philosophy assumes that since the US has a bloated military, it doesn’t matter whether or not we use diplomacy or participate in international organizations. Conservatives believe that because America is big and powerful we can do whatever we want in the world: go it alone. Liberals need to point out that the strategy hasn’t proven successful, that it hasn’t built the alliances required to solve problems such as terrorism, AIDS, and global warming.

10. Winning is everything: Finally, the operating philosophy of conservatives has been that it doesn’t matter how you accomplish your objectives, just that you win: the ends justify the means. This has been the modus operandi of a conservative Bush Administration that lied to the American people. Liberals need to stand up for telling the truth, argue that Americans are governed by a morality that that values the common good, and places the public interest above personal ambition.

Corrupt Bush Administration Officials

After the folks behind the rightwing blog Powerline claimed that they could only "remember" one Bush administration that had resigned due to some "scandal," Josh Marshall of TalkingPointsMemo.com decided to put a cheat sheet together for the folks at Powerline blog. Here’s the first draft of the cheat sheet, Our Great List of Scandalized Administration Officials.

At last count the list included the following Bush administration officials that have resigned because of corruption or similar criminal charge: Lester Crawford, Carl Truscott, Joseph Schmitz, Brian Doyle, Claude Allen, David Safavian, Steven Griles, Susan Ralston, Dusty Foggo, Larry Franklin, Janet Rehnquist, Roger Stillwell, Ken Tomlinson, George Deutsch, Richard Perle, Frank Figueroa, James Roche, Darleen Druyun, Marvin Sambur, Philip Cooney.

GOP Abandons the Bush Administration

After the recent elections where Dems recaptured the Senate and House after 12 years of being in the minority we’ve seen the GOP bickering over what went wrong. This cartoon does a great job of capturing the GOP mood: