MediaMatters: Will BP be Fox News' tipping point?

Just read this post over at MediaMatters and I couldn't agree more:

Will BP be Fox News' tipping point?
June 23, 2010 8:51 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Eight-two percent.
That’s the number you need to keep in mind as you listen to the right-wing caterwauling about how poor, helpless BP has been tormented and demonized by the bullying, Constitution-hating Obama White House.
Eight-two percent.
According to the latest CNN poll, a huge, huge, huge majority of Americans supports the $20 billion escrow fund that BP agreed to create in order to help pay for the Gulf of Mexico cleanup.
And get this: According to the same CNN poll, a microscopic 5 percent of Americans think Obama has been “too tough” on BP. Just 5 percent.
But apparently those 5-percenters all host radio and TV shows, or blog online, because that radical claim that Obama’s to blame for creating the hated escrow fund (not to mention for causing the oil spill in the first place), has been exploding within the GOP Noise Machine as pundits, bloggers, and talk show hosts rush to defend BP and denounce one of the most popular things Obama has ever done.
And, of course, helping lead the charge to guard BP from Obama’s wicked ways has been Fox News.
Fox News is programmed for Obama dead-enders, that much is clear. They’re the radical minority of political hyper-partisans who hold as a matter of faith that Obama is a Manchurian candidate. It’s not just that Obama was born in Kenya and isn’t truly of this country, or culture, and that his policies are misguided and wrong for America. It runs much deeper. It’s that Obama ran for the Oval Office with the explicit plan to ruin America from within once he was elected. He ran for president in order to destroy this country by stripping it of its freedoms and liberties and transforming the United States into some sort of socialist or communist outpost.
That’s how far out on the ledge Fox News now operates. And FYI, if you view the world from that demented perspective, it probably does look like BP got jobbed. (Just like of course the Clinton White House sold nuclear secrets to China during the `90s; Democratic presidents are a treasonous bunch.)
As I said, the dead-enders represent a radical minority. And yet they have an entire right-wing media complex set up explicitly to whet their Obama-hating appetite. There is no thought put into the rhetoric anymore, or their partisan jousting. Instead, the content revolves around a very simple premise: If Obama did it, it’s wrong. Not just wrong. More like, if Obama did it, it’s evil and dangerous and ghastly and un-American.
So the stimulus bill was evil and un-American. Bailing out GM and Chrysler was evil and un-American. Passing health care reform, of course, was evil and un-America.
But securing $20 billion from BP to pay for the cleanup and to compensate working Americans for the damage done to their livelihoods. That was evil and un-American?
According to Fox News it was.
And with that audacious claim, I’m wondering if Fox News isn’t pressing up very closely to its tipping point; to the moment where Fox News reveals how certifiably insane it is by rushing to BP’s defense, and just how distant its programming is from the American mainstream.
I don’t mean it’s the tipping point in terms of there being some sort of collective realization within Fox News that its signature form of partisan Obama hatred has jumped about 19 different sets of tracks and its incessant campaign of smears and lies makes a mockery out of the news business, as well as does real damage to democracy. (I’m pretty sure everyone at Fox News already knows that.)
I’m referring instead to a collective realization among people outside Fox News and the GOP Noise Machine that there’s something fundamentally wrong with a so-called news organization siding with BP after what the oil giant has done to the Gulf of Mexico and the reckless, cavalier way it has ruined the livelihoods of countless of residents.
That there’s something just plain wrong and illogical in being so robotically ant-Obama that the Fox News team would consciously side with today’s version of Public Enemy No. 1 and insist, with complete conviction, that it’s the president of the United States who’s to blame for the big oil disaster, and it’s the president of the United States who should be attacked, smeared, and ridiculed for getting BP to set aside $20 billion in damages.
The tipping point could come when everyday Americans, as well as mainstream reporters, observe the right-wing media’s radical embrace of BP (fueled by all-consuming Obama Derangement Syndrome), look at each other and utter various equivalents of, “WTF?”
Because not only is Fox News in effect defending BP, but it’s using the occasion of the $20 billion agreement to depict Obama as some sort of monster bent on destroying America. How? By holding BP financially responsible.
Again, you can almost hear the “WTF’s” as the realization of the Fox News attack campaign sinks in. Rupert Murdoch’s channel is siding with BP over the United States???
You better believe it. From Fox News’ Andrew Napolitano:
I think you could argue that the government is, in large measure, responsible for this mess.
The reason I’m (perhaps naïvely) suggesting there may soon be a collective A-ha moment about Fox News with regard to its defense of BP, whereas the channel’s outrageous programming in the past has not triggered that kind of response, is that this is different because it’s not about politics. That Fox News will relentlessly attack Obama and Democrats about every conceivable issue is, at this point, a given -- Fox News functions as the Opposition Party.
But the BP disaster, and the callous disregard for how it was handled by the oil company, is different. The environmental fiasco very much resembles an attack on the United States by a foreign entity. (An act of eco-terrorism, if you will.) And common sense tells us that that should never be a partisan issue. And common sense dictates that no sane person would side with BP, let alone condemn the government for securing $20 billion in private funds to pay for the disaster.
Or would they?
It’s difficult to put into words just how isolated and extreme the right-wing media’s embrace of BP has been over the last week. It’s mind-bending that a major political movement in this country, driven by its media “news” outlets, would rush out onto the battlefield of public debate in order to plant its flag alongside BP, even as the incompetent petroleum giant remains unable to turn off the underwater gusher that is destroying the Gulf of Mexico.
And yet turn on Fox News or tune into Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin, or a whole host of other BP apologists, and get a daily earful about how BP is being unfairly maligned and that Obama should be condemned for securing $20 billion in cleanup funds. (Keep in mind that no one associated with BP has ever suggested the White House bullied the company, or that BP was the victim of a “shakedown.” No one.)
And yes, I realize some conservative loud mouths claim that just because they’re attacking the White House over the $20 billion “shakedown,” that doesn’t mean they’re defending BP, or that they agree with Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) and think the oil giant deserves an apology. But gimme a break. That’s a distinction without a difference because even before the “shakedown” meme was launched late last week, the same right-wing outlets, including Fox News, were weeping hysterically at how the White House was trying to “demonize” little ol’ BP, and how its poor executives were going to be paraded before Congress for a nasty “show trial.” Meaning, the right wing’s desire to throw its body in front of BP and protect it from alleged government abuse has been a constant for weeks now, and extends far beyond the “shakedown” defense.
The fact is, forced to pick a villain in the BP disaster, Fox News chose America and set its sights on the White House, not the foreign oil giant; a giant that even industry players have tagged as being reckless and guilty of “gross negligence.”
Has Fox News finally reached the point of no return?

Bittersweet reunion

I recently put up a post on Stone Temple Pilots in anticipation of their most recent album after a 6 year hiatus with reserved excitement and optimism. Since then STP has been garnering the expected amount of press and magazine articles that one can expect from a multi-platinum record selling band reuniting during a time when the musical landscape has since moved on from alternative rock and grunge. Being the huge fan of the group back in the day, I've read as much as I can find and I can only conclude that Scott Weiland is an absolute mess.

After the first bit of excitement over hearing of an STP reunion there were immediate signs that I shouldn't get too worked up over it. Amidst the gushing of band members about how great it was to work together again there was the confession that, while the DeLeo brothers and Kretz were recording together, Weiland had his own separate recording studio and was recording the vocal tracks by himself. Doesn't exactly speak of a glorious return to comradery, does it.

While reading through the track by track story on the Wikipedia page you see again and again how Dean DeLeo is impressed with how well Scott sang on the tunes. However, accompanying all the praise are remarks like "Scott is in a dark place". Songs that are to sound kind of happy and poppy are subject to the dark depression and drug influenced lyrics of the singer.

If you supplement these notes with articles like what was written in SPIN you can really only conclude that this reunion tour might not be very long-lived. Weiland simply sounds like a mess. He doesn't show up until the very last minute before concerts, has his own bus which he retreats to the second a show is over, needs an assistant to bring him food, chain smokes and drinks like crazy, pops pills but considers himself "clean" because he is no longer doing smack and is obsessed over ex-flames. It really sounds like he hates his current gig of "talented millionaire front man", which is a shame.

I recently gotten my hands on the newest cd and the first listen wasn't too bad. From what I have heard so far it isn't as hard as previous albums but it is definitely catchy. Without listening to lyrics it does sound like a happy album... but paying attention really exposes the current state that Weiland is in. The dude, quite frankly, sounds like he's one bad trip from suicide.

It must be frustrating as well for the other members of the band. They are talented as all hell but really have not amounted to much without Scott in front of the band. It would have been nice to see them continue the Army of Anyone project with Filter front man Patrick because the cd they did release was actually pretty good. It seems, however, that they really don't shine unless they have Weiland, and to have their success tied to such an erratic and unhealthy person can not be pleasant.

You'd think this wouldn't bother me as much as it does. The band has basically been dead for years and everything else they release is pretty much a bonus but just knowing that they are capable of much more pisses me off. I'll never be able to understand rock stars. You take a god given gift that is capable of getting you hordes of admirers and a shit ton of cash and yet it's not good enough. Ruin it all with drugs and self-loathing. Awesome. Have fun with that. I suppose the over-exposure of media is to blame as I could simply just listen to the cds and ignore the story.

Anyway, I'm hoping to take advantage of the long memorial day weekend by giving this new cd as well as the new release by the Deftones a good listen. I also plan on getting drunk at least once. There's a new bottle of brandy with my name on it. Have a good weekend kids.

Rand Paul is an effing coward

So in the aftermath of Rand Paul's inability to answer a question about Civil Rights, he has resorted to some rather childish damage control today. Taking a page out of the Sarah Palin book of zero personal responsibility, his statements are now all Rachel Maddow's fault.

"It was a poor political decision and probably won't be happening anytime in the near future," the Tea Party endorsed Senate candidate said on the Laura Ingraham show on Thursday morning. "Because, yeah, they can play things and want to say, 'Oh you believed in beating up people that were trying to sit in restaurants in the 1960s.' And that is such a ridiculous notion and something that no rational person is in favor of. [But] she went on and on about that.

These are settled issues in the Civil Rights Act," he said. "I have no intention of bringing up anything related to the Civil Rights Act... I think [segregation] is sort of a stain and blight on our history -- so, no, I have never really favored any change in the Civil Rights Act or any of that. But they have seemed to unleash the loony left on me."

To his credit, he did issue a full a full statement which you can read if you follow the above link.

I'm sure the right wing blogosphere is currently vilifying Maddow and accusing her of gotcha politics. I bet there might even be people referring to her being a lesbian. The truth is that Rand took the cowards way out of this situation. Perhaps it was unwise of him to go on her program, but Rachel did not force him to say the things he said.

I think the Tea Party needs to find themselves a new hero.

Pussies hiding behind the bible

There's nothing I love more than smug assholes twisting the words of the Bible and the Constitution to suit their needs. The Bible-thumpers are particularly disturbing as ones faith in God can be a very powerful thing.

For some, faith can be the driving force that keeps them going. It can help people through tragedies and trials. It can bring people back from the brink of self-destruction. It can also be a routine every day source of happiness. There's any number of reasons why faith and religion can be a positive influence in the world.

For others, it is a motivation for actions that one would normally be too chicken shit to conduct without some viable excuse. The Bible is a large book. There's a lot of business going on in there. In fact, there's enough material in there to supply any twisted fuck with enough divine guidance to do just about anything their perverted mind wishes to undertake.

Quite a few years ago I recall some documentary that was interviewing some backwoods hillbilly. He was sitting there on his bed with a high-powered rifle across his lap and discussing his hatred for gays. The one line that has stuck in my head, and always will, is, "...and if the good lord tells me to shoot, I will shoot." This man believed that he was God's tool to kill homosexuals.

Another example are the anti-abortion fanatics. Abortion in itself is a very controversial topic. Unfortunately, it has become a very political issue and there are millions of people who will vote primarily on that issue alone. Personally, as long as the procedure is deemed legal, it should be up to the choice of the individual. If, for some reason, it is overturned, I will accept the decision and move on, without loss of sleep. It is not that big of an issue (to me). However, there are some who believe that it is necessary that doctors who do these procedures should be killed. In doing this, they believe that they are doing God's work. I call bullshit. The murder of a doctor does not make you a saint. It makes you a murderer, and you will burn in Hell. Plain and simple.

There are countless examples of religious fanatics justifying their actions by saying God told them to do it (George W Bush claiming that God told him to go to war in Iraq, Spanish Inquisitions, etc.). The point is, I'm not buying any of it. It's things like this which cause my view of religion to be somewhat jaded. How is it that, with the potential for so much good, so many of the faithful use religion as an excuse for insidious deeds?

Which brings me to my point: the extreme religious right using God and the Bible as justification for absolute insanity in their stance on President Obama. The idiocy started right about a year ago when stupid-ass chain emails were being tossed around declaring Obama was the anti-christ. My dear parents were receiving these emails weekly from a church acquaintance which allowed me the opportunity to read the crap first-hand.

Let me tell you something, the Bible can be interpreted to justify just about anything if you want it to. I bet that, with a little work, I could use the good book to justify me eating a whole pizza for lunch, skipping out on work early, getting piss drunk, and then hitting up the titty-bar. Pretty sure I could also use it to justify punching you in the face. Whatever.

Cowards do this on a regular basis. There's nothing quite as motivating as divine justification.

The latest in extreme religious right wing actions is the fad known as "hide-behind-scripture-wishing-for-the-death-of-Obama-without-actually-saying-it". I came upon an article yesterday which talks about these new bumper stickers/ t-shirts/ assorted asshole merchandise which reads some variation of "Pray for Obama - Psalm 109:8". Without doing any research or having the Bible committed to memory, one would think this is a nice thing by nice religious people. If you look up the Psalm however, you get this:

"Let his days be few; and let another take his office and charge"

Still, no big deal, right? Other than the fact that it looks like some douche bags are using scripture to pray Obama out of office, of course. I mean, the line between religion and government has been blurring for some time now, and for the religious right it has ceased to exist altogether.

When you read on to the next line, however, you get this:

"Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow"

...and now you are just in asshole fuck religious fanatic territory.

Just come out and say it, cowards. Come right out and make your t-shirts say, "Pray for the murder of Obama". That's what you really want to say. So just come out and say it. Don't be coy and sneaky. And what makes these people different from the fanaticism of the likes of Al Qaeda? Not too much, in my opinion.

What would happen if we had people doing the same thing releasing this merchandise in regards to George W Bush? You know what would happen. What's the difference? These people are justified because of their faith.

With Secret Service recently reporting that death threats have skyrocketed since Obama took office, I find it extremely irresponsible with the way that some are inciting violence and anger. For 99.9% of the population, it is all just talk. But there are those few, who take it upon themselves to do the unthinkable, and it is those who are the most dangerous. What sets those few apart from the docile masses?

Why, it's God, of course. And each one of those individuals believes that God is on their side.

Into the flood again... again?

Some random Friday things...

I had no idea that the new incarnation of Alice in Chains had released their first CD in something like 50 years until I checked out Deadspin this morning. Read through the football previews a bit and you'll see their youtube link to the first single. It's uncanny how new guy sounds so much like Staley. The song itself sounds so much like vintage AinC it's ridiculous. So, as can be expected, I'm mighty stoked about this. My music preferences for some reason seem to be stuck on repeat in the 1990-1995 era and haven't been able to move past brooding lyrics, thick ugly distortion, and subject matter mostly limited to losing buddies to heroin. That's Alice in Chains to a T. My lunch break may feature a trip over to Best Buy (and Subway?) later. Or perhaps I will have to scoot on home after work and visit Isohunt instead. Viva le Grunge!

And in other Friday surprises, I was also unaware that hockey started yesterday. If you were a casual ESPN radio listener you would think that the only thing that happened yesterday was this:

ALEX OVECHKIN SCORES 2 GOAAAALLLLLSSSSSS!!!!!!

rather than this:

Washington 4, Boston 1

Montreal 4, Toronto 3 OT

Calgary 5, Vancouver 3

Colorado 5, San Jose 2

Ever since the NHL signed on with Vs and broke off their relationship with ESPN, the worldwide leader has made it painfully clear that they could give two shits about hockey. If there is a person alive who cares more about Who's Now than what's happening in hockey they deserve to be sodomized with Stuart Scott's head.

Still, hockey's back and that is good for me. Despite the fact that it hasn't gotten out of the 40s here in central New York this is the best time of year. Baseball playoffs, Football, and Hockey all at my disposal. Thus ends my pathetic attempts at being outside and active as those give way to sitting in front of teevees, eating shitty food covered in cheese, and pounding Pabst Blue Ribbons. You gotta love sports!

In other news, Letterman let on last night that he's been getting down and dirty with some of his co-workers. Apparently some douche on another show has known about it and has been trying to extort some cash from Letterman. I honestly don't know if I care. Of course it's a dick move as it's safe to assume that this has been going on while he's been with whatever lady he recently married, but who's to say that they haven't already addressed this privately. Still, extortion-guy really fucked up by trying to blackmail him. You're just getting your own ass in trouble in that situation.

This guy almost makes me want to like Sid the Kid

I have to admit it. Ovechkin is sick to watch on the ice. He plays with an enthusiasm and flair that is extremely rare in the NHL. He celebrates goals in cheesy displays and loves the camera.

This dude is good.

But everytime I read an interview he does I get a little disgusted. It's hard to equate properly but he may be the NHLs version of TO or Ochocinco. I can't stand either one of those guys. While checking the baseball box scores this morning (Logjammin is on FIRE!) on Yahoo I saw another one of his interviews and a report of his clothing line release party. Some of the shit he says is extremely obnoxious. Maybe it's just because he's foreign but it seems like he goes out of the way to show how much of a pimp he is.

Look at him!

He's always talking about the ladies. Often times the guy who talks about how much tail he's getting is usually getting the least but maybe the rules are different in Russia. I don't know. I suppose he could serve as an example to every ass-ugly dude out there that anyone can lay some pipe despite a d-bag personality and a face only your mother could love. Of course all you need in that situation is to be the future of the NHL and make a shit ton of cash.