.:[Double Click To][Close]:.
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts

Donald Trump gets a weekly segment on Fox and Friends

In the few posts I have made on Donald Trump, I said I did not think he was really trying to run for the White House. Instead, I believe that Trump is once again pushing his brand. After this I am even more convinced Trump is just working his brand.
Mediaite: Need to add some spice to your Monday morning? Fox & Friends has announced just the thing for the media nerd that simply can’t get enough of the most attention-grabbing potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates yet: “Mondays with Trump,” a brand new segment where “The Donald now makes his voice loud and clear on Fox” on the news of the day. [MORE]


Fox has already let go of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum for getting too far along in their presidential aspirations. So does Trump joining Fox and Friends, 18 months out from the election, mean he isn't even getting into the race? Why hire him if he will only last two months?

Yesterday I watched Donald Trump's interview with Bill O'Reilly. As insufferable as O'Reilly has become, he did a good job asking serious questions to Trump. What I gathered from Trump's answers is as far as details go it is thin gruel. It is like he simply mimics the popular conservative position on issues like abortion and health care. On foreign affairs, Trumps offers up some heavy duty tough talk that I cannot imagine anyone backing up. 

Watch the whole interview below and let me know if you think Trump is serious about running or just serious about self promotion.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Mediate
Via: The O'Reilly Factor

Fox News suspends Gingrich and Santorum due to 2012 intentions


Politico: Fox News has suspended contributors Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum until they decide whether to run for president.
Anchor Bret Baier announced on air late Wednesday morning that the network “has suspended its contributor arrangements” with Gingrich and Santorum for the next 60 days.
Both, Baier said, “have signaled possible runs for the presidency” and it “is Fox policy” for them to be suspended.
With the suspensions, the network has taken its first big step to address mounting concerns that it could run afoul of campaign finance laws and journalistic ethics by continuing to keep on its payroll people who are maneuvering to run for president. But the suspensions of two contributors also leads to questions about three others on the Fox payroll — Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin and John Bolton — who are also weighing White House bids.

I always wondered how Fox was going to handle having potential GOP candidates on their payroll. Now we know. Fox's actions are sure to put a big spotlight on Palin and Huckabee. Fox will no doubt wait until the last possible moment to ditch the both of them since they are real ratings getters.

Fox News election coverage vs. MSNBC

The results are in and not only did Fox crush the competition (again), lefty critics are saying Fox’s election coverage was “fair and balanced”.
Mediaite: But don’t just take our word for it, read what other media critics had to say. Writing for Time’s Tuned In blog James Poniewozik seemed to agree that Fox News was fairer than the lot:
To be fair, NBC did join coverage earlier, after an all-new Biggest Loser.) Fox News, for all its image as the Republican-friendly network, actually seemed to have the most reserved coverage in tone of the three big cablers, going with a more reserved set and less flashy graphics (granted, by cable news standards) than its competitors. A whiteboard was even employed.
Credit where due, Fox also had a more, well, balanced panel much of the night than its competitor MSNBC. Holding forth from left of center for Fox were the recently-high-profile Juan Williams and Democratic political guru Joe Trippi. MSNBC’s main lineup, on the other hand, was basically its center-to-left lineup of nightly hosts: Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell.
Politico also drew a similar distinction between the coverage and analysis provided by MSNBC and Fox News:
Although Fox News took the most criticism during this campaign season for its alleged bias, it was MSNBC — whose new “Lean Forward” tagline inspired CNN’s promo — that wore its point of view most on its sleeve Tuesday night.
MSNBC’s election coverage was led by a panel comprised mostly of its opinionated prime-time hosts (Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell, along with frequent contributor Eugene Robinson), with nary a conservative voice in the mix. In contrast, Fox News’s was provided by two anchors from its straight-news dayside, Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier, along with a panel that included conservatives like Karl Rove as well as liberals like Juan Williams. Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity stopped by only briefly.
During the commercials on Fox, I would flip to MSNBC and CNN.  On CNN, I thought I was watching the morning commute on the NYC subways.  Their studio was jammed packed with pundits.  It was impossible to tell what was going on there. 

On MSNBC, it was like watching a bunch of teens talking smack in the locker room, complete with dick jokes.


This is news? This isn’t even decent commentary.  What this is is sour grapes on steroids!  If MSNBC really wants to live up to their new “lean forward” motto, they might start by ditching these pathetic clowns for some more credible personalities.  There are lefties out there that know how to make sane and credible arguments as well as conduct themselves in a professional manner.

MSNBC? What’s that? Poll: Only 12% rely on MSNBC for their news


Every time I have been subjected to watching MSNBC News, I have always said to myself; "who the hell can watch this crap"?  Today, I get my answer, not many.
Politico: More people are getting their news about the upcoming election from cable television than any other source, and from Fox News more than any other cable channel, according to a POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll released Monday.
The poll found that 81 percent of those polled get their news about the midterm elections from cable channels, like Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, or their websites, compared with 71 percent from national network news channels, such as ABC, NBC or CBS, and their websites.Among cable news channels, Fox was the clear winner, with 42 percent of respondents saying it is their main source, compared with 30 percent who cited CNN and 12 percent who rely on MSNBC. 
The most delicious part of the poll is when pollsters asked about cable news and talk radio personalities
Fox’s opinionated personalities were also rated as having the greatest positive impact on the political debate in the country. Bill O’Reilly was rated as having, by far, the greatest positive impact, with 49 percent of respondents rating him positively, and 32 percent negatively.Glenn Beck was the second most-positively rated personality, with 38 percent of respondents saying he had a positive impact, and 32 percent saying he had a negative impact.[...]
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was the third-most-positively ranked, with 36 percent saying he has a positive impact on the discourse, but his negatives far outweighed his positives, with 52 percent saying he has a negative impact.
MSNBC’s personalities were largely ranked as unknown by respondents: 70 percent said they had never heard of Ed Schultz, 55 percent said they had never heard of Rachel Maddow and 42 percent said they had never heard of Keith Olbermann.
[Snicker] Sorry, but I have to laugh over that one. Didn’t Ed Schultz just say the other day that he too could draw crowds like Glenn Beck?  Poor Ed, he may want to start with something less prodigious, like getting someone to watch his nightly ranting.  Otherwise, he could end up all by himself shouting on the Mall and everyone wonder who is that fat slob?
Read the Politico piece and check out the full results of the poll. Oh, and does anyone want to take a guess at what O'Reilly's Talking Point Memo will be about tonight ;-)

Shirley Sherrod caught in the crossfire

In the great pitch battle between the NAACP and the Tea Party movement over politically motivated charges of racism, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development Shirley Sherrod got caught in the crossfire.

After viewing the full video of Sherrrod’s remark it becomes clear that her story wasn’t one of black vs. white, but rather a shift in attitude from black vs. white to rich vs. poor. Ms. Sherrod also makes clear that this story happened before the USDA employed her. Ms. Sherrod goes on to state that she became good friends with the white farmer in the end and the white farmer’s family confirms Ms. Sherrod’s claims.

Before the full video was made available, Ms. Sherrod was asked to resign her position from the USDA. In a CNN interview, Ms. Sherrod says the request for her resignation came from the White House and that she was disappointed that the NAACP did not bother to hear her out.


Between the administration and the NAACP, the NAACP’s actions are most egregious. The NAACP’s initial reaction was to condemn Sherrod without hearing her side of the story. Once the full story got out, the NAACP claimed that they were snookered by Fox News and Andrew Breitbart.
With regard to the initial media coverage of the resignation of USDA Official Shirley Sherrod, we have come to the conclusion we were snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart into believing she had harmed white farmers because of racial bias.
Having reviewed the full tape, spoken to Ms. Sherrod, and most importantly heard the testimony of the white farmers mentioned in this story, we now believe the organization that edited the documents did so with the intention of deceiving millions of Americans. 
This is complete nonsense. The NAACP was in possession of the full video before anyone else yet they did not bother to view it before condemning Sherrod.  They only people who snookered the NAACP was the NAACP themselves when they decided that covering their own ass was far more important than defending Sherrod.

Regarding the administration, their actions were completely political.  In typical Obama administration fashion their goal was to take a hot subject off the front burner any way they can. So Shirley Sherrod was tossed under the bus just like Rev. Wright, Van Jones and Yosi Sargent.  The administration’s claims that it had no input into the request for Sherrod’s resignation and that the decision came from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack alone.  This is baloney. The Sherrod story was top news and whatever decision was made about her was going to reflect on the administration one way or another. Are we to believe that the White House did not care about the outcome?

Again, in order to remove the hot glare of attention from the Sherrod incident, the administration did a 180 just like the NAACP and is offering Sherrod her job back.

Regarding Andrew Breitbart, his goal was to launch a broadside at the NAACP. Mission accomplished, they made fools of themselves and pulled the administration along with them.  Where Breitbart can be faulted is for using the edited clips without knowing what the full story was about. In doing so, he has left himself open to criticism from the left and has caused most of the focus to go to Ms. Sherrod rather than the NAACP.

That being said, the left and Ms. Sherrod herself seem to think that all this is the fault of Breitbart and Fox News. Nope. Neither Breitbart nor Fox News fired Ms. Sherrod. It was the administration that chose to do that.

Each and every day, both the Democratic Party and the NAACP put themselves out there as great defenders and champions of the black community. Yet when a black person needed some defending, neither this Democratic administration or the NAACP defended her. Instead their first instincts were to defend themselves by throwing Sherrod under the bus. So in the end, the very people Ms, Sherrod is still putting her faith in are the very ones who betrayed her.

Via: CNN
Via: NAACP
Via: The Washington Post
Via: Media Matters

Video: Megyn Kelly vs. Kristen Powers on Black Panther case

This video is starting to make the rounds on Memeorandum. Wow, what a catfight!


Given how quickly Megyn and Kristen go at it, I get the feeling that the two had a dust up before going on air. Notice at the 4:00 mark, Kristen starts off by accusing Megyn of “putting her in the same category of people who don’t give a darn”. Where did that come from? Megyn never made that accusation on air.

If I had to pick a winner, I have to give Megyn Kelly the nod. Kristen Powers contradicted herself badly by first trying to say she didn’t really see voter intimidation and finally ending with she agrees there was intimidation. Plus the “look what Bush did” argument has long ago fallen out of vogue. Kelly on the other hand stayed on point saying Powers did not know what she was talking about and proves it when Powers contradicts herself.

Sadly, what is lost in this verbal brawl is Congressman Brad Sherman’s comments which were never addressed by either Megyn Kelly or Kristen Powers.

Video h/t: The Right Scoop

Sean Hannity pulled from Cincinnati Tea Party event by Fox News execs


Fox News canceled Sean Hannity’s broadcast from the Cincinnati Tea Party after it learned that the Tea Party organizers were charging admission. Even though the party organizers were not profiting from the event, the Fox execs still ordered Hannity back to the NY studio.
From the LA Times:  Angry Fox News executives ordered host Sean Hannity to abandon plans to broadcast his nightly show as part of a Tea Party rally in Cincinnati on Thursday after top executives learned that he was set to headline the event, proceeds from which would benefit the local Tea Party organization.
Rally organizers had listed Hannity, who is on a book tour, as the headliner of the four-hour Tax Day event at the University of Cincinnati. The rally, expected to draw as many as 13,000 people, was set feature speakers such as “Liberal Facism” author Jonah Goldberg and local Tea Party leaders. Participants were being charged a minimum of $5, with seats near Hannity’s set going for $20,according to the Cincinnati Enquirer, which reported that any profits would go to future Tea Party events. Media Matters for America noted that Hannity’s personal website directed supporters to a link to buy tickets for the Cincinnati rally.
But senior Fox News executives said they were not aware Hannity was being billed as the centerpiece of the event or that Tea Party organizers were charging for admission to Hannity’s show as part of the rally. They first learned of it Thursday morning from John Finley, Hannity's executive producer, who was in Cincinnati to produce Hannity's show.
Furious, top officials recalled Hannity back to New York to do his show in his regular studio. The network plans to do an extensive post-mortem about the incident with Finley and Hannity's staff.
“Fox News never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party organizers to use Sean Hannity’s television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event," said Bill Shine, the network’s executive vice president of programming. "When senior executives in New York were made aware of this, we changed our plans for tonight’s show.”
This seems like one of those deals where a little bit more communication could have gone a long way. Shame on the Fox execs, Sean Hannity is one of their biggest personalities. As such, how is it possible they could send him anywhere without full knowledge of ever single detail? I think what happened is that the Fox execs, were too concerned about looking like they are coordinating with the Tea Parties. If this is the case, they are beyond foolish. The left will call Fox shills for Republicans no matter what they do, so why give a hoot.

I have a feeling we may be hearing more of this story. 
There is further details at Hot Air Pundit  and Instapundit.

UPDATED: Sarah Palin’s Fox News Special to feature L.L. Cool J?


I knew Palin was going to do specials for Fox, I also knew that she wanted to focus on everyday American stories. What I was surprised by was her guest list. Somehow, I never imagine LL Cool J going on a Palin show. 
Mediaite: This is not an April Fool’s joke. Sarah Palin will take her first stab at television hosting when she fronts a new Fox News series, Real American Stories, premiering Thursday April 1 at 10pmET.
Guests for the first show include country singerToby Keith, rapper/actor LL Cool J and Jack Welch. Get excited.
The show will “focus on a range of such stories including a Marine Medal of Honor recipient who gave his live to save his comrades.” But also there will be the celebrity guests – a very broad range of celebrity guests.
If you skip over to Hot Air to see a clip of LL Cool J, the brother sounds downright conservative.


UPDATE 1: View the promo commercial here.
UPDATE 2: Right Klik picks up on what is sure to be the big Palin "controversy" involving LL Cool J

Via: Hot Air 

UPDATED: VIDEO: Obama's interview on Fox News with Bret Baier



The most noticiable thing about this interview is the testiness between Obama and Baier.  Out of all the interviews Obama has had on Fox, this was by far the toughest. Baier knew his stuff and pressed hard for answers. I am sure we will be hearing from the left that Baier was disrespectful to the president.  

Normally Obama is pretty good at giving non-answers, but under Baier's pressure, his non-answers were quite apparent. The part I think Obama did the worst in was when Baier pressed him on specifically which kickbacks were coming out. Obama only seemed familiar with the two biggest (Louisiana and Nebraska) but was clueless about the rest.

BAIER: Do you know which specific deals are in or out, as of today?
OBAMA: I am certain that we've made sure, for example, that any burdens on states are alleviated, when it comes to what they're going to have to chip in to make sure that we're giving subsidies to small businesses, and subsidies to individuals, for example.
BAIER: So the Connecticut deal is still in?
OBAMA: So that's not — that's not going to be something that is going to be in this final package. I think the same is true on all of these provisions. I'll give you some exceptions though.
Something that was called a special deal was for Louisiana. It was said that there were billions — millions of dollars going to Louisiana, this was a special deal. Well, in fact, that provision, which I think should remain in, said that if a state has been affected by a natural catastrophe, that has created a special health care emergency in that state, they should get help. Louisiana, obviously, went through Katrina, and they're still trying to deal with the enormous challenges that were faced because of that.
(CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: That also — I'm giving you an example of one that I consider important. It also affects Hawaii, which went through an earthquake. So that's not just a Louisiana provision. That is a provision that affects every state that is going through a natural catastrophe.
Now I have said that there are certain provisions, like this Nebraska one, that don't make sense. And they needed to be out. And we have removed those. So, at the end of the day, what people are going to be able to say is that this legislation is going to be providing help to small businesses and individuals, across the board, in an even handed way, and providing people relief from a status quo that's just not working.
BAIER: OK, the Florida deal, in or out?
OBAMA: The Florida deal —
BAIER: Paying for Medicare Advantage, exempting 800,000 Floridians from —
OBAMA: My understanding is that whatever is going to be done on Medicare is going to apply across the board to all states.
BAIER: Connecticut, Montana — there are a lot of deals in here, Mr. President, that people have issues about.
OBAMA: Bret, the core of this bill is going to be affecting every American family. If you have insurance, you're going to be able to keep it. If you don't have insurance, you're going to be able to buy into a pool, like members of Congress have. We're going to make sure that we have delivery system reforms that strengthen Medicare, that are going to make sure that doctors and hospitals are providing better service and better care, and this is going to reduce the deficit.
Now, there are going to be in this, as I just mentioned, on things like making sure that states who have gone through natural catastrophes and medical emergencies are getting help, but those are not going to ones that are driven by politics, they're going to be driven policy.
In the end, I don't think the interview was a game changer and I doubt anyone was swayed either way.  What are your thoughts?


UPDATE: Drudge calls interview Historic First

Drudge calls the interview a historic first. The first time Obama got grilled by the media!