Oh man, this is classic.  Many people have watched Gretchen Carlson on Fox & Friends and wondered how can she be so dumb.  Alex Koppelman at Salon:

Like many of her colleagues on Fox, Carlson often plays dumb. In her case, that means looking up words like “ignoramus” and “czar,” or at least pretending to in order to score some points against liberals — and look anti-intellectual in the process.

Turns out, Gretchen was her high school valedictorian, graduated with honors from Stanford, studied at Oxford and is a talented classically-trained violinist.  Jon Stewart called her out on the absurdity of her ‘troubled mom trying to figure out this confusing modern world’ act:

Aaron Barnhart at the Kansas City Star was unkind in his assessment of the larger ruse of which Gretchen is only a small part:

The rule they always tell you in show business is be yourself, right? But not in conservative populist talk radio and TV. Look, I have no problem with conservatives being themselves. Bill O’Reilly and Dr. Laura and El Rushbo and (of course) Saint Paul Harvey all became huge in radio because radio values authenticity, and their essence bled through every second that they were on the air.

But it seems for every Billo these days there are three people like Carlson, Glenn Beck and Steve Doocy — people who probably have some Republican in them but are simply (and obviously) overplaying to the right wing because they know it sells.

George Will must be turning over in his grave.  Buckley, too.  Once a hallowed voice of conservative thought, the Wall Street Journal has been Fox Newsified as everyone feared would happen when News Corp. bought it in 2007.  Exhibit A:

A special committee was established to oversee The Journal’s editorial integrity. But after the managing editor, Marcus Brauchli resigned on April 22, 2008, the committee said that he resigned under pressure, and that News Corporation had violated its agreement by not notifying the committee earlier.  Brauchli said that he thought it was reasonable that new owners would appoint their own editor.

However, a June 5 Journal news story quoted charges that Murdoch had made and broken similar promises in the past. One large shareholder commented that Murdoch has long “expressed his personal, political and business biases through his newspapers and television stations.” Journalist Fred Emery, formerly of the British newspaper The Times, recounted an incident when Murdoch was reminded of his own earlier promises not to fire The Times’ editors without independent directors’ approval and allegedly responded, “God, you don’t take all that seriously, do you?”

Exhibit B:  Of all discredited people to opine about what the health care reform bill says, they chose Betsy “Death Panel” McCaughey (photo, above right).  She’s hardly Grade A conservative thought about one of our country’s most pressing issues; more former prom queen than Dow policy analyst.  What, were all the fellows at the American Enterprise Institute tied up?

McCaughey – a laughing stock after she continually couldn’t find her facts in the bill on The Daily Show — is now a regular Wall Street Journal columnist about health care reform.  She seems like a sweet lady, but this spectacle must make her children blush (video below):

McCaughey’s turn to be questioned was embarrassing as she kept flipping through the bill, unable to find the facts she was basing her arguments upon.  Women everywhere cringed.

She is the one who started the death panel rumor, the topic in the clip above that she couldn’t support.  McCaughey (pronounced “McCoy”) is a follower of faith-based facts; she is of a new class that discuss facts that can’t be evidenced.  It only takes a belief that the fact is there, even when it’s not.  Just like when someone believes the Earth is only 2,000 years old.  On the WSJ editorial page, they now feature the flat earthers of our national discourse.  Bravo, Journal.

A former insitution is officially Fox Newsified.

Both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s talents lie in their ability to use intelligence and physical comedy to show they are the masters in the craft.  Whether you agree with their politics or not, what they do can be done by few others.

So Thursday night’s Glenn Beck parody by Jon Stewart was extended, and was without doubt the most biting piece of satire I have seen since Colbert’s White House Correspondent’s Dinner send-up of Bush and the media.  It is more than a parody of Glenn Beck; it’s a parody of textbook demagogy with a slight-of-hand as the sermonizing is about Beck’s health, since he was off the air from appendicitis.  Six minutes in, the humor melts away and as spot-on and brilliant is Stewart’s impression, it’s not funny in the end.

See it to believe it (video below):

In related news, the Onion News Network reported that a victim in a fatal car accident was tragically not Glenn Beck:

Victim In Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck

“[M]y baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’“- Sarah Palin, 8/7/09

Republican Death Panels: How many falsehoods can a party spread before it is no longer viable to the electorate?

As if the Republicans’ Teabaggers, Birthers and Screamers weren’t problem enough for its image, now they have the Deathers.  The Republican Party is now the embodiment of American fringe politics.

Ever since August 7th when Sarah Palin twittered that her disabled baby would die before the eyes of Obama’s death panels, the Republicans credibility with voters has taken a nose dive (again).  At what point does a political party obscure the reality of issues to voters so often, that it can no longer run in elections because it has destroyed all faith and trust in itself?

The Republicans used to rely upon Frank Luntz and Newt Gingrich to help them obfuscate in crafty, disingenuous ways.  Now, they flat out lie.

The party’s stars in politics and in their information machine Fox News have hearkened the pending Death Panels who will kill the elderly and Sarah Palin’s baby.  Problem:  there is no such thing.

In fact, pro-life Republican Johnny Isakson of Georgia is the one who wrote the provision into the healthcare bill.  Facing South’s Sue Sturgis unearthed that fact:

Many in the media quickly pointed out that Palin’s claims weren’t true. But Sturgis was the first to report that one of the biggest advocates of counseling for end-of-life care — the provision that actually was in the Congressional legislation — was none other than a pro-life Republican: Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia.

Although one of their own was the architect of the “Death Panels”, Republicans have been going into over drive to tell people that they exist, when they don’t.  Isakson is exasperated by his own party:

“I just had a phone call where someone said Sarah Palin’s web site had talked about the House bill having death panels on it where people would be euthanized. How someone could take an end of life directive or a living will as that is nuts. You’re putting the authority in the individual rather than the government. I don’t know how that got so mixed up.”

Are voters wisening-up to Republican tricks to harm the veracity of the national debate over issues, and if so, how long can a party function with no credibility once people realize this is their game plan?

Death Panels and Republican Credibility – a timeline

“By poisoning the political well, they’ve given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They’ve become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.” – Steven Pearlstein, Washington Post, 8/7/09

The ‘Death Panel’ provision of Section 1233 of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, as written by pro-life Republican of Georgia Johnny Isakson:

According to an analysis of the bill produced by the three relevant House committees, the section “[p]rovides coverage for consultation between enrollees and practitioners to discuss orders for life-sustaining treatment. Instructs CMS to modify ‘Medicare & You’ handbook to incorporate information on end-of-life planning resources and to incorporate measures on advance care planning into the physician’s quality reporting initiative.”

June 25, 2009 - Peter Johnson Jr. claimed on Fox & Friends that health care reform is “the government deciding who will live, who will die.” He later went on to ask: “Is that what this plan is about? To save money by killing old people? That’s frightening. That’s absolutely frightening.”

June 26, 2009 -  NewsBusters article titled “Obama Says We Shouldn’t Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf,” Warner Todd Huston wrote, “[I]t sure seemed to me as if the most caring, most civil, most intelligent president evah just said that healthcare could be cheaper if we don’t give old folks and the infirm the full measure of care they now get. It appeared that Obama said we should just let them die or suffer because they aren’t worth the effort.”

June 25, 2009 -  American Spectator article titled “Obama Wants to Let Those Pesky Geezers Die,” Capital Research Center senior editor Matthew Vadum paraphrased an excerpt from a Los Angeles Times article as stating: “So, old people: screw you”

June 27, 2009 – Forbes on Fox, Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard misrepresented Obama’s remarks at the health care forum, stating: “[W]hat he’s indicating is that government health care involves rationing. It’s kind of funny that he let it slip out. It was kind of funny he signaled it by wearing a black tie, the color of funerals. There’s going to be more funerals for old people going ahead.”

July 16, 2009 - former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey falsely claimed on Fred Thompson’s show that the House health care reform bill would “absolutely require” end-of-life counseling for seniors “that will tell them how to end their life sooner.”

July 17, 2009 – Betsy McCaughey writes an op-ed for the New York Post repeating false claims, writing “[o]ne troubling provision” of the bill “compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years … about alternatives for end-of-life care,” adding that the “mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care.”

Fox News stars begin spreading the rumor

Sean Hannity:  “[I]t sounds to me like they’re actually encouraging seniors in the end, ‘Well, you may just want to consider packing it all in here, this is — ‘ what other way is there to describe this?” He continued, “So that they don’t become a financial burden on the Obamacare system? I mean that’s how they intend to cut cost, by cutting down on the health care we can give and get at the end of our lives and dramatically cutting it down for senior citizens? You know, welcome to the brave new world of Obamacare. We’re going to encourage, you know, inconvenient people to consider ‘alternatives to living.’ ”

Laura Ingraham:  “[S]ome will call them death camps, but this is the way Obamacare is gonna go for America.”

August 9, 2009 – Newt Gingrich on This Week -“You’re asking us to decide that the government is to be trusted … You are asking us to trust turning power over to the government, when there are clearly people in American who believe in establishing euthanasia, including selective standards.”

August 9, 2009 – Michelle Malkin – “Death panels? What death panels? Oh, yeah, those death panels.”

August 10, 2009 – Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said, “[E]veryone’s talking about seniors, and they’re talking about the middle class and affordable health care. If the upper class is paying for the next two classes, and are seniors going to be in front of the death panel? And then just as you think, OK, that’s ridiculous, then you realize there’s provisions in there that seniors in the last lap of their life will be sitting there going to a panel possibly discussing what the best thing for them is.”

August 10, 2009 -Glenn Beck on death panels: “I believe it to be true.”

“Once these stories get out there, they’re hard to stamp out because our media do such a lousy job of speaking truth to stupid.” – Bill Maher, July 31, 2009, L.A. Times

CNN's Dobbsian President Jon Klein: "Yes! We have no standards!"

Ugh.  During the recent Lou Dobbs birther dust-up, CNN President Jon Klein confirmed a suspicion I’ve had that the cable news networks have fundamentally debased American journalism (cue laugh track).

King Birther Dobbs

Lou Dobbs should have stuck to business reporting.  Instead, Dobbs has fashioned himself after someone more of his era, Father Coughlin.  From Coughlin’s Wikipedia article:

He was one of the first political leaders to use radio to reach a mass audience, as more than forty million tuned to his weekly broadcasts during the 1930s. Coughlin used his radio program to promote Franklin D. Roosevelt and his early New Deal proposals, to issue antisemitic commentary, and later to rationalize some of the policies of National Socialist Adolf Hitler and Fascist Benito Mussolini.  The broadcasts have been called “a variation of the Fascist agenda applied to American culture”. His chief topics were political and economic rather than religious, with his slogan being Social Justice, first with, and later against, the New Deal.

Dobbs as a modern-day Coughlin was evident with his alarmist xenophobic advocacy journalism on the subject of immigration. Now he enters the fracas as a light of hope for the “Birthers”, recently tying the two issues together to say Obama might be an illegal immigrant:

I’m starting to think we have a document issue. You suppose he’s un — no, I won’t even use the word undocumented, it wouldn’t be right.

The birthers are primarily composed of southern redneck Republicans (the party’s base, and Dobbs’ demographic):

The conspiracy has a regional flavor. Overall, even including Democrats and independents, only 47 percent of respondents in the South said they believed Obama was born in America, with 23 percent saying he was not and 30 percent saying they were unsure. In the Northeast and Midwest, the percentage of respondents who believe Obama was born in the U.S. was over 90 percent.

Ninety-three percent of Democrats say the president was born in the United States, as do 83 percent of independents.

Virtually nobody except for Lou Dobbs and America’s Backwater Republicans gives any serious consideration to the birthers.  So why is Lou Dobbs on CNN  promoting the tin hat redneck crowd’s most delusional hope to an international audience?  Ratings – the only thing that matters in cable news.

After Dobbs first salvo on behalf of the birthers was aired on CNN, he continued giving fuel to the birthers on his radio show by stating that, “Obama should put his birth certificate out there. I’m still looking for validation.”

Dobbs has no intention of backing down, but at least the birther nonsense seems to have hurt his ratings. Thank God for small favors.

Important lesson via CNN President Jon Klein

The most important lesson to be learned here has nothing to do with the birthers, and everything to do with how cable news is operating.  CNN’s President, Jon Klein, has had to defend Dobbs before, but his recent defense is illuminating:

We have no control over what he says on his radio show. It’s not a CNN radio program so he does what he does on the radio separate from what he does on our air. So we ask you and anyone writing about this, to look at what he says on CNN. It’s the only thing we control.

“It’s the only thing we control” is not correct.  You control giving Dobbs a platform.  You control what kinds of opinions you judge to be worthy of airing.

The defense Klein raises is problematic for the public interest, something that a news agency is supposed to hold supreme after “truth”.  It tells people turning to CNN that the network could care less about the integrity of the people they want you to hear, as long as they do their nasty business off ‘their air’.

Yeah, but…Dobbs did say these things on ‘your air’, Mr. Klein, and continued with them on his radio show.

Lou Dobbs as Father Coughlin is one thing, but the debasement of cable news journalism is more evident at Fox News, where few standards are in place for the pedigrees of their pundits, as I wrote last week:

Whether it be foul-mouthed stalker Rachel Marsden; the scandal-fabricating Aaron Klein; former gay porn star and male escort Matt Sanchez; or the crazy racist Hillary supporter Harriet Christian; the number of bottom-feeders with few journalistic–or personal–ethics who are paraded before us by the mainstream media is startling.  It’s not even a left-or-right issue.

With cable news thinking people like this are worth listening to, and people actually listening, there appears to be absolutely no way to fix this breakdown in our national discourse on cable news.  When there are no standards for opinion-makers, the quality of Americans’ opinions suffers.

Thanks, Jon Klein, for confirming that your network could care less what your pundits do and say when they are not on ‘your air’.  It logically follows that David Duke could have his own show on CNN, as long as he doesn’t talk about white supremacy on ‘your air’.

Or maybe even the white supremacy bit is okay, if you appear on Rachel Maddow.

Pat Buchanan was pied in 2005 at Western Michigan University not because his racist views were unknown. Image: Melanie Maxwell

Dear Daily Kos,

I write this as an unabashed liberal: why has your site become a shill advertising machine for the destructive “journalism” of the cable news you oft-decry?

Whether it be foul-mouthed stalker Rachel Marsden; the scandal-fabricating Aaron Klein; former gay porn star and male escort Matt Sanchez; or the crazy racist Hillary supporter Harriet Christian; the number of bottom-feeders with few journalistic–or personal–ethics who are paraded before us by the mainstream media is startling.  It’s not even a left-or-right issue.

The question the blogosphere needs to answer: why perpetuate the sins of these so-called news networks by writing endlessly about the cretins they slap on our screens?

The answer works like this: crazy-talking pundit gets on the O’Reilly Factor, Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews, and then the blogosphere is happy to have something to write about the next day (“This crazy person on [Fox News/MSNBC/ABC/CBS] said something crazy!  Shame!“).  It drives traffic, baby, and comments!

While there is some fun in pointing out how awful people can be (I’ve done it), sites like Daily Kos et al. have devolved into waiting for the latest clown to be paraded on cable so that they can write about their attrocities.

The networks love it – it brings in viewers, and creates “buzz” around their shows.  Links and embedded video clips ensue.

The blogs should focus less on debating the ponyboy pundits’ words, whose kinked thoughts about humanity merit little serious consideration, and more on why the networks giving such outrageous people air time only seems to bring benefits.  That’s why you are seeing more of these characters.

Instead, Daily Kos and the rest discuss and debate their gutter perspectives, giving them the credibility of artificial controversy.  Our country’s most vile views are pored over in the minutest details, breathing life in to them as people become curious about the fuss.  Blogs like Daily Kos are  unwitting dupes in the game.  They used to be forceful critics of the practice.  Why  take off the air trash-talking nitwits whose documented histories show little integrity, when they get so many people watching, talking and typing?

Racist Pat Buchanan shows the blogosphere’s utter fail

The most recent dust-up is Pat Buchanan, who has been letting everyone know he’s for white men, and that the GOP will continue to flounder with voters as long as they stay away from race-baiting and culture wars.  Never mind that Buchanan has been saying these things for decades, including that he thought the Republican Party could learn a lot from Ku Klux Klansman David Duke (“Take a hard look at Duke’s portfolio of winning issues and expropriate those not in conflict with GOP principles, [such as] reverse discrimination against white folks”).

When Buchanan appeared on Rachel Maddow last night saying the United States was built 100% by white men, Maddow predictably smacked him down.  And the blogosphere predictably went to town on filling its role of advertising the crazy people on cable news and their crazy words.  Maddow, who put this old man with his long-discredited views on her shows, comes out the hero.  Why wouldn’t she put a racist on her show, then?

Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck: they are modern versions of the 1990′s love-fest with Ricki Lake, Richard Bey, Jerry Springer and Jenny Jones.  They put the same guests on, except now they wear suits and there is no live studio audience to boo, hiss and call the guest a “dog who should be in the dog house.”  That’s become the job of Daily Kos and the blogosphere.

Daily Kos, the 24-hour-news cycle’s best advertiser

The Daily Kos is perhaps the most egregious cable news advertising shill out there.  In just a little over a day, Kos and his bloggers have written no less than seventeen posts exploring the minutia of Pat Buchanan and his racism.  They are all predictable diatribes that effectively expand Buchanan’s name-recognition and give his racism a wider airing, often with a video clip:

The Imperial Wizard Of MSNBC.
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 06:07:16 AM PDT
632 comments

Dear MSNBC
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 07:09:06 AM PDT
63 comments

You are gonna break my heart dear Rachel!
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 10:09:53 AM PDT
75 comments

Open memo to MSNBC re: Tonight’s Rachel Maddow Show
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 10:36:20 AM PDT
79 comments

I’m Not Angry At MSNBC.
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:34:21 PM PDT
67 comments

Buchanan calls Robinson “boy”?
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:26:34 PM PDT
129 comments

Pat Buchanan, your electoral math doesn’t add up
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:09:35 PM PDT
15 comments

Maddow calls Pat Buchanan “dated”
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 06:44:45 PM PDT
66 comments

What would white people do…
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 05:40:04 PM PDT
387 comments

Rachel Maddow decides she’s had enough”
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 07:05:03 PM PDT
610 comments

Buchanan is right. This white man is full of resentment.
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 07:21:51 PM PDT
447 comments

Dear Rachel – boot the bigoted “Uncle Pat”
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 07:19:54 PM PDT
66 comments

Why We NEED Pat Buchanan on TV
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 09:09:52 PM PDT
52 comments

A Word on Princeton and Affirmative Action
Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 10:10:22 PM PDT
151 comments

I’m gonna miss you, MSNBC.
Fri Jul 17, 2009 at 05:37:45 AM PDT
109 comments

Mything the point of “White Men Built This Country”
Fri Jul 17, 2009 at 07:08:31 AM PDT
49 comments

Is Pat Buchanan Really Playing with Fire? (with poll)
Fri Jul 17, 2009 at 08:04:53 AM PDT
1 comment

How many different ways can you parse the words of a racist before you are the platform for their views, Kos?

The worst was the Rachel Maddow boot-licker ErinW43′s post  (“Rachel Maddow decides she’s had enough“)  that cheered the same Maddow who handed a racist her platform again:

After seeing MSNBC talking heads continue to treat Pat Buchanan like the lovable but misguided uncle for far too long, Rachel Maddow decided to call a spade a spade on her show tonight during Buchanan’s guest appearance.
[....]
But Rachel Maddow continued to prove her skill as an effective pundit and stopped the MSNBC practice of politely giving him a pass and instead coolly and calmly, but forcefully, called him out on his views.

Yes, but she still put him on as she has done multiple time, and will do so again in the future.  These appearances on what are meant to be serious shows lend credibility to Buchanan, which is how he makes his money.   ErinW43′s shilling forgets the last time Maddow ‘called out’ Buchanan.  From the August 2008 Daily Kos story “The Beauty of Rachel Maddow’s Smackdown of Pat Buchanan Last Night“:

Keep this in mind when you’re watching Pat Buchanan spout his asshat opinions on every show. Here is the Pat Buchanan I know and loathe. And three cheers to Rachel for the SMACKDOWN. You are so awesome!

Erin, how many repeat smackdowns does Maddow need to have before you realize they are contrived?  It’s a game that ErinW43 and many  bloggers play into because they don’t see that when the cameras are off, host and vile pundit wink, wink each other over the fireworks that will get the attention of…ErinW43 at Daily Kos, et al.

They never ask where is Maddow’s responsibility to obtain decent guests who challenge our intellects, instead of bait our moral outrage.  After Buchanan’s performances on MSNBC this week, it’s the only question an intelligent person should ask.

The Jon Stewart-Tucker Carlson feud, where Carlson couldn’t believe that Stewart refused to play by these unwritten rules, should have clued you in, especially since Carlson has never gotten over it.

Rachel Maddow and Daily Kos seek short-term gain, ignoring long-term harm

Maddow is going by the playbook: create controversy, create buzz and watch the ratings climb.  When the cameras are off, guest and host talk about what a “smackdown” it was, and how it will be good for ratings.  That’s how Ann Coulter gets booked.  “What crazy thing will happen next with her?” is not David Brinkley, it’s Ricki Lake.

Whether they are adding anything productive to our national discourse is a meaningless consideration.  That ain’t the game.  It’s short-term gain in viewers and web traffic, over the long-term harm it does to how we respect each other and our views.  The blogosphere, once pointed critic, is now the lap-dog of this pablum. Why?  It brings traffic and comments.

Short-term gain that ignores long-term harm was a key element in our financial meltdown.  People wonder why the media is in meltdown?  Those ratings they are getting from all of this horror aren’t followers; they are people grabbing popcorn and watching the spectacle of their desperate attempt to forestall their implosion.  The blogosphere is now part of the show.  What’s left in our debasement?

“There is a right to privacy but not a right to hypocrisy,” openly gay Rep. Barney Frank ( D-Mass.)

Florida Governor Charlie Crist is gay, in the closet, votes against his own interests–surprise, he’s a Republican–as a gay man, and he recently announced that he is running for the U.S. Senate.  Wow.  So says a new film (and the gay press for years).

My most-read post is the one where I became the second person to out Fox News anchor Shepard Smith as gay; Smith hit on me at a bar in 2002 after we were introduced through a mutual friend.   Now the film Outrage, by Academy Award-nominated director Kirby Dick, confirms what I wrote: yes, the prime time anchor of the anti-gay Fox News is in the closet, and afraid to come out. Watch the trailer to the movie:

Conservatives who hate are in quite an uproar about the recent spate of outings of their top political figures in Dick’s film.

This is known as chickies coming home to roost.

When politicians continually effort to be elected based upon moral crusading, and their party continually codifies hate into its platform, they should not be surprised when the public exposes their hypocrisy and dishonesty when those politicians tow the party line whilst living double lives.

See related story: Photos of former NJ Gov. Jim McGreevey and his former prisoner ministry in Harlem.

Most Republicans are upset about this revelation of truth, more than they are upset that they have leaders who don’t follow what they purport to believe.  It’s getting tougher to be a Republican today: they don’t know what to believe nor the reality of those for whom they are voting.

That the mainstream media laps up and reports any hint of drug or sex scandal about public officials, but lets them remain in the closet when their hypocritical anti-gay votes hurt many people, is a scandal in itself.

David Shankbone and Ed Koch in 2008. Koch, long known for his refusal to admit that he is gay, is outed for the billionth time in the film Outrage.

Here’s the gay hypocrites parade:

• Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho – 2007 arrest on suspicion of lewd conduct for soliciting gay sex in a Minneapolis airport men’s room ended his political career.
• U.S. Rep. Edward L. Schrock, R-Va., who retired in 2004 after he was outed by the Advocate.
• Governor Charlie Crist, R-FL – a supporter of the state’s ban on gay adoption.  The film notes a long-ago six-month marriage to a woman now living with a female partner; two sources who separately told a reporter about two different men who claimed relationships with Crist; 2006 gubernatorial rival Max Linn saying Crist told him years ago that he was gay; and a former girlfriend, Kelly Heyniger, who responded when contacted by the filmmakers: “I think I should just keep my mouth shut … call me in 10 years and I’ll tell you a story.”
• Former Mayor Ed Koch, D-NYC – remains closeted while publicly opposing legislation on issues such as same-sex marriage, HIV/AIDS funding, and gays in the military.
• Rep. David Dreier, R-CA – In the last Congress, Dreier received a 10 percent rating from the gay advocacy group Human Rights Campaign. Over his career he has opposed, among other things, measures to protect gay people against job discrimination and to add sexual orientation as a federal hate-crime category, which would enable prosecution of such offenses by federal authorities.
• Ken Mehlman, former Republican National Committee Chairman
• Jim McCrery, former Republican Louisiana congressman.  Scored 0% by the HRC on gay rights.

Kirby Dick also outs Shepard Smith.  When asked why he focused on this one journalist amongst all the politicians, the filmmaker’s answer to the Huffington Post reflects my own reasons for outing Shepard Smith:

And if you do out closeted politicians, what about other folks in the public sphere? Actors? Television personalities? Journalists? Pundits? When is it not okay to out someone?

My film focuses primarily on hypocrisy of politicians who are entrusted to uphold the rights of all citizens equally. Closeted gays and lesbians in the other professions you mention have not been elected to enact laws that affect the entire citizenry, and they are not usually acting hypocritically. The film does report on one journalist, Shepard Smith, who was first reported on by Kevin Naff of the Washington Blade. Shepard Smith works for Fox News, which has been a major factor in the rise of anti-gay hysteria in this country over the past two decades. As one of the most prominent people in Fox News—according to the New York Times, Smith makes 7 to 8 million dollars per year—his complicity with the network’s homophobic agenda rises to a level of hypocrisy that I felt was worthy of reporting.

So what about it, Republicans?  Are you going to nix popular Governor Charlie Crist, who recently announced he is running for the US Senate in Florida, because he is not honest about who he is, and because gay people are bad?  Is Crist going to finally come out of the closet, accept who he is, and run as a gay man?  Are the Republicans going to get over their moral crusades, the same ones that are helping them to remain losers at the ballot box as voters tire of their culturally divisive campaigns?

The questions over who is “questioning” remain unresolved as we prepare for the 2010 election, but it’s time for the media to stop letting the dishonesty and hypocrisy go unchecked.  Live up to your Fourth Estate responsibilities, mainstream media.

It looks like Gawker’s John Cook decided to pick up the gauntlet this blog first laid down (without credit) and has started his own “Ambush Jesse Watters” campaign.  What they don’t tell you was this was a campaign started here:

If we find him, we’ll post the video as soon as we can. If we don’t, we’ll keep trying, and for that we’ll need your help. What do you know about Jesse Watters? Did you go to college with him? Do you ride the train with him? Do you work at the Starbucks where he buys his coffee? Let us know. We’ll get you started:

Watters was born in July 1978. He was raised in Philadelphia, graduated from Trinity College in Hartford, Conn., in 2001, and has been a producer for the O’Reilly Factor since 2003. Before that, he spent about four months in 2002 working on federal judge Dora Irizarry’s losing campaign for New York Attorney General (making less than $12,000 per year).

He is married to Noelle Watters—maiden name Inguagiato—who works at Fox News as well, as the host of something called iMag Style on Foxnews.com. They live together in Manhasset, N.Y.

If you see him, snap a camera phone picture and send it to us. Or better yet, ask him why he stalks and ambushes people that his boss disagrees with, and tell us what he says. Two years ago, during an on-air celebration of Watters’ ambushes, O’Reilly had this to say about his young charge: “Jesse Watters, everybody. He’s becoming a big star all over the world.”

Let’s make that happen.

This blog considers imitation the highest form of flattery, and we first started the “Ambush Jesse Watters” campaign on March 31st with this post.   On April 6th, a bounty of $200 was offered for the production of an actual ambush video of Watters (Gawker is offering nothing), the same day Haikuku haiku-ed the Ambush Jesse Watters campaign (giving credit).  On April 7th Transracial also spotlighted the Shankbone ambush Watters campaign (giving credit).

Gawker came a little late to the party, joining on April 24th – but we are glad that they did.  Thanks for picking up a campaign started here, John Cook.

As if the right-wing fringe politics of the nationally-organized tea parties are not embarrassing enough, almost nobody showed up for them. 

Staten Island's Republican fringe show up for a party that almost nobody else cared about. Image: Emmanuel Dunand / AFP / Getty

“Tens of thousands of people” across the United States showed up at the tea parties to denounce taxes, Barack Obama, evolution and whatever else they could throw on the plate. 

To give you perspective on the turn-out of ”tens of thousands” across a country of over 300,000,000 people, at Denver, Colorado’s Gay Pride Parade in 2008 there were 250,000 participants in attendance.

An estimated 800,000 people protested the Republican National Convention in 2004. 

Tens of thousands nationwide, even with right-wing media stars hyping these events?  Perhaps nobody showed up because most Americans think that they are paying a fair amount of their taxes.  Robert Schlesinger  at U.S. News & World Report:

According to Gallup, for only the second time in more than half a century, a plurality of Americans (48-46 percent) think that they’re paying the proper amount of taxes. The only other time that that has been true since 1956 was in 2003 when 50 percent of Americans felt they were paying the right amount in taxes. Drilling down a bit deeper, the slim plurality comes entirely from Democrats, who 55-40 think we’re paying the right amount of taxes (up sharply from 2008 when they thought so 47-45). Independents narrowly disagree, with 48 percent saying taxes are too high and 46 percent saying they’re just right–though that figure too has narrowed sharply, as it was 54-40 in 2008. And Republicans are not surprisingly opposite Democrats, with 53 percent saying taxes are too high and 43 percent saying they’re about right. (Really? Forty-three percent of Republicans think taxes are correct? I thought it was an article of GOP faith that taxes are by their nature too high.)

A separate Gallup poll released today showed that for the first time in 15 years a plurality of Americans think lower-income people are being taxed fairly (usually, they are seen as overtaxed), while by a margin of 50-43, they believe that middle-income taxpayers are taxed at the proper rate (this has fluctuated fairly rhythmically over the decade). Nobody likes the wealthy, of course: 60 percent of Americans think them under-taxed, 23 percent think they pay their fair share, and 13 percent feel that they are overburdened. (The “fair share” and “too much” numbers both declined this year, while the “overburdened” number went up.)

“Now, the far-left websites fear greatly the vicious guy Jesse Watters.”  – Bill O’Reilly, April 3, 2009.

Feeling scared?  Then relieve your anxiety by Ambush interviewing Jesse Watters wherever you see him.  If you must, wait for him outside of his home, favorite restaurants or outside of Fox News headquarters on 6th Avenue in New York.  And if you Ambush him on an Ambush, you win $100 $200.   If you are being Ambushed and Ambush Jesse Watters back, you still get the money.

Do it the way Jesse does. Here’s a Crooks and Liars video to learn how:

O’Reilly will do anything for ratings, which is why David Letterman called him a “goon.”  It’s not just that O’Reilly blamed the rape-murder of 18 year old Jennifer Moore on the way that she dressed.   It’s that he’s a hypocrite, as Jon Stewart pointed out after Bill O’Reilly criticized the paparazzi (yes, who suck) for invading the privacy of celebrities just to get a photograph.   That’s exactly what O’Reilly and his sicko psycho stalker Jesse Watters do.  Instead of interrupting Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen’s lives, Watters and O’Reilly focus on bloggers, editors, journalists and judges who are at the grocery store or on weekend getaways. Read what others have to say about these two:

If you see Jesse Watters at an event, such as the one at Brown University above, or on an Ambush, Ambush him back relentlessly. Photograph him non-stop. Credit: Oliver Schulze

“Jesse can bring his camera crew anywhere he wants and ask tough questions too, but what’s despicable about his tactics is that he shows up on their private property unannounced or (worse yet) on the private weekend getaways, after stalking them. That’s uncool and out of line and that’s what’s objectionable.” – John Amato, Crooks and Liars

“Amanda Terkel wrote something saying Bill O’Reilly shouldn’t insinuate that girls who drink and wear halter tops had that rape coming, because they are dirty, dirty girls. Who would write such a thing except an anti-American whore? Bill O’Reilly sent his psycho stalker producer, Jesse Watters, to find out.” -Hamilton Nolan, Gawker.

“This weekend, while on vacation, I was ambushed by O’Reilly’s top hit man, producer Jesse Watters, who accosted me on the street and told me that because I highlighted O’Reilly’s comments, I was causing ‘pain and suffering’ to rape victims and their families. He of course offered no proof to back up this claim, instead choosing to shout questions at me.” Amanda Terkel, Think Progress.

What if whenever Jesse Watters ventured on the street, people were waiting to "ambush" him?

“I think my favorite part about ‘The Factor’ is that they have no trouble reconciling their defense of celebrities’ right to privacy with their intimidation of everyone else.”  Jon Stewart, The Daily Show.

“Where’s Jesse Watters?  Find him. Stalk him. Bombard him. You get what you give.” Lawchick, Haikuku.com

Ambush interview Jesse Watters.  Keep an eye out for him on the street no matter the town you live in, because he might just be on an ‘Ambush’.   If you ‘Ambush’ Watters on an ‘Ambush’, Shankblog is offering a  $100 $200 gift certificate to the store of your choosing, and we will post your video here.

Ambush him about anything.  About his stalking.  His love life.  Why he styles his hair like a seventeen year-old boy.  Anything that you want to know about Jesse Watters, grab your camera phone, walk up to him and Ambush interview him. 

UPDATE 4/6 – a loyal reader has just doubled the Ambush Jesse Watters bounty.  It is now $200.