For me, Fox News has become unendurable It is just not enough that Fox News is better than the other TV networks. That is just because conservative viewpoints actually make it on to Fox News on occasion, while conservative viewpoints (Rush Limbuagh type conservative viewpoints, and not Olympia Snow type Republican viewpoints) never make it at all onto the other TV networks (leading leftist to accuse Fox, falsely, of being right wing because they actually see a real conservative viewpoint occasionally on Fox News--shocking them in terms of their view of what is right and proper). But Fox News is not actually any good at presenting facts, or at fairness. Oh, I actually think Fox News is somewhat "balanced", if toward an "establishment" type of both leftism and conservatism, but Fox is not fair. That is because the facts get lost on Fox News, as they get lost on the other TV networks--cable and broadcast. "Balancing" opinions does not make "news" fair. In fact, it guarantees that "news" will be unfair, in the sense that there is always an agenda and point of view, and no one is really trying to give news without spin (certainly not O'Reilly).
The Wall Street bailout reporting revealed the very worst of Fox News, as Fox News campaigned full tilt for the passage of the bailout--buying completely into the fear mongering and propaganda. Yes, there were a few lonely voices. I saw Dave Ramsey once on Fox. I am sure there were other isolated instances where contrary opinions were briefly inserted. But Fox News basically presented unrelenting propaganda in favor of the bailout, including propaganda from Fox Business Channel (all of the "business channels were "in the tank" lobbying for Wall Street on this bailout, and CNBC could well have been a co-winner of this award). The few facts that were presented were distorted. It was basically all opinion, and almost all of it was in favor of the bailout. See the entry yesterday on the "taxpayers making money on this bailout", and other entries throughout the week Fox did the same thing last year when it acted as an arm of the "establishment" in pushing the McCain/Kennedy/Bush/Obama immigration bill. I have had it.
Look at that hyped "record" Wall Street drop on Monday--which was all fiction (except for the part that represented the drop while it was still thought the bailout was going to pass). Most of that drop was reversed in the "recovery" the next day.
Yet, even now Fox is referring to the "record" drop in the Dow on Monday, which is an outright lie. Let me be as blunt as I can: NO (that's right: none) "news outlet which continually refers to the Dow drop on Monday as a record is worth watching, listening to, or reading. That is sheer propaganda.
How can I explain this, if you do not already know it? Well, let me try. Say you have a stock market portfolio, when you are just starting, with a value of $10,000. Say you lose $9,000 of it in one day. Now say you have been investing in the market for several years, and have $100,000 in the market. Say you lose $20,000 in one day. Which day was a "record". Sure, you lost more money when you lost $20,000, but it was only 20%. When you lost $9,000, it was 90%--a far worse day.
Okay, it is technically correct that the point drop in the Dow was the worst of all time, but that is only because the Dow is so high (Historically, it is. You will never know it from watching Fox News, but the present bear market is only a standard--average--bear market drop from an all time high in the Dow). Monday's drop was not even in the top ten percentage drops of all time, and a good part of that was fiction (part of the blackmail and extortion, as referred to in my entries this past week).
Is it not acceptable to "report" that the drop was the largest point drop of all time, while at the same time reporting that as a pretty meaningless statistic--reporting that it was not near the biggest percentage drops of all time? Sure, and some on Fox did that the first day. But thereafter, the Monday drop became a "record" drop in every subsequent reference, without the necessary clarification. That is a fear mongering lie. It is true in no real sense. If you are referring to Monday's drop, in a story where you don't have time to go into the full circumstances, you should leave "record" out of the story. The factual information is that the Dow dropped 777 points (bad enough, even though a good part of it was fiction). To go on and continue to repeat the fear mongering lie that this was a "record" is irresponsible, and labels you as an incompetent "news" organization.
It is worse than that, and this is where it gets really bad. Fox News, and everyone else in the mainstream media, reported that the Dow lost that 777 points because the House rejected the bailout bill. That is an even more obvious lie. The Dow was already down 200 to 250 points on Monday morning, when the bailout bill was expected to pass. The most you can say is that the House rejection pushed the Dow down another 500 points While that was not good, it was quickly reversed (revealed as fiction) the next morning. Where were the voices explaining this to you on Fox--the voices explaining how that drop of Monday afternoon was pretty meaningless? Where were the voices on Fox explaining that perhaps the drop on Monday morning, when the bailout bill was assumed to be going to pass, was more significant. Wall Street was already voting, as it would vote later in the week, that the bailout bill would not really "bail out main street", or even Wall Street. Then came Thursday and Friday, when the market went below where it ended Monday. In fact, the Dow transports lost a similar percentage to the percentage the main Dow 30 lost on Monday in a single day. This was, again, in anticipation of a bailout passing, and after it had actually passed.
Was Fox trying to reconcile all of these facts. Nope. The facts hardly mattered. It was all opinion. The opinion was that other factors had driven down the market on Thursday and Friday, and that the bailout was not the reason the market went down. AS I said yesterday, however, the fear created by Fox, and the entire establishment, was very likely a big part in the market sell off last week. That sell off was real. The drop on Monday afternoon, after the House rejection of the bailout bill, was fiction. See the entries all week, where I was proven right and the mainstream media and establishment proven wrong (the fear mongering idiots).
That brings me to Fred Barnes. He is one of the fear mongering, insulting, establishment idiots, as he was on the immigration bill. He said on Fox that people opposing this bailout were "idiotic and myopic". He handed out similar insults to people who opposed the immigration bill. Barnes is one of "The Beltway Boys"--a show he has on Fox. Forever more, I am going to refer to him as Fred "Beltway" Barnes. It is the most insulting nickname I can give anyone (more insulting than the nicknames for Pelosi and Reid). Barnes does have a "Beltway" mentality I was smarter than he is at age ten, and am about ten times as smart as he is now. I do not accept insults from people like that. I do not turn the other cheek. I admit to being "myopic", but the way. My eyesight really is not good, and I am very nearsighted (along with other difficulties). But there is no person on this lplanet, excepting only people like Pelosi and Reid who I consider more idiotic than Fred Barnes.
Let me be blunt again: How can everyone, including President Bush, refer to this bailout bill as a "terrible" bill, and it still be "idiotic" to oppose it? Yes, I understand that those people are trying to scare us into believing that the bill was necessary, even though terrible. But that had to be a close thing, didn't it? And if the scare were overdone, then what is left? Right. Then we are left with what everyone is agreeing is a terrible bill. To me, both the scare, and the beneficial effects of this bill (rarely, if ever, factually explained), were both overdone. Worse, the scare itself has created the worst enemy of this economy and of the stock market: FEAR. Yes, the mainstream media has been trying to create fear for 6 years about the economy. But it has gone into hyperdrive in the past few weeks, and has been joined by the rest of the establishment, including our politicians. Now that the monster of fear has been unleashed, how do you now control it. My answer: you don't. That is the very worst thing about those who have pushed this bailout, including Fox and Fred Barnes: they have been dealers in fear, and that is worse, any time, than being a cocaine dealer.
I don't doubt that reasonable people could support this bailout as being necessary I have trouble seeing that any reasonable conservative could do so, but I will even concede that. Newt Gingrich have a pretty good picture of how fear can work on the best of us, and you could argue that in his case it was a reasonable balancing of risks and benefits. But there was no excuse for pushing the propaganda of fear, blackmail and extortion to get this bill passed. If backers of this bill could not argue with perspective and reason, and get the bill passed, the bill was not worth passing. You say that the bill would not have passed without the hyped fear? I agree with you. But the cost of passing the bill was then too high, and we are paying that cost.
Nancy "total failure" Pelosi receives the "Finger" again this week for her speech on Monday--one of the most disgraceful speeches to have even been given in Congress. That was the speech where Pelosi advocated passage of the bill, while blaming all of our problems on the Republicans--in effect, blaming the Republicans for this bill because they made it necessary.
WHY did Democrats not pass the bill? Oh, that was because Democrats refused to be held politically responsible for the unpopular bill. In other words, Democrats were putting their own political future ahead of the good of the country. In fact, there is considerable evidence that Pelois deliberately refused to get the bill passed without more Republican votes, when she could have done so. Is this not understandable? Is it really reasonable to ask a political party to destroy itself "for the good of the country", when a bill can get done anyway? Yep, it probably is.
But look what I just did? I just exposed the Democrats and the mainstream media as dishonest, sanctimonious hypocrites. They accepted it as perfectly reasonable that Democrats should not have to sacrifice themselves for he "good of the country", but that Republicans should sacrifice themelve. What would have happened if Republicans had let the bailout bill pass on Monday, after Pelosi's hyper-partisan speech? It would have destroyed Republicans, fully as much, or more, as making this a "Democratic" bill would have destroyed Democrats.
However, the sanctimonious hypocrites in the mainstream media were perfectly willing to condemn Republicans for acting out of political necessity after the Pelosi speech, while willing to be perfectly understanding of the political necessity that Democrats not let this bailout bill be hung around their necks. In fact, the mainstream media, and Fox (complicit in all of this), were almost willing to blame Republicans for not "understanding" the "dilemma" of Democrats--making it the Republicans to blame for not helping the Democrats out by voting for a bill in which they do not really believe, after Pelosi had made it politically impossible to vote for that bill.
Yes. Pelosi deserves the "Finger". Oh, Barney Frank, the mainstream media, and all of our "establishments" deserve it too, but the "Finger" was too exhausted oscillating back and forth among four "winners" to fit in any more.
That brings us to Harry "Dirty Oil" Reid--labeled in this blog (correctly) on Friday as the "most evil man ever to serve in the U.S. Senate". Reid, on Thursday, caused a Wall Street panic in insurance company stocks---costing people billions of dollars--by taking the political scare game to a new level (causing even Jim Cramer of CNBC to label Reid as a total idiot). Reid said that another major insurance company was in danger of going under and sinking us all, and that such disastrous event would likely happen if the bailout bill failed to be passed by the House, This particular piece of "clever" blackmail and extortion virtually caused the demise of more than one insurance company all by itself--showing the power of fear.
Yes. Harry Reid also deserves to be singled out for the "Finger" among all of the other villains in this bailout fiasco.
Yep. It is time for the actual award of the "Finger". As you should be aware by now, the Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate is my unauthorized reincarnation of the old "Laough In" award As a visual aid only, as he has no connection to this award, I suggest you visualize Dick Martin presenting the "Finger" to the winners, as he did on "Laugh In". The "Finger" is a statuette of an INDEX finger pointing. You have to see the ward in your imagination, because there are no graphics, and no video.
Award ceremoney:
Imagine Dick Martin thrusting the "Finger" at the camera, and saying: Fox News, Fred Barnes, Nancy "Total Failure" Pelosi, and Harry "Dirty Oil" Reid: this is for you. You deserve it. You are further sentenced to listening 100,000 times to the original recording of FDR's speech where he said: 'We have nothing to fear but fear itself'. It may do some good in preventing you from spreading fear in the future, and has to do some good by keeping you out of our hair a little while."
Return next weekend for next week's revelation of where the spinning "Finger" will stop--again revealing outstanding examples of outrageous stupidity and/or evil which come to light during this coming week.
No comments:
Post a Comment