• The New York Times claims that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich- who, lets remind everyone, was forced out of Congress by his own party- is “resurgent” because he tells a crowd in Iowa that “you can’t put a gun rack on a Smart Car.” Nor can you create a non-toxic environment for your kids by driving 10 mph vehicles for quick trips to the grocery store, which may explain why Hummers are now as extinct as the dodo.

• The only reason why the ethically corrupt Gingrich and Sarah Palin have any political weight at all is because the “liberal media” believes that they are worth coverage. Typically, if a politician finds their elected job “too hard” and quits halfway through, their reputation suffers irreparable damage and they are shunned by the media. Not Sarah Palin, who has mastered the art of the double standard. (For example, it appears that the Palins were in Los Angeles during Oscars week, helping herself to some free Oscar swag, when the news broke that she used Canada’s free health care system. Rumor has it that Todd spent a good chunk of that time trying to spell out the Hollywood sign.)

• Finally, let’s not forget that Fox News believes its too late for Obama to be bringing his pitch for health care directly to the American public. He should have done that shortly after taking office when his approval ratings were higher, as opposed to preventing our economy for going belly up with the passing of the stimulus package. Never mind the fact that every time the President did leave Washington for domestic trips, the “liberal media” criticized these excursions outside the Beltway, regardless of the reason.

So, can we finally please put this “liberal media” meme that lacks any connection with reality to rest all ready? Seriously, when the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Summer Redstone manipulate information is being relayed to the masses and the resources how media is being shared, how could media possibly be considered “liberal?”

I happened across ZvtS with a post that laughably detailed the efforts by some misguided (and since we are discussing conservatives here, I’ll add the descriptive ‘brain-dead’) efforts to draft Dick Cheney in an effort to run as a Republican candidate for President in 2012. I know. Funny, right? The former baby-eating Veep only left office with a 13 percent approval rating. (That’s right, I said thirteen.) Far be it for me to squash such quixotic efforts.

Zandar also continues his efforts by pointing out how FOX News- who has referred to Obama’s “failed” stimulus efforts- is describing the current eight-month economic recovery as the Bush recovery. Seriously, folks. You cannot make this stuff up, and a tip of the hat needs to be doffed to Mr. Zander for his vailant effort of taking on the stoopid.

Speaking of stupid, a wag of the finger needs to be given to the dissemblers and misinformationists over at NW Republican who offer their emotionally-based arguments that have no grounding in reality. A recent post asserts that some leaked emails by climate scientists somehow equals proof that the world is not warmer than it was ten, twenty-five, or fifty years ago. (Note to those over at NW Republican: it is.) Its funny how the same people who argue fervently in favor of free market economics somehow insist that scientists should offer the services for charity, or live off the public dole. Scientists typically get paid to do research, either through a grant-funded university or through non-profits. Let’s not forget that for any scientific conclusion to have merit, it needs to be passed a peer-review process. (Which no paper submitted by a climate change denier has accomplished.) Therefore, if a hack scientist were to submit results that mirrored the intended result sought by funders throwing around gobs of money- it still needed to have scientific merit.

This ties in with the advice given by conservative adviser/ framing expert Frank Luntz who once suggested that conservatives best control the climate change debate by “challenge the idea that the science isn’t conclusive” when it actually is, and has been for some time. What is amusing is that NW Republican’s climate change post came after a post that examined the use of the post-modern philosophical concept of ‘deconstruction’ which challenges the meaning of the written word, or any other media, resulting in the only meaning given to the text provided by the reader himself. Thus, efforts need to be given to “sway” the mind of the interpreter, with those who succeed by having the final influence winning the ideological battle. NW Republican jumps upon this obscure concept for no other reason than that liberal academics have cited the French social critic Jacques Derrida in the past, and that Derrida was a big proponent of deconstructionism, a theory that was originally created and used by the fascists. Therefore, obviously, as liberals have used deconstructionsit theory in the past, they are fascists. Duh.

So its very odd that NW Republican would post a treatise on how the use of deconstructionist theory to sway arguments is somehow “proof” that liberals are fascist after a post in which deconstructionism is used in an attempt to sway the reader regarding climate change. By suggesting that the science of climate change be “challenged” Luntz is offering a rhetorical tactic that is very close to Derrida’s deconstructionism that is criticized by NW Republican. After all, there is no correlation or causality between some linked emails and the planet’s increasing temperature. (NW Republican might be interested in finding the definition of those words, along with consensus and irony.)

Therefore, with its disingenuous, misleading, and- to use their argument- fascist posts, NW Republican deserves a wag of the finger.

House Democrats passed a health care reform bill.

The battle between the White House and FOX News lead to Obama’s Communications Director Anita Dunn stepping down much sooner than the end of the year, as she initially said.

Democrats picked up two more Congressional seats in the House, extending their winning streak to five straight special Congressional races over Republican candidates.

I’m not suggesting that the current political momentum is entirely for the Democrats.  Certainly the right has their successes to celebrate as well!

What the Fox!?

“The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological… what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party.”

“Obviously [the President] will go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents. He has done that before and he will do it again… when he goes on Fox he understands he is not going on it as a news network at this point. He is going on it to debate the opposition.”

“[Fox is] widely viewed as a part of the Republican Party: take their talking points and put them on the air, take their opposition research and put it on the air. And that’s fine. But let’s not pretend they’re a news organization like CNN is.”

Well, there you go. That’s the extent of the comments from the White House. Where does Anita Dunn say that the White House is planning to take Fox News off the air? Was it when she said that the President will go on the network again because he likes to engage with ideological opponents?

Can you find anywhere in Anita Dunn’s comments where she talked about how the white house was paying liberal editorial writers to write favorable opinion pieces about White House policy positions, like how the Bush White House paid Armstrong Williams and others to trump up his No-Child Left Behind education bill?

Where in Anita Dunn’s comments does she talk about about how the White House was paying fake news reporters and gay escorts to ask soft ball questions during daily White House Briefings and Press Conferences, like how the Bush White house paid Jeff Gannon, employed by the “just-for-Jeff-Gannon’s-credentials” fake virtual news agency Talon news, which of course no longer exists.

And does anyone remember a Bush Press Secretary named Tony Snow? Has that name been erased from everyone’s memory over there at Fox News? Well, aside from the fact Tony Snow has since passed away from cancer and how forgetting his name would fall in line with Fox New’s ideological stance on health care, because obviously Tony Snow didn’t pull himself up by his own bootstraps enough, Tony Snow was the host of “Fox News Sunday” and substitute fill-in for Bill O’Reilly’s radio show before the Bush White House snapped him up to be the White House Press Secretary in April 2006. Just curious, did anyone hear Anita Dunn mention when the White House would be hiring liberal MSNBC host Rachel Maddow to be Obama’s new White House Press Secretary?

Did anyone notice if Anita Dunn mentioned that the White House would be spending millions to organize and facilitate massive protests across the nation in protest of Fox News? Not that Fox News would ever spend millions organizing nation-wide astro-turf tea party protests against paying taxes at a rate still remaining since the last president before Obama passed them into law, which were even at a lower tax rate than what taxes were under Reagan. Except that’s exactly what they did.

Fox News frequently aired segments encouraging viewers to get involved with “tea party” protests across the country on their channel. They provided attendance numbers, protest dates, locations and website URLs. Fox News’s own website had also posted information and publicity material for protests. Fox News hosts repeatedly encouraged viewers to join them at several April 15 protests that they were attending and covering. In addition, Fox News has also aired numerous interviews with protest organizers in the build up to the protests. No, Anita Dunn didn’t mention anything quite at that level, although she did say the White House viewed Fox News as the political arm of the Republican party. Huh.

So, please Fox News cry babies, STFU! You made your bed and now its time to go sleep in it. Trying to call out the White House for calling you what you are, and saying they are fine with that, but nevertheless it is what it is, just drips with hypocrisy. Calling the President Stalin and Chairman Mao is beyond ridiculous, especially since it took the Bush White House “forever” to finally completely blacklist MSNBC according to Fox News hosts during the last 2 years of the Bush presidency.

In defense, Fox News Senior Vice President Michael Clemente struck back at the White House after Dunn’s remark saying, “It’s astounding the White House cannot distinguish between news and opinion programming. It seems self-serving on their part.” Fox went on to define its news hours as 9am-4pm & 6-8pm, of course time slots which exclude Cavuto, O’Reilly, Fox & Friends crew, Glenn Beck, Greta Van Susteren, and Sean Hannity from the news category and leave a bunch of people nobody’s ever heard of.

But if the above examples aren’t enough for you then I’ll let Jon Stewart further explore the hypocrisy of Fox News’s inability to call the kettle black. To be fair, Stewart even skewers the White House as well, for not claiming MSNBC is also biased.

Without regulation on the Health Insurance companies and without the Public-Option available to the public, what is there to stop these greedy corporations from making hand over fist profits with the blood of hard working Americans? Thankfully some people are coming around and seeing the light, even on the Fox Right Wing News channel:

And just last month, after months of calling the Public-Option “socialist government run health care”, Poppa Bear himself, Bill O’Reilly came out in favor of the Public-Option on his show because he wants “hard working Americans to have an option.”