Tag Archives: FoxNews

“They” Have Good Reason to Fear Taylor Swift

Posted on by
The 'Taylor Swift Psyop' Freaks Need to Go Outside | National Review

I don’t think it’s my imagination. I really don’t. Not when every day it gets tougher and tougher to believe today’s Republicans have an ounce of respect for the intelligence of the average rube. Their average rubes. Not when in the course of a single week we had …

1: A dozen Colorado Republican congressional candidates — including “Beetlejuice” groper Lauren Boebert — being asked how many of them had ever been arrested? And half of them proudly shot up their hands … to the delight of the crowd that commenced hootin’ and hollerin’ in delight … at the sight of, you know, such bona fide maverick Wild West independence … or something.

2: Minnesota’s 8th District Congressman “Coach Pete” Stauber, a guy sent to D.C. solely because he can talk hockey to the marginally literate of the far north, boasting to his fellow puckheads about how he “advocated” for the billion dollars of federal money to rebuild the giant Blatnik Bridge to Superior. When in fact he … oh damn, you already knew the punchline … he caved to MAGA group think and voted against all those high-paying construction jobs.

And 3: And now, a whole host of once-upon-a-time Republican presidential candidates, (pseudo-intellectual/inflamed hemorrhoid Vivek Ramaswamy), Fox, NewsMax and OAN anchors and pundits plus … plus! … the guy who did so well selling the story of Hillary Clinton eating babies in the basement of a pizza parlor … that has no basement … freaking out about Taylor Swift rigging the the Super Bowl and the next election.

I freely concede I live in a bubble where this kind of stuff strikes me as … mmmm, what’s the word I’m looking for? … well how about “stupid” until I can come up with something better? (“Batshit” has been worn thin describing this crowd.)

But the Swift thing, besides so vividly demonstrating how afraid the MAGA-nauts are of one cute, fabulously wealthy young lady, is interesting because her influence over her fans, most of them young to young-ish women is both extraordinary and immense. Any of us who have followed pop culture for decades have to admit we’ve seen nothing — nothing — like her Eras tour or the devotion her fans have to her.

The still on-going tour has been a campaign across the globe that made her a billionaire because in large measure she was selling joyful community via high professional standards. (Ok, and high prices, too.) Point being, all her songs about relationships gone wrong withstanding, her affect is of someone who respects her audience and holds herself to standards respectful of truth (sometimes hard truths) and decency towards others. Fans may shriek and sing along and wave their flashing Swiftie bracelets without giving a lot of explicit thought to such virtues, but they feel it … and in Swift’s case, based on what we and the MAGA crowd can see, she lives the virtues she sings about.

Including the virtue of not being a sap for the bastards of the world.

Therein lies the fear she strikes into the (mmmmm, gotta come up with a new word) cynical thought leaders as they contemplate what she might be able to do with a political endorsement later this year.

Being a (very) shrewd businesswoman, Swift no doubt calculates the impact of “coming out” for say Joe Biden might have on her remarkably unblemished celebrity. Sure, there’s a percentage of her fan base that would react negatively. Certainly to an overt endorsement. But what percentage would you put that at? 10%? 15%?

She has 534 million social media followers. She can lose 50 million and still be a goddam force of political nature … if she wants to be.

The sense she’s giving at the moment is less about doing something as heavy-handed as popping up on the Jumbotron at the Super Bowl and telling all Swifties everywhere to “Vote for Joe”. It’s more — and this is savvy and wise in so many ways — simply making the persistent case to, “Vote and vote for the right thing. Vote for racial justice, gender justice, honesty and intelligence and respect for everyone, including yourself.” Presented that way, the average Swiftie — a lot of them smart young ladies — has very little difficulty discerning who of the two strange old geezers running for The Big Job embodies those virtues best.

Ms. Swift is an unprecedented phenomonon, in no small part due to her masterful manipulation of social media. She gets her message across. Instantly. And by virtue of her … well, professional virtues … her message has startling credibility with her millions of fans, (unlike, say Ted Nugent or Kid Rock), a large portion of whom may never have voted before and wouldn’t now other than she — their gold standard for fun and decency — says it’s important.

And for that reason Sean Hannity and the usual collection of incel folk heroes are rightfully terrified of her.

Heh.

“Succession”, A GOAT of the Modern Zeitgeist

Posted on by

Modern media, valued most for holding eyeballs and generating clicks, loves quick-hit lists. Ten Best this and Greatest of All Time that. Never anything too serious you know, the crowds want to be entertained, not made to feel all gloomy and what not.

So bear that in mind as I suggest that HBO’s “Succession”, which returns for its final season tomorrow night, should be ranked among TV’s finest achievements, up there with “The Wire”, “Breaking Bad” and, ummm, “Veep”, with which it shares a lot of DNA. The soon-to-culminate saga of the gilded and truly wretched Roy family, principal owner-operators of Ameerica’s most influential mad dog conservative “news” network, is so completely locked in to the zeitgeist of this era it could pass as a documentary.

The fact that “Succession” returns at the precise moment that the Murdoch family on which it is unapologetically modeled is fighting off not one but two multi-billion dollar defamation suits for hosting and nurturing outright lies about the 2020 election is too delicious for words. (Even though I may find a few in the next couple paragraphs.)

If you haven’t watched any of the previous three seasons, I can’t help you much, other than to say the Rupert-like paterfamilias, Logan, played by Brian Cox, is currently at war with his four craven, despicable children over who gets the reins of ATN (their FoxNews-like network/money machine) when he passes on to his great reward. Needless to say none of the children trusts anyone else and all are running side scams to gut the others.

Rupert Murdoch to step back at Fox, hand off CEO title to son James - Los Angeles Times
Daddy Rupert and his boys.

It’s a thing of goddam beauty I tell you. And it very much recalls “Veep’s” farewell in the spring of 2019, two years into the Trump “administration” maelstrom of fraud, incompetence and rampant, spinning bullshit. At the time the show’s star, Julia-Louis Dreyfus made several talk show stops joking and shaking her head at the painfully obvious fact that “Veep’s” writers simply couldn’t keep up with the level of actual cowardice and lunacy playing out in the real White House.

Team Trump had trumped the most absurd satire anyone could imagine.

I have no idea if “Succession’s” show-runner, Jesse Armstrong, a former “Veep” writer, has been able to work the Dominion and SmartMatic defamation suits — with all the astonishing, incriminating texts from Fox’s wretched/ethically debauched news “stars” — into this final season. But the dramatic-to-farcical possibilities of Fox’s current predicaments are endless.

Consider Murdoch/FoxNews’ current predicament. They are currently waiting for the presiding judge to decide on a summary judgment, a complete “Get Out of Jail Free” card on the basis of the First Amendment … or some mobius-like legal convolution. Should that fail they will almost certainly have to try to settle. But at what price?

It is inconceivable that Fox would take their case to trial. Not with what has already gone public and internationally viral in the the intra-company communications that haven’t been redacted.

So it would seem that Dominion and SmartMatic are in a, um, strong position to demand ample compensation, which even at 50% of what they’re demanding could easily push $2 billion. A penalty that would almost certainly and deservedly enrage Fox/NewsCorp shareholders into a massive class action suit. Which is not to mention encouraging all sorts of other characters — cops and guards injured in the Jan. 6 riot, staffers subjected to the usual FoxNews in-house misogyny and coercions — to file their own suits.

This already colossal clusterf**k has set off speculation that — very much like “Succession’s” Roy family — someone else must be sacrificed for the good of the next quarterly earnings. (And no, I don’t pity Maria Bartiromo and Lou Dobbs.)

“Succession” is of course very much a bubble entity. Just as Fox has mentioned next to nothing about all the texts of Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and others calling Trump an idiot and inferring that their devoted fans are clueless goobers hooked on bullshit. (I laughed so hard I wept at the e-mail from Carlson’s producer referring to their audience as a bunch “cousin f**kers.” That is so … so … “Succession”.)

The appeal, the dead-on, of-the-moment satire of the show is lost on MAGA nation. It simply doesn’t exist in their bubble. But that too is so of-this-moment. Two completely separate information/entertainment silos, with one capable of savoring a brilliant satire of a diseased reality and the other continuing to eagerly feed at a trough of prion-infused sewage.

I’ll have extra butter on my popcorn, thank you.

Porn Star Pay Offs, Inciting Insurrection, Sexual Assaults, Bank Fraud, Election Conspiracy and FoxNews v. Dominion. But Still … Not Even an Indictment.

Posted on by

Can I see a show of hands on the question, “Do you believe no one is above the law in America?” Please. Hands? Anyone? I didn’t think so.

Of all the lofty assertions of our exceptional nature, the claim that be they poor or be they rich and connected, everyone faces the same justice in this country is arguably the most transparently false. It’s a nice aspirational goal, but utterly without basis as we can all see day after day in the American legal system.

In the news today we have the grand jury in Georgia releasing an abbreviated, redacted version of its investigation into Trumpist meddling/fraud in the 2020 election. This plays with Special Counsel Jack Smith’s range of investigations into Trump’s hidden trove of documents at Mar-A-Lago, his incitement of a riot on the U.S. Capitol and other, um, lesser matters. Then there’s everything going on in New York, with very, very long-running investigations into Trump’s tax and banking frauds, his assaults on various women, his hush-money pay-off of a porn star. And elsewhere, but related, FoxNews’ battle with Dominion Voting Systems, and the revelation yesterday that all of its prime time hosts concurred that guests regularly booked on their shows were not only touting flagrant lies about Dominion rigging the vote for Joe Biden but were saying stuff that was, “mind-blowingly nuts.”

The point here being that we are now … years … after the fact in all of these cases (except the documents) and — exactly like Wall Street’s gamed-out trading of 2008 — no one of any significant status has suffered any consequence for outrageously obvious crimes. The kind for which you or I would have been indicted, tried, bankrupted and sentenced within months.

This point is emphasized/hammered on by Elie Honig in his new book, “Untouchable: How Powerful People Get Away With It.” A former assistant attorney for the Southern District of New York, Honig is IMHO, one the better/least hyperbolic/more reliably credible cable news pundits. I caught him recently on Charlie Sykes’ daily Bulwark podcast.

(I can’t recommend Sykes’ show highly enough. Once the Jason Lewis of Wisconsin, Sykes looked at the Republican embrace of Donald Trump and essentially said, “These people are out of their f**king minds”, bailed on the party, has done multiple mea culpas for his role in enabling anti-constitutional idiocy to run rampant and now leads daily, consistently clear-eyed, rational discussions of where cult-think has led us.)

In short, Honig’s view of the likelihood of conviction in any of these cases is not encouraging. He firmly believes Attorney General Merrick Garland has lost his window for effective prosecution and is desperately looking for any way to avoid indicting Trump … on anything … preferring someone else, like Fulton County District attorney Fani Willis in Atlanta do the deed first and take him off the hook. Jack Smith may have a more “aggressive” attitude toward Trump, but he answers to Garland.

Furthermore, and this is where the rubber really doesn’t hit the road, is the matter of securing convictions. Good luck, says Honig, getting a unanimous verdict in New York, much less Georgia on any case where 30% of the possible jury pool remains convinced Donald Trump is not only innocent of anything and everything but sent from God on high to save them from woke liberalism. Point being, says Honig, no “buck stops here” prosecutor, like Garland, wants/dares a (super) high profile acquittal on their record.

But sadly, there is no “sure thing” in American court rooms, other than you know some black kid caught selling dope on a street corner.

Honig didn’t get into the Fox-Dominion case on Sykes show, but here’s tech’s Grand Inquisitor Kara Swisher on her podcast, (Also highly recommended.)

The takeaway there being that Rupert Murdoch has the resources and legal firepower to whittle Dominion’s $1.6 billion claim down to a rounding error for Fox, maybe even with the standard legalese of “admits no wrong-doing” in its final settlement. A settlement that will get no play on Fox and quickly disappear from public memory, much like Bill O’Reilly’s $32 million pay-out to one woman for whatever he did to her. (The “non-consensual sex” and gay porn angles are always worth a headslap.)

This stark, relentlessy reaffirmed double standard for American justice has no obvious resolution. (Honig argues for Garland to try the case against Trump for the basic Constititional demonstration that acts so egregious and historical must be publicly adjudcated, lone MAGA juror be damned.)

My only suggestion would be for pundits and legal experts to at least do us the courtesy of A: stop asserting that “no one is above the law” in this country and/or B: disclaim that assertion whenever someone else “wonders” if that is the case.

The Number of White Teachers About to Get Fired is Exactly … Zero.

Posted on by

Anytime there’s a school or teacher flap in the news it helps to have an expert right here on the premises. Ladies and gentlemen, I offer you The Lovely Mrs., a veteran of 37 years teaching senior high English in the great state of Minnesota.

If you have a Trumper in your social orbit you no doubt heard bone-on-bone caterwauling the other day about the Minneapolis school district going “full woke radical” and laying off white teachers regardless of seniority. I certainly did, without quite understanding what ignited the outrage that was built into the new contract language months ago.

But lordy, lordy! A quick Google search of “Minneapolis … white teachers … fired first” found more than 30 “news reports”, the most-trafficked from Murdoch-owned operations howling about the blatant “racism” in the radical socialist hell hole we know as Minneapolis. (Gotta love the sources for their reporting.) And if you need video, there were selected black folks on Sean Hannity’s show railing against the injustice to … mmmm … white folks. Teachers, to be specific.

Color me very confused.

i ask you, “Who in the hell is getting fired? Or laid off? Or in the coagulated verbiage of the Teachers Union’s contract, “If excessing a teacher who is a member of a population underrepresented among licensed teachers in the site, the district shall excess the next least senior teacher, who is not a member of an underrepresented population’.” (“Excessing?” … for chrissake, who writes shit like that?)

The short answer to the question of which Minneapolis teachers are getting canned and forced to work at the Wendy’s drive-through is … exactly … no body.

That’s because every day there are a half dozen other stories reporting the 200, 300, pick-a-scary number of teachers the Minneapolis district needs to … hire … right now … in order to have enough to educate our little savants this coming school year. So no. The answer to the Pop Quiz: “How many patriotic white men and women are going to be cruelly axed to satisfy woke liberals?” is … zero. Certainly today and for as far into the future as any actual education expert can predict.

But, you know, when you’re in the outrage business, woke liberal blue state racists destroying the careers of decent white people is absolutely irresistible. Get it in the “A” block and sell it!

But back to The Lovely Mrs, who has no end of horror stories of incompetent faculty colleagues and incompetent school administrators. The latter being guilty of failing to do their job, which includes culling out the lazy, lazier and laziest regardless of color or seniority. The crowd as she often says who “laminated their lesson plans 20 years ago and haven’t updated anything since.”

This unfortunately connects to stories of administrators perpetually conniving to run off people who they simply took a personal disliking to.

Human nature. It’s a bitch.

But, no. Just no. Exactly like the outrages over Critical Race Theory (get a furious Trumper to even explain what he thinks it is), the IRS kicking down the door of your trailer to collect back taxes or Ilhan Omar mandating Sharia Law on the Iron Range, this one has no connection to a real and imminent reality.

But, don’t let me ruin your fun. Howl away.

That NY Post Hunter Biden Story: Has Vladimir Lost His Mojo?

Posted on by

I’m a little worried. Judging by this Rudy Giuliani/New York Post/Hunter Biden fiasco I’m thinking our old pal Vladimir is losing his touch.

I mean, by now I was expecting something a lot more sinister and sophisticated than, you know, another e-mail scandal. People, it’s 2020! Where are the deep fake videos? You know, a slick 4k mash-up with Joe Biden sitting down in his favorite pizza joint in front of an 18″ wood-fired pie of chopped up baby parts and a side dish of Satanic hot sauce?

Instead Vlad wheels out … Rudy Giuliani? The fearsome Russian FSB doesn’t understand that Giuliani is Functioning Adult America’s idea of a sad, over played punchline? As in: truly everyone’s babbling, drunk uncle? As “October surprises” goes, this is just sad. Pathetic even.

It gets really bad when (Murdoch-owned) FoxNews won’t touch a story — presented for your inflammation — by the (Murdoch-owned) Post. Why? Was it the combination of Giuliani’s and Steve Bannon’s and Alex Jones’ fingerprints all over the thing? Or did they have enough inside-the-family intel to know that the guy who wrote the thing demanded his name be taken off it … and that the by-line that finally ran belonged a poor woman who had never before had anything printed in the Post … and only learned her name was attached after it was published? I mean, good lord people. We need better practices nefariousness. This is amateurish.

Now, I’m guessing Vlad is saving his best moves for election day. Namely, as I’ve said before, a series of “ballot irregularities” in key states that aligns with Bill Barr’s judicial philosophy like the gears of a fine luxury sedan. (I’m pleased to see that Team Biden is stashing away cash for the court fight(s) over that inevitability.)

Bad as the Post-Hunter Biden story is, it was predictably inhaled by the right-wing bubble culture. I don’t know why I was surprised. I guess it’s because at this point I was assuming that even they would require something a bit more elegant in their flagrant con jobs. But no. If there was ever any doubt how ill-informed and sealed-off from wider culture the Trump base is, the last semblance evaporated with their whole-hearted, childishly credulous embrace of a story with so many gaping lapses of plausibility. (Here’s the best item-by-item take down I’ve read.)

Pundits and mainstream media oracles are slapping themselves on the back for recognizing … all the red flares shooting off a pile of absurdist bullshit … when they saw it lying right there on the sidewalk in front of them. Good for them, I guess. It is an improvement from 2016’s “even-handed” pursuit of Hillary’s e-mail “scandal.”

Two weeks is always an eternity in a presidential election cycle, and with the combination of Valdimir/Trump/Barr still in the game we remain very much in a kind of super duper, double secret form of eternity.

But I can’t help but wonder what Putin is thinking over there in his sealed up dacha. His investment in Trump paid off with four years of chaos and corruption, and all the international disgrace Trump has brought down on the United States. So it goes without saying he’d like a longer run. More of the same. The complete ruination of NATO for example … and on and on. But did Vlad factor in the full incompetence of Trump? The transparent buffoonery of Rudy Giuliani and the ineptitude of Republican politicians like Wisconsin’s Ron Johnson, charged with … making something out of all the drunk uncle theories? I’m thinking, “no.” Being diabolical, Putin would have a hard time imagining such an broad cross-section of idiots.

So, eager as modern Republicans are to play his game, Vlad is going to have to come up with something more clever — by far — than the stale re-run he got out of Rudy and the Post.

Repeat After Me, “It Will Never Be ‘Normal’ Again.”

Posted on by

Forget raining, it’s pouring Trump scandal books. The past few days I’ve been toggling between Jeffrey Toobin’s, “True Crimes and Misdemeanors” and Brian Stelter’s, “Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News, and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth.”

There are separate discussions to be had about both, as there are over Bob Woodward’s “Rage”, the New York Times’ Michael Schmidt’s, “Donald Trump v. The United States” and top Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissman’s “Where the Law Ends.”

But one stark takeaway from Toobin and Stelter is how completely unprepared “the establishment” was for Donald Trump. More to the point both are argue, is how unprepared traditional legal bureaucracies and journalism organizations still are even today, nearly four years and 20,000 lies after Trump was elected … the first time.

Toobin (and Weissman, based on interviews he’s already given), both lament the overly-cautious, tradition-bound behavior of Robert Mueller as he confronted Trump’s total obstruction of his investigation. A creature from an era when people in high offices showed basic respect for legal “norms”, Mueller (and at least one key deputy) refused to push a direct face-to-face confrontation with Trump or any of his family over the source of their wealth, despite clear indications that its roots were in Russia and therefore they were all highly likely to be compromised by Vladimir Putin.

The spectre of litigating against … the President of the United States … over large scale money laundering for Russian oligarch/gangsters was simply a place Mueller didn’t want to go. Better to deliver a narrowly-investigated, bridled report that suggested as much but left all the ugly charging business to Congress.

Stelter’s book is a dizzying trip into Fox’s alternate universe. The naked careerism and mendacity. The all but total dereliction of journalistic duty in favor of locking down and pandering to an audience with a nearly-religious allegiance to a “norm-busting” celebrity figure. It’s all there, plus some.

Bad as all that is, the problem both Toobin and Stelter suggest is that “normal”, “traditional” politicians, courts and media are still off-balance and indecisive about how to respond to Trump. And this comes barely a month before the next election and with Trump plainly setting up to deny the results of the election should he lose.

Fundamentally, the problem is that the people in control of response to Trump’s (and Bill Barr’s, and Mitch McConnell’s) flagrant norm and tradition-breaking are almost all figures groomed and elevated to their positions from what appears to be a lost era. An era when editors and judges and sensible, civic-minded politicians always gave presidents the benefit of the doubt, always sought to present a “balance” between “both sides” and always avoided the word, “lying.”

But if you watch the Trump spectacle day after day and if you read what you can, the only conclusion is that we don’t live in that era or world anymore, and given social media and every other platform of disinformation, we never will again. The evolution of “normal” has passed our institutions by and is rocketing into a new time zone.

The Eisenhower-era of journalism, courts and politics is long gone. And we’re at a point, right now today where tradition-groomed and bound judges, politicians and journalists are have to ask themselves if they’re really going to play this moment as Robert Mueller did? Are they going to continue to respect the “norms” of their professions, all of which have been mocked, abused and degraded by Donald Trump, in the anachronistic hope that eventually, at some point, if not now, November or a decade from now, normal respect for tradition will prevail again?

Or, are they going to accept a harsh reality and adapt to change?

Frankly, if Trump is able to create enough chaos to declare and sustain victory I don’t see how old time tradition will hold sway in the US of A ever again.

What Did Bill O’Reilly Do to Give a Woman a $32 Million Pay-Off?

Posted on by

Let’s imagine for a moment what you would have to have done to pay another person $32 million to go away and forget the whole thing? I don’t know what it was, and Bill O’Reilly, as usual, is screaming “bull[bleep]” and claiming that he is the real victim. But if a pig like Harvey Weinstein was in the habit of tossing $150,000 of chicken feed to shut up women he sexually harassed, it’s reasonable to think O’Reilly is into “either a dead girl or a live boy” territory.

Says Debra Katz, a D.C. attorney in a Huffington Post story this morning,

” ‘This is unprecedented’, she said. ‘It’s a shocking figure’. The settlement, Katz said, indicates that O’Reilly ‘felt extremely exposed’. ‘There was obviously strong and compelling evidence that had to be of a very embarrassing nature that he did not want to become public, and that’s why he’s paying this extraordinary sum’, she said. ‘You don’t pay a $32 million settlement if you’ve engaged in no wrongdoing’.”

The astonishing boorish-to-criminal behavior of guys like O’Reilly and his boss Roger Ailes, a mob of other Fox executives, Weinstein, movie director James Toback, Bill Cosby, Roman Polanski and on and on (and on and on) may actually have ignited something that produces real change … just when you thought progress and improvement were quaint notions held only by sweet nattering aunts. The #metoo movement has the feel of a cathartic event that if it doesn’t put an end to O’Reilly/Weinstein-ism, (of course it won’t), will at least continue to embolden women (and their lawyers) to drop the hammer more often than they have in the past.

I mean, when the astonishing machine gun slaughter of 58 people at a music concert In Las Vegas rates only a week’s worth of attention, because no one expects anything to change, the power of so many women collectively calling out the arrogant, diseased-by-power dudes who regularly make their lives miserable seems a far better bet for forward movement.

But back to O’Reilly, and the toxic, consistently misogynistic culture promoted in the right-wing media environment. $32 million is the kind of money you pay to someone who has the kind of irrefutable proof of behavior so heinous it guarantees your existential ruin. Not murder, and maybe not actual rape, but … well there was the, um, unusual mention of O’Reilly sending the woman in question gay pornography. I have no statistics on how many desperate guys get anywhere with the women of their desires by impressing them with their gay porn collection, but I’m thinking it’s in the low single digits.

Bill O’Reilly unmasked as a bona fide bi-sexual/closeted gay predator would be really … really … tough on the macho, “No Spin” branding campaign, wouldn’t it?

Josh Harkinson at Mother Jones wrote a fascinating piece last winter that bored into the psychology of the target audience for FoxNews, O’Reilly and Trump. (A comment on Weinstein in a moment.)

“Revelations of Trump’s sexist comments and his bragging about grabbing women’s genitals only helped forge stronger ties between the racist and sexist wings of the alt-right. After the bombshell revelation of the Access Hollywood tape, Spencer said it was ‘ridiculous’ and ‘puritanical’ to call Trump’s behavior sexual assault, adding, ‘At some part of every woman’s soul, they want to be taken by a strong man’. Far-right blogger RamZPaul responded to the Trump tape by saying, ‘Girls really don’t mind guys that like pussies, they just hate guys who are pussies’.”

His colleague, Kevin Drum, quoted that graph and reacted to it saying,

“A big chunk of the alt-right is populated by social misfits who have been repeatedly rejected by women and are bitter about it. This makes them suckers for leaders who assure them they aren’t misfits. What’s really happening—and this can be a very beguiling story—is that women toy with them and laugh at them as part of a deliberate ploy to emasculate strong men and keep them from their rightful leadership positions. Because of this, a bitter resentment of women runs through almost every strain of the alt-right.

“I don’t know if the alt-right is a truly important new development or just a passing fad—a new name for a lot of the same old resentments that have been around forever. But to the extent the alt-right is important, it’s worth knowing how central this particularly toxic brand of sexism is to the whole movement—even if it doesn’t often get a lot attention. This is also why it’s not right to simply call them racists or neo-Nazis. A lot of them are indeed that, but they’re so, so much more.”

Hollywood’s Weinstein problem is bad. The movie/TV industry in general has too few qualms about relating masculinity to violence and selling sexual stereotypes marinated in a lot of pretty juvenile male fantasies. #metoo will have a tougher time adjusting corporate/studio calculations of “what the public wants”. But I’ll bet gross-pig behavior will get more immediate and louder blowback than before.

But toxic masculinity — based on victimhood, grievance and domination — is a staple of The O’Reilly Diet Plan. A staple so lucrative and satisfying Bill-O and “scores” of other boys at FoxNews apparently became addicted to it.

Which leads me to Steve Bannon. Given everything we know about this manifestly damaged, bitter personality, how long do you think before we find out what or who was dissolved in acid in his hot tub in Florida?

Bonus link: A (possibly bogus) site claims Bannon’s joint, (supposedly occupied by his third ex) was used to cook meth and shoot porn videos.

You want to say, “That’s crazy.” But with this crowd everything is plausible.

 

Bye, Bye Bill-O. Schadenfreude So Sweet.

Posted on by

NEW BLOG PHOTO_edited- 3The deceptively lovely German word “schadenfreude” feels like it was made for Bill O’Reilly. If ever a guy deserved an ignominious demise, a real “Game of Thrones” shot-on-the-toilet departure, it is Bill-O, the biggest of cable TV’s braying, anti-PC “straight shooters”. A self-inflating TV “entertainer” whose Orwellian all spin-and-fantasy “No Spin Zone” was designed to inflame the self-pity, bogus victimhood and grievances of (mainly) aging white men, while piling up tens of millions of profits for his employers. So yeah, a lot of people are enjoying watching Bill-O take one to the chest and topple over, off the pooper (i.e. FoxNews), albeit clutching $25 million in bye-bye cash.

(Trevor Noah gets the overnight prize for the best of many gleeful takedowns.)

No offense to all the women he intimidated, pawed and leered at, but getting Bill O’Reilly for sexual harassment is a little like jailing Al Capone for tax evasion. I mean, great. The deal got done. Whatever it takes. But O’Reilly’s barely disguised racism and siren call to his audience of confused and embittered whites, stoking their antipathies toward the truly less fortunate was a far worse pollutant in our cultural waters than hitting on every woman who found herself marooned in his domain, wittingly or otherwise.

It’s a wholly good thing that O’Reilly’s downfall generates another round of talk about sexual harassment. The piggish behavior of entitled bullies like Bill-O is a universal disease, even as the FoxNews “empire” raised it to the level of a brand ethos. But the greater cancer that O’Reilly and so many others of the Fox “team” normalize(d) was the extraordinarily cynical concept of white Christian male privilege, of a moral standing based entirely on gender, race and religious orientation. It’s always been repugnant, but it is so deeply baked into our popular culture today it’s almost like we don’t see it anymore.

I had two conversations with O’Reilly over my years covering the media. Once in Minneapolis when he was on tour hyping “Inside Edition” and then years later in Hollywood at some press dog and pony show. (The other notable at that event was singer Jon Bon Jovi. Proving what a nerd I am I — tried — to chat up O’Reilly.)

The impression the first time was, “One of those guys.” A Sammy Glick character hyping a cheesy tabloid show as the next coming of Edward R. Murrow. The second time the impression was simply, “a jerk.” A guy who, now feeling the cushion of real money, couldn’t bother to engage in a conversation about cable news … at a cocktail party organized for the sole purpose of schmoozing the press. Bill-O had clearly decided he was beyond that stage of life. Or maybe he was looking for someone with more cleavage.

At the Washington Post Ruth Marcus unloads on the Fox culture for creating and enabling the O’Reilly/Roger Ailes frat house within and projecting its corresponding message to its audience. But watching O’Reilly over the years and the events of the past week I was reminded again of author Susan Cain’s research for “Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking.” The experts she interviewed formed a consensus that big, narcissistic, possible sociopathic characters capable of dominating rooms and conversations hold sway over the more introverted among us purely because they talk the most and the loudest. Human nature lends undue credibility to such people, possibly because they are doing something most of us can’t, or won’t. Whether they possess better judgment or more valuable insights is secondary to the influence of their presence.

Hence a toxic flow of Bill O’Reillys, Rush Limbaughs, Donald Trumps and on and on … and on and on. (Many of the worst, the most toxic, appeal to the authoritarian personality, common people inordinately submissive to the rule of force, or personality in these cases.)

So as I say, “whatever it takes.” There’s delicious justice in women driving O’Reilly off the air, (until he reappears on Breitbart TV). But his piggishness toward women was only one facet of his and Fox’s sociopathic personality.

 

 

This Just In: Bill O’Reilly Full of [bleep]

Posted on by

Lambert_to_the_SlaughterMaybe the strangest thing about the still unfolding “Bill O’Reilly is a bullshitter!” story is that anyone with their wits still about them ever thought he wasn’t.

It is ridiculously entertaining to read David Corn’s Mother Jones piece, and now yesterday’s howler about Bill knocking on the door of a key JFK assassination figure at the very moment the guy inside blows his head off with a shotgun. Gripping stuff if not for the recordings of O’Reilly on the phone … from 1200 miles away. I mean, there’s a hilarious Ron Burgundy aspect to O’Reilly’s uber-manly tale of dragging an injured colleague to safety amid a murderous police rampage in Buenos Aires when in fact the “riot” was barely more than a routine demonstration, no one was killed and no CBS employee reported so much as a twisted ankle or required any level of medical attention.

I’d add that this is the stuff of full-on parody if it weren’t for the fact that Stephen Colbert built a career doing exactly that. (Can you imagine the delirium Colbert’s writers would be in with this run of red meat?)

Comparisons to Brian Williams’ self-immolation miss the central difference here pretty badly. Williams was employed with the explicit understanding that he was credible, trading only in the facts as best as NBC could report them. Bill O’Reilly is the key mouthpiece in Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes’ enormously profitable political campaign masquerading as a news organization. Williams’ viewers were justifiably disappointed to learn of his bizarre embellishments. O’Reilly’s viewers, I strongly suspect, do not care in the least what he has embellished or flat-out invented, as long as he continues to attack Murdoch and Ailes’ and their designated enemies.

With that in mind it’ll be easier to understand why FoxNews not only isn’t going to “investigate” O’Reilly’s superhero imaginings, and is instead gleeful at a fresh opportunity to attack the “guttersnipe liberal media” and threaten straight news pinheads with bodily harm. It plays directly into the fascinating psychology wherein ardent zealots confronted with information that unambiguously contradicts their beliefs double down on their erroneous thinking rather than concede and align themselves with reality.

Prediction: O’Reilly’s ratings will spike over the next month.

This incident brings two things back to mind.

1: Liberals take FoxNews far too seriously, and I fully admit my complicity on that point. For years I’ve fulminated myself into apoplexy at Fox’s shameless absurdity and cynicism, convinced that the network was an aggressive form of cancer soon to terminate all higher brain function among the credulous masses. But somewhere after the 2012 elections, when all of Fox-think was revealed to be astonishingly incompetent at both campaigning and campaign analysis, I settled down. Their bona fides, such as they are, are all but completely limited to an old, embittered demographic of rapidly diminishing electoral significance.

Here’s Frank Rich not long ago on the topic.

I suspect the irrelevance of FoxNews to the 300 million Americans who are not lapping it up 24/7 has something to do with Jon Stewart bailing on “The Daily Show”. FoxNews as a punchline is a settled, cliched commodity.

2:  Blogging colleague Joe Loveland passed this on yesterday. It’s the annual Pew survey on America’s most and least-trusted broadcast news operations. In the realm of what we’ve come to expect the survey’s authors write:

“Fox News is both the most trusted and least trusted name in news. 35% of Americans say they trust Fox News more than any other TV news outlet, followed by 14% for PBS, 11% for ABC, 10% for CNN, 9% for CBS, 6% each for Comedy Central and MSNBC, and 3% for NBC. It leads the way because of its continuing near total support among Republicans as the place to go for news- 69% of Republicans say it’s their most trusted source with nothing else polling above 7%.”

Think of that. 69%. Pretty well proving Murdoch and Ailes’ show biz genius at giving their people the campaign message they want.

But in the context of Bill O’Reilly’s naked bogus-ness, it also explains why he’ll suffer no reputational damage. Fox’s world is designed as an “us v. them” battlefield. O’Reilly is the high profile field marshall under constant attack from common enemies. To support Bill without equivocation is to be a loyal soldier.

Contrast that, as Joe pointed out, with the dismal all-in loyalty liberals have to their alleged message-bearer, MSNBC.

“It’s interesting that while Fox News and MSNBC are often thought of as equivalent, Fox News is by far and away the most trusted source of GOP voters while MSNBC is only tied for 4th among Democrats.”

The underlying point here is that liberals and conservatives affiliate with and consume partisan messaging in vastly different ways. Other psychological studies note conservatives’ far higher levels of trust in authority, e.g. Bill O’Reilly, and liberals’ elevated levels of skepticism toward leadership/herd thinking. One group embraces the minister-to-parish relationship. The other tolerates it in small doses.

Second prediction:  Bill O’Reilly will soon reveal that it was he who shot Osama bin Laden and to thunderous applause will vilify any left-wing guttersnipe who says otherwise.