LOL!!!!! Roger took Huffington to school. She never had a chance.

It was an entertaining segment; I thoroughly enjoyed it. I agree that the comparison between Beck and a Huffpo commentator wasn’t the best, but a point was made none-the-less. Arienna is biased and that was the point Ailes made.

I wonder if ABC will finally beat out MTP in the Sunday ratings game with Brown and the panel. We’ll have to wait and see.

PS: I thought it was kind of weird that Barbara showed the Cosmo and mentioned she was in it as well. I also read that Scott asked Barbara if he wanted her to sign the Cosmo when she held it up during their interview. I didn’t see it, so I have no idea if its true or not. But if he did, it sounded funny and quite good natured.

“Because we’re the most trusted name in news,”

I loved it.

Not sure we watched the same thing….but, you are conservatives. I don’t expect you all to understand.

Actually, Huffington exposed Ailes’ and fox for their duplicity . As for cutting away, they did come back and cover the GOP’s press conference in it’s entirety after they were smacked down by the President. But, back to Arianna and the Huffington post’s charges of to Ailes about the language used on his network.

“Reminded by HuffPost’s Arianna Huffington that Beck has warned of “slaughter” and a “killing spree” for those not on board with the Obama administration’s agenda, Ailes insisted that the reference wasn’t to this president but rather to murderous dictators.

“Well, he was talking about Hitler and Stalin slaughtering people, so I think he was probably accurate,” he said. “I think he speaks English, I don’t know. But I don’t misinterpret any of his words. He did say one unfortunate thing that he apologized for. But that happens in live television.”

Ailes was wrong. Beck’s reference was, indeed, to Obama. Here is the “killing spree” quote from October 2009:
Spread the wealth — hello, Mao — that is what this is all about. And anybody not on board, look out because you too could be the next victim of the killing spree. Is it far fetched to think that [pay] Czar [Kenneth] Feinberg could go into Walmart and argue it that it is just too important to the economy if Walmart fails? I mean it’s the biggest store in the world. We feel you are being reckless in your pay structure Walmart. We have to bring the unions in to control your pay. What about Rupert Murdoch? if News Corp failed would it be harmful to the economic health of America?… Obama has repeated over and over again just how dangerous, old and unworkable our economy is.”

Must see tv, indeed!

I think the most revealing comment made by Ailes wasn’t the” fair and balanced” comment or the “we’re the most trusted source in news” which nearly elicited a seizure but was rather when he stood up and announced, “I’ve pissed my pants and there’s nothing you can do about it.” Or was he talking about Glenn Beck? In either case, it was really great entertainment.

Ariana is a LIAR! Those comments were not left by some anonymous commenter, but a story featured on her blog.

What “Ailes” Cable News? Rupe Murdoch’s Evil Genius
Bill MannTV-Radio Critic, http://www.dcweasels.com
Posted: January 12, 2010 01:28 PM

“But we haven’t heard nearly enough about the secretive, security-encircled Ailes, who’s arguably done more to spread fear and hatred in this country than anyone since Joe McCarthy.

J. Edgar Hoover lookalike Ailes, who has a face like a clenched fist, is a long-time TV veteran who once produced Mike Douglas’ inane chat show (the late George Carlin mentions Ailes’ unpleasant demeanor way back then in his recently released “Last Words”). Ailes has used cynical but well-worn TV tactics to pump up his cable carnival-attraction net’s ratings: fear and eye candy.”

Then there’s Fox’s sexy visuals. A look at Fox’s commentator/anchor lineups shows a predominance of attractive blondes (long called “newsbabes” in TV newsrooms), but these blondes, who cynically appeal to the network’s testosterone-poisoned male demo, are willing to be venal and nasty — e.g., Megyn Kelly, Gretchen Carlson, and disgraceful human oddity Ann Coulter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/what-ailes-cable-news-rup_b_420327.html?&just_reloaded=1

Oh, I forgot this:

“Unleashing the likes of sideshow attraction Glenn Beck, schoolyard bully Bill O’Reilly, and Gumby lookalike Sean Hannity on the airwaves is something traditional broadcasters would have never done – back in the days when the FCC actually yanked people’s licenses, that is.

So, while Fox News, as the Times story stresses, may be a financial success story, it’s also a malignant tumor on the body politic. For that you can thank Roger Ailes.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/what-ailes-cable-news-rup_b_420327.html?&just_reloaded=1

So, I’d like to ask Arianna,

“Aren’t you concerned about the language that your site is using, which is, after all, inciting the American people?”

Don’t believe me, just read the comments left by people here…

Another Ailes classic! Right up there with his hilarious takedowns culminating in “we wish [that critic] well”, that he gives to the media when asked to respond to some snark criticism from a notable.

Smart and unafraid!

Just another example of how we BLOG COMMENTERS truly control the political dialogue of our Once Proud Republic!!1 Why discuss the content of actual columns when it’s the contents of their COMMENTS SECTION that really matters??!!1 All you have to do is read the comments on FOXNATION.COM to get a pulse of what REAL AMERICANS think!!1

@TfT: The full interview is available on ABCNews.com and the “do you want me to sign it” was him making light, while Barbara got the magazine into position.
—

Completely on another train of thought, but was Ailes’ thing about Beck speaking English, a somewhat veiled swipe at Arriana and her accent?

tjl says:Not sure we watched the same thing….but, you are conservatives. I don’t expect you all to understand.

Not at all! We understand completely that you have dementia.

“we’re not about politics we’re about ratings” – Roger Ailes

so was jerry springer .. so is ‘pro wrestling’

sometimes the ‘truth’ comes out of that huge blubbery head after all…

unfortunately the ‘truth’ is not as important to Ailes/FOX as the ability to brag about “ratings”

smh..

So then we all agree that Ailes was busted by Huffington for trying to spin what Beck said, right? I’m taking the silence of some of you as consent.

Magister: I wondered about the “speaking english” thing as well. Was it a swipe or was it simply a statement about Beck’s style — as in he is a plain talker, straight forward, lays out his thoughts; tells you want he is gonna tell you, tells you, and then tells you what he told you. A standard process for briefings, that I know I use when I have to present something. I haven’t seen any spin on that comment, so I guess no one took it as a swipe against Arienna.

I thought so!

By the way, the “I thought so, is in reference to my previous comment. I agree with TFT’s take on what he meant with the speaks english comment and was not talking about her accent.

Anyone know if “Bill Mann” was/is technically employed by HuffPo? I just read the article by him on HuffPo and Mann does state those things that Ailes points out.

Having Arianna claim “Well, that was never by anybody that we employed though” must mean she thought that was troubling language for her to make that statement. To make a distinction.

I’m assuming Mann does not write columns for HuffPo for free. Problem here, is Arianna brought up the troubling language issue. If Mann not employed by HuffPo, then I agree that Arianna can’t be held accountable for “commenters”

@RazorsEdge: I’m sure Rachel or someone could speak to this better, but the Huffington Post isn’t known for paying their bloggers and my (outside) perception is that most are writing for free.

As to whether an unpaid blogger counts as an employee, perhaps if you could provide a link…

@magister.

I have no link. So I’ll ask you. If you had a column with HuffPo or Mediaite (and not paid) and assume you go through an editor. Would you consider youself “employed” by them?

Would HuffPo or other be accountable for your content? Would you consider HuffPo have the ability to “fire” or “hire” you?

Robin Jones – I agree – Fox “News” is terrific entertainment, on par with Springer.

Ted, no one is surprised that you get your entertainment from FNC and your news from Springer.

Ms. Huffington was correct to call out Ailes about the over-the-top comments by Beck. And Ailes’ rejoinder about commentators at HuffPost misses the target by 100 miles. However the only way we’re going to stop this ugly rhetoric is for people on both sides to call out their own people and not point elsewhere.

When Ms. Huffington refuses to go on Olbermann’s show or when she condemns Ed Schultz (“Republicans want people to die”) or others for their name-calling,then she’ll have the moral standing to point elsewhere.

Again, she is (mostly) right here. But I don’t ever recall her condemning those who called Bush a fascist and Republicans terrorists.

C’mon, Arianna, go after both sides.

@RazorsEdge: I assume that Mediaite’s reprints from OutofContext.com is the result of some kind of content-sharing agreement and though I don’t frequent the HuffPo, I believe that a lot of Rachel’s more recent content has been reposts from this site.

Otherwise, though I haven’t gone through his posts and didn’t see his profile on their alphabetical list, it appears that Bill Mann is also someone they reprint.

So though it may sound Clintonesque, I think “employed” could be a stretch, perhaps a misleading stretch, but I doubt Arriana reads all of her site anyway.

Those comments were not left by some anonymous commenter, but a story featured on her blog.

What “Ailes” Cable News? Rupe Murdoch’s Evil Genius
Bill MannTV-Radio Critic,
Posted: January 12, 2010 01:28 PM

“But we haven’t heard nearly enough about the secretive, security-encircled Ailes, who’s arguably done more to spread fear and hatred in this country than anyone since Joe McCarthy.

J. Edgar Hoover lookalike Ailes, who has a face like a clenched fist, is a long-time TV veteran who once produced Mike Douglas’ inane chat show (the late George Carlin mentions Ailes’ unpleasant demeanor way back then in his recently released “Last Words”). Ailes has used cynical but well-worn TV tactics to pump up his cable carnival-attraction net’s ratings: fear and eye candy.”

Then there’s Fox’s sexy visuals. A look at Fox’s commentator/anchor lineups shows a predominance of attractive blondes (long called “newsbabes” in TV newsrooms), but these blondes, who cynically appeal to the network’s testosterone-poisoned male demo, are willing to be venal and nasty — e.g., Megyn Kelly, Gretchen Carlson, and disgraceful human oddity Ann Coulter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/what-ailes-cable-news-rup_b_420327.html?&just_reloaded=1

(this comment didn’t show up above the earier one, because it had two hyperlinks in it)

@magister

Fair enough. I’ll not defend Ailes nor Huffington in this little spat. I tend to agree with parts of what @steveMG stated above.

Both parties have political slant and both have political bias. If Huffington calls out Ailes, she could have done so without the need to perhaps hide behind semantics. If Mann a commentator and Beck a commentator, doesn’t matter. That “language” reside with both. As I stated, Arianna must have thought that as well to make her “not employed” distinction.

I assume Beck has larger audience but HuffPo no slouch either. According to Alexa, HuffPo ranks 167 worldwide and 36th in US

Roxsteady, says: “I’m taking the silence of some of you as consent.” Take it for what it’s really worth, you’re an obnoxious person who is absolutely no fun to argue with.

Wow, sarainitaly!

This rates a story on this site!

Also – I am pretty sure Arianna says, “that was not by anybody we approved of” not, not anybody we employed. I listened to it numerous times, plus I watched the original show. That’s what it sounds like to me.

Arianna also said, in the longer clip:

“words matter. and words that are actually being used by people we hire are different than words that are being used by commenters on our site that you mentioned.”

Too bad for her those words were not left by a commenter….although there are plenty of nasty ones over there.

Ailes was wrong. Beck’s reference was, indeed, to Obama. Here is the “killing spree” quote from October 2009:

Question: Was that made by Beck on his TV show or his radio show?

In either case, it’s absurd and stupid and ugly. Among other problems, it trivializes what Mao actually did.

When folks compare Bush to fascists or Obama to Marxists, you are really trivializing the horrors – millions slaughtered – that those two ideologies committed. Please think about it.

This is the video, that has her additional remarks to Ailes, near the 11:35 mark.
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/roundtable-scott-brown-republican-9710855

“Mike Douglas’s inane TV show..” ?? I loved the old Mike Douglas show in the 70′s.
@Roxsteady – please quit begging. Just accept the fact that nobody pays attention to you.

TALK ABOUT LIES:

Lamenting the “word police” tone of the questions being lobbed his way, Ailes would go on to note that he had been subject to some ridicule on the pages of the Huffington Post. The offending remark, a review of the site showed, came from an anonymous commenter and, unlike Beck, not by anyone on this news organization’s payroll.

The article that rockunsteady copy/pasted from, about the Mao quote, actually contains the above paragraph!!

Roger Ailes On “This Week”: Defends Glenn Beck, Insists Fox Is No Longer At War With Obama
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/31/roger-ailes-on-this-week_n_443555.html

Oh my god, they are incompetant and liars.

I thought Arianna stated “approved of” as well. Not, “employed”. Regardless, ABCNews did not go as far as Krakauer with their official transcript. Their transcript does not offer either approved or employed. ABC offered as (Crosstalk) and unable to determine.

Ailes-Huffington Transcript

Hell of combo eh, Sarah?
Incompetent, liars, and mean spirited as well.

sarainitaly:

FYI, seems HuffPo has sinced changed the text on your link to read:

“The offending remark, a review of the site showed, did not come from anyone on the Huffington Post’s payroll”

The cached version of HuffPo page shows it was changed from what you pasted:

“The offending remark, a review of the site showed, came from an anonymous commenter and, unlike Beck, not by anyone on this news organization’s payroll.

Cached HuffPo Page

Never Mind, the HuffPo cached paged was just updated in last 3 minutes to read:

“The offending remark, a review of the site showed, did not come from anyone on the Huffington Post’s payroll”

anonymous commenter now gone completely

I already have a screen cap. haha

OK – I just read the Bill Mann reprint and though he may be somewhat personally insulting to Roger Ailes and all the thing really is, is a bunch of adjectives interspersed with what Mr. Mann thinks about something somebody else wrote. I’m sure the bagger at Krogers could also produce unoriginal thoughts.

Still, though Ailes was personally insulted, it doesn’t really seem to be in the same league as some of the divisive political rhetoric coming out of Beck’s mouth.

Magister says:
January 31, 2010 at 8:17 pm

If you don’t like what Beck says then turn it off or ignore it. Better yet, try to prove him wrong.

funny how they determined “The offending remark, a review of the site showed, came from an anonymous commenter” when it was clearly an article on their site.

sarainitaly says:
January 31, 2010 at 8:12 pm

I already have a screen cap. haha

You rock!

Is Huff-Po letting any of this come through the comments or are they moderating the dickens out it?

i never read the comments there anymore. they are too nasty. i tried a few times recently to comment and they never approve them.

I think Steve Krakauer should rightly do an UPDATE on this blog– with the piece written by this man (mentioned by Ailes) and Sara’s screen capture of the original wording of Huff-Po’s denial.

Arianna Huffington is an ENORMOUS HYPOCRITE! This is the same woman, that has no problem going on MSNBC, and especially going on Countdown with Kieth Olbermann. The same Kieth Olbermann, that we all know by now, call Scott Brown every name in the book. Since she hates ‘nasty’ language so much, does that mean she’s boycotting Olbermann? Answer: NO!

And if I’m not mistaken, her web site compared Bill O’Reilly to Nazis because of some church O’Reilly’s relatives attended. I don’t remember the exact attack in the posting, but I do remember the controversy.

The fact that Huffington may or may not be a hypocrite doesn’t answer the question of whether Ailes wants to defend the over-the-top comments by Beck. Does he or doesn’t he?

I don’t think Beck is a bad guy. Broadly speaking, I think he means well. But the comparison and analogies of America and the “progressives” to a Mao or Hitler or other dictators is just absurd. It trivializes the horrors that those despots did and it does nothing to further discourse on the direction of the country we want the government to follow.

Citing Olbermann or Huffington or comments by the “other side” is just mis-directing the topic here.

Bush was attacked, and called a facist (by Olby), and Hitler for eight years. i don’t know if Ailes should care one way or the other if Beck uses *colorful* language. It didn’t seem to bother anyone on the Left for eight years, not sure why it is bothering them now.

“whether Ailes wants to defend the over-the-top comments by Beck. Does he or doesn’t he?”

I don’t think he needs to defend Beck’s words, he is defending Beck’s right to say them. Just as Olby was free to say things he said, like Bush was a facist.

i don’t know if Ailes should care one way or the other if Beck uses *colorful* language.

But that’s the question. He runs the network. You don’t think he should care what is said on the channel he runs?

This isn’t a question of whether Beck has the constitutional right to say these things. Of course, he has the right. But there’s a difference between having the right to do or say something and the right thing to do or say.

And sorry, comparing progressives to a Mao or Hitler is not just “colorful” language. It’s obscene. You’re a smart person. You know what those monsters did. Unspeakable acts. Using those figures the way Beck does is trivializing what they did. It really does.

It’s just as obscene when Olbermann did it to Bush and Republicans. And believe me, while I think Beck means well, I can’t say the same about Olbermann. He is beyond redemption.

I think if you’ll just look around this blog for two minutes you’ll see that it’s replete with authors who do little more than to use and to applaud the use of hyperbole in order to squelch the speech of people who aren’t liberal democrats.

When every nearly every thread is about some conservative pariah, you pretty well see which way the wind blows for the media.

i agree it trivializes the real horrors to make those comparisons. but like i said, no one on the left cared for eight years while they were attacking Bush, why the concern now?

‘This isn’t a question of whether Beck has the constitutional right to say these things. Of course, he has the right. But there’s a difference between having the right to do or say something and the right thing to do or say. ”

And I don’t think people should be able to say some of the things they do in rap songs, or images they portray on TV, movies or video games. You don’t censor the language, you choose to watch/buy it, or not.

“He runs the network. You don’t think he should care what is said on the channel he runs? ”

Arianna runs her site, shouldn’t she care what she runs on her site? She claims because she didn’t pay the guy, it is ok… She obviously doesn’t care about all of the vile things people post on her site, or write in their articles.

MSNBC/the Left runs the most vile crap DAILY on their shows, from Olby to Shultz, O’Donnell, Mike Malloy cheering on Beck’s suicide, etc.

If Beck said something that his viewers don’t like they can either write and tell him, or tune him off. I tuned certain shows on MSNBC off because they are vile.

I think if you’ll just look around this blog for two minutes you’ll see that it’s replete with authors who do little more than to use and to applaud the use of hyperbole in order to squelch the speech of people who aren’t liberal democrats

Yes, this is a liberal/left-of-center blog. I figured that out in two seconds not two minutes

But the response is to do the same thing, only from the other side? Why?

If this was a post about Olbermann et al. and their smears, believe me I’d jump in condemning him.

But we’re just spinning our wheels if we only condemn the other side while turning our heads when it’s our side. When the topic is Olbermann, one side responds “But what about Beck??!” And when it’s Beck, the other side says, “But what about Olbermann??!”

At some point, it’s got to stop.

SteveMc,

I don’t think anyone here is blaming Olbermann for murder or telling him to shut up lest he be responsible for some future nutcase.

At some point, it’s got to stop.

Ok, How about in seven years, we all call a truce?

well…in three or seven, depending on how 2012 goes.

I watched the whole program this morning, and I felt Ailes was ill-suited for the panel. He did not seem of the intellectual heft of the others. More of a talking points type. It seemed really silly the comparison of Glenn Beck’s comments to someone who posted on HuffPo about Ailes looking like J. Edgar Hoover (not all that far fetched if you have been into FaceBook’s doppleganger week). I hope they thing twice before having him on there again.

ChickaBOOMer — Roger Ailes: “We’re the most trusted name in news.”
http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2010/01/roger-ailes-were-most-trusted-name-in.html

It’s wrong – and stupid (if not worse) – for progressives to call conservatives fascists. And it’s wrong – and stupid (again, if not worse) – for conservatives to call progressives communists.

When either side does it, it diminishes the horrors that those twisted ideologies of communism and fascism did to people. By the millions.

I’ll condemn either side when its done. Why condemn one side and not the other? Both are making absurd and indefensible statements.

I can’t make it any plainer than that.

I don’t know which world you are living in, but by just reading what people have written this is NOT a liberal or a conservative blog. It is just a nasty nasty nasty blog.

It is the same dozen or slightly more people attacking each other over and over again and I am shocked that Mediaite lets these few people piss all over it. It is attack Roxy this, attack Sara that, and then the Jims are at it like children, and Magister and IAmNotBlue. They seem equally divided and nothing changes.

Don’t you want to expand the people who care to comment on the actual article instead being freaking terrified of a juvenile food fight? Mediaite, where are you?

First of all Cecelia shut the hell up, go back to Dollar Dung pile and use you smart ass comments over there.
Second Ailes was good for one reason, he is a good liar, his network lied for Bush for 8 years, and now they are lying about being “Fair and Balanced” Conservatives like you Cecelia and Sara can call Obama, Hitler and fascist or whatever and that is ok but as soon as Olbermann farts you guys jump on his ass.
You guys should want universal healthcare to pay for your brain transplants.
Also Cecelia, while Billo did not kill Dr Tiller, his rhetoric and lies about the man sure did not help the situation.

They say a mind is a terrible thing to waste, but in your case, it’s a blessing…

Peace be with you, boy, and with all the seven hundred voices in your head.

@sueNaustin: I wasn’t aware that my comments to any post, anywhere on the internet have been nasty, I attack people or that I veer from the original topic, but if I do — I apologize.

I doubt much of what they say they believe or understand. Most of these folks are playing a role. The role pays the bills and puts food on the table. Huffington is a prime example.
villas bali

Facebook User says:
January 31, 2010 at 11:01 pm

I’m not a conservative, nor do I call Obama Hitler. Why don’t you look in the mirror next to you feel the urge to say *shut the hell up*.

it’s a comment board, and we are commenting. you, and others, however, are incapable of civil comments or debate, you just attack. attack. attack. attack. a differnce of opinion should be welcome, otherwise it becomes a circle jerk ditto board. what shouldn’t be welcome are endless insults, and people who contribute nothing but personal attacks.

The Left just goes apoplectic over Fox News, which I think is great because it means it’s having the desired effect. One could just as easily ask why MSNBC ‘cut away’ from Scott Brown’s victory speech. Clearly it was because he was a winner they really wanted to see lose. Nothing more than that. Every single thing that Huffington ‘whined’ about was easily batted back at her at twice the speed. After eight years of incessant ‘Bush-bashing,’ these media Lib hacks just can’t seem to come to grips that two can play at the game they invented.

SteveMG says:
January 31, 2010 at 10:31 pm

Here is where I think you are getting Beck’s message wrong. He is saying that HISTORY has proven that
the Progressive line of thought always leads to the ‘Hitler/Mao’ scenario. Just fill in the victim group. Why
should we expect it to be different this time around?

I find the bushels of drivel and tons of self-righteousness from Cecelia and Sara(h) N. Italy, terribly, terribly amusing. Outside the deceptively comforting confines of a silly, saccharine, self-contained Fox Fan Klub site, in the one instance, and a rarefied bubble of oxygen-starved mediocrity and mendacity in another, we have the same shrill primordial screams which characterize each and every FOX fan conversation which seeks in vain to cover the all too obvious quest for validation: Why outside the innermost rings of extreme rightism does no one respect FOX? After all, a full 3% of Americans watch FNC on any given day? Surely, you wouldn’t suggest that 3% might be wrong and 97% correct? That would be preposterous, wouldn’t it? Why should we listen to heretics who would disavow our catch phrase formulations repeating more often than guests at an all you can eat cucumber and chili buffet as Gospel? Did you not hear our bloated Messiah again proclaim the Good New that FOX and FOX alone is fair and balanced? Why would you doubt the Nixon-appointed and self-annointed Prince of Platitudes? For this safe passage across Στύξ is, to be sure, too good for you of such little faith. And so, you go erecting your heaven in hell. To you, I would say, rest assure, the cacophony long since informed and may soon cease to entertain. The respect you so desperately crave you will not, will never be yours. Ailes and his stable of hot-headed, irrational men and blonde and buxom vacuous women will never be yours. In the end, Ailes remains a less successful Simon Cowell, albeit, thankfully not in the form-fitting T, always searching for a stardom well outside his grasp. Your noise may momentarily make him feel great, but it does nothing more, and look from whence the source. The calls from every trailer park in Alabama, every gulch in West Virginia, every honky tonk in Tennessee change this not.

By the way, isn’t it charming in a junior high boys’ locker room sort of way how this mature and “substantial” man is thrilled at using the word underwear on the tele?

“Ailes and his stable of hot-headed, irrational men…will never be yours”

[mouthing DAMN!]

Mr. Krakauer,

Don’t you think it’s necessary for you to do an update on your blog here?

Sara has found the piece that Ailes referenced and it was not a mere “anonymous commenter” as Huffington said.

When Sara pointed that out (and got the screen capture), Huff-Po changed the on-site rebuttal they had made to Ailes’ claim, to simply read that the piece was by someone ‘not on HuffPo’s payroll’.

If the exchange warranted a blog on this site, doesn’t this turn of events warrant one? I’m sure Sara would be glad to share the original screen capture with you.

Thanks for the update, Steve. The FOX Fan Klub bobbysoxers might otherwise be driven to over-consumption of fudge and chocolate.

Thanks, indeed, Mr. Krakauer, although it would have been nice if you had used the screen shot to show the change wording that happened at Huff-Po.

BTW, The Real Fake Royal King, your first comment above (nothing but ad hominym) completely ignores the fact that AIles was appearing as a panelist on This Week At ABC. Wouldn’t it have been more to your point for you to denigrate the ratings and the quality of THAT show or their choice in panelists?

Here’s what our Mr. Krakauer has just today said about Ailes on his blog about Megyn Kelly’s new show:

“It’s an interesting insight to the thought process of one of the most successful TV news executives ever.”

I’ve certainly never offered up such effusive praise for Mr. Ailes, and I’d wager that neither has Sara…

It’s nice to see you back from your weekend of mandated community service, TRFRK.

He is saying that HISTORY has proven that
the Progressive line of thought always leads to the ‘Hitler/Mao’ scenario

Well, according to Beck, “progressives” have been a major force in American politics for almost a century. From Woodrow Wilson on through John McCain (!).

When is this new Mao or Hitler supposed to arrive?

Besides, many other countries in Europe have embraced the sort of progressive/statist/expansive state that Beck says will lead to dictatorship. France, Britain, Sweden, Denmark…..Where is their Hitler/Mao?

Warning about the dangers of expansive government and the dependency and bureaucracy that it leads to is fine. Tocqueville recognized this about 170 years ago. But comparing this sort of “soft despotism” (as Tocquevilled called it) to the mass slaughter engineered by Hitler or Mao is absurd. And obscene.

I’m not sure who is better deserving of being denigrated, Ailes and FOX or Walters and ABC. Certainly, they are both (or all) highly deserving of denigration. An interesting concept, no? To be sure, ABC offered the same uninspired programming it has since Brinkley left. FOX continues to offer the same low quality programming it has since its inception. I don’t think it much matters who is worse, and I am not the one to judge the quality of news programming on the basis of my political leanings. Of one thing I am certain: All Americans suffer from the poor quality of news programming on our airways, through the coax cables or by virtue of the satellite dishes. We’d all be better served by a steady diet of the BBC, BBC World, CNN International, NPR or PBS. Even Al Jazeera English tends to be more objective and more informative than many of our offerings.

Steve MG: a voice of reason as always. Thanks.

The Real Royal King says:
February 1, 2010 at 8:18 am
I find the bushels of drivel and tons of self-righteousness from Cecelia and Sara(h) N. Italy, terribly, terribly amusing. The calls from every trailer park in Alabama, every gulch in West Virginia, every honky tonk in Tennessee change this not.

“blah blah blah… i have nothing of importance to say, so i just make personal attacks…blah blah blah….i am a bigot blah blah blah…hate anyone with differing opinions..attack attack attack…blah blah blah” ~Real Royal Kong

You levy the usual tiresome complaints, devoid of substance, and overlook the many substantive points made, Sara(h) N. Italy, so please blather on, dear. It rather follows Ailes’ style, a defensive defense not involving any facts. Sara(h) N. Italy and FOX are obviously a marriage made in heaven. Many happy returns, I am sure.

oh look, more personal attacks.

And, I think I am one of the only ones who provided the actual facts in this whole post, regarding this story. So, keep on making personal attacks, but I provided the facts, and the story had to be edited. In fact, I think about five or so posts on this site have had to be revised because of facts I provided.

If anyone is devoid of substance in this thread, it’s not me. When there are substantitive points made, I do not overlook them. But I don’t consider a reply that begins with “you are dumb, stupid, ignorant, a teabagger, FOX lover”, substantive – and that is how 99% of the posters who disagree with me, or non-liberals, begin their replies.

But, feel free to keep on just making personal attacks. blah blah blaaaaaaaaaaah

Goodness, you’re simply wonder, Sara(h) N. Italy! How could I have ever missed it. If I were Koldys, I’d be in abject fear that you would be replacing me as FOX’s #1 fan. Of course, you still haven’t addressed the fact that Ailes never got beyond platitudes and the mindless repetition of advertising slogans, but I guess it is unfair of me to expect that of either him or you. Rah! Rah! You Go Girl! &c.

Chris Matthews Compares Conservative Republicans to Murderous Khmer Rouge Regime

Appearing on the January 29 “Rachel Maddow Show,” fellow MSNBCer Chris Matthews compared Republican conservatives to the Khmer Rouge, the murderous Communist regime that racked up a body count of some two million during its reign of terror:

What’s going on out there in the Republican Party is kind of a frightening, almost Cambodia re-education camp going on in that party, where they’re going around to people, sort of switching their minds around saying, if you’re not far right, you’re not right enough.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0eImNFsjz
Hmmm…But yet, Arianna frequents MSNBC.

You’ve been such a source of amazement to me, in your stunning intuition and steadfastness at not taking anything at face value.

I don’t think that there’s a thread where you’ve posted that you haven’t demolished commenters (and often the blog writer) with objective facts that you’ve searched out.

I WISH you were a regular at Johnny Dollar’s Place. You most certainly are the major draw to my reading the comment board here. The RealRoyalkingCluckerPatsyHaggis is a source of hilarity to me too (despite himself) and I find the utter partisan shamelessness of Tommy Christopher rather fascinating (not to put you in the company of the other two)

Indeed, you go, girl!

Oops,

The above is addressed to Sara. :D

The Real Royal King says:
February 1, 2010 at 11:11 am

more attacks and insults!

“Of course, you still haven’t addressed the fact that Ailes never got beyond platitudes and the mindless repetition of advertising slogans”

First of all, why should I? because you made a statement, surrounded by NUMEROUS insults, which is untrue, I have to address it?

Second, did you watch the entire show? I’m guessing all you did was read this post, because your statements are incorrect.

Take this statement from this post, for example: “Because we’re the most trusted name in news,” said Ailes. And that was it.”

That’s not completely true. Barbara Walters cut him off, proclaming ABC was the most trusted name in news, interrupting him, and went to commercial.

“What’s going on out there in the Republican Party is kind of a frightening, almost Cambodia re-education camp going on in that party, where they’re going around to people, sort of switching their minds around saying, if you’re not far right, you’re not right enough.”

So much for all the faux outrage that Matthews has voiced over Glenn Beck’s allusions to communistic governments.

I suppose Matthews finds the more common linkage of conservatives to Hitler a bit cliche now, and the netroots have never heard of Franco.

Cecelia says:
February 1, 2010 at 11:28 am

Thank you! You know, I always forget to visit that site. I will add it to my blog roll, right now!!

It is getting harder and harder to stay here, because of the personal attacks, but I like the site, and the writers, even though I usually disagree with them… haha But, I do like to point out when they are simply regurgitating left wing distortions, with no fact checking. There have been some sloppy mistakes made. I understand they have to produce a lot of material, but that doesn’t excuse not fact checking. This is excatly what I started to realize the left had been doing, for years and years. I just took their word, and never fact checked. Now I know the truth, and I check everything.

I also like to debate, so I like to step out of sites where we all agree…. I was hoping this would be a good site, but there are a handful of just plain super ugly people here who do nothing but attack, and offer no debate. I think debate is a great way to learn, and expand your mind, but here, all I end up doing is lowering myself to their obnoxious behavior, and getting heartburn. hahaha

I appreciate your comments, and always value your opinons on subjects.

Cecelia says:
February 1, 2010 at 11:36 am

Have you seen the video of Beck on his radio show, talking about matthews comments about *i forgot obama was black*? He is so right!

http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/01/31/glenn-beck-on-chris-i-forgot-he-was-black-matthews/

Ailes had the good sense to bring Huffington’s publicity stunt to a complete halt. It was quite a pleasure to see Huffington’s (and Krugman’s ) face when Ailes started pumping FNC, and to see Walters bring the entire thing to a swift halt by reminding them they were at ABC.

I would have at least asked Huffington why she had no objections to going on a show with Olbermann when he said the Republican Party was a bigger threat to the country than terrorists, but then THAT would have made big news for BOTH Olbermann and Huff-Po.

The Real Royal King says:
February 1, 2010 at 11:11 am
Koldys

I don’t know who that is and why you are always talking about him,

Cecelia says:
February 1, 2010 at 11:45 am
Her face was priceless when he brought up that post. And you could tell it was killing her that she was cut off, and couldn’t say more about it. And when she finally did, she lied. haha

Don’t worry about making a substantive response about Ailes’ self-adulation, Sara(h) N. Italy. Obviously, there isn’t one to be made. That makes my point.

I watched in its entirety, by the way. It was grueling. I am not at all fond of Walters, Huffington is not on my “A” list. Ailes, as always, sends me to the showers. What a slimy sort he is!

—

As for the Cambodian matter. I think I understand what Matthews was saying. He was using the Khmer Rouge as an example of the destructiveness of ideological purity. I certainly do think that as the Democratic party has become an even broader coalition, the Republican party has shrunk even more in its ideological breadth. Certainly, we see the (White) Tea Party, a branch of the Republican party, proudly sponsored by FOX News, imposing all manner of purity tests on the “faithful” or the witless, as the case may be. To that end, Matthews is correct. Although I doubt most Americans even have a clue what the Khmer Rouge is, I really do tire of the constant Nazis as Republican and Communists as Democrat analyses. It is all so inaccurate, so non-descriptive and so destructive.

Franco dates you, Cecelia. You know my grandmother was an ambulance driver and nurse for the Lincoln Brigade (leaving my mother with an aunt) and one of her eleven sisters, my great aunt, was a journalist in the battle zone espousing a militant falangist cause. Both returned safely, but neither ever spoke to the other the remainder of their lives. It is a fascinating, fascinating historical period, far more informative of what is happening in the US today than the Russian and German analogies. Indeed, even the Mexican Revolution is far more instructive. Alas, Norte Americanos are woefully ignorant of both, for the most part, and can learn nothing at all from them. I am so thankful that my grandmother was able to enrich me with this experience, and I still have a framed picture of Dolores Ibárruri (along with Emma Goldmann) in my dining room. So, see, I do like and admire strong women (as long as they don’t wear pants in public and don’t talk nasty).

I WISH you were a regular at Johnny Dollar’s Place.

—

It would increase the number of people posting by half, and it would dilute some the tedious obsession with the News Hounds. But, Sara(h) N. Italy does sometimes talk nasty, and I’m not sure Koldys really benefits from another uncritical FOX fan.

Sara, that’s a great video! Thank you! What a point Beck makes!

I tend to give the benefit of the doubt too (as did the Beck staffer) when it comes to appellations that are so inflammatory.

I don’t think Matthews is a “racist”, but yes, in the case of the president, Matthews is as conscious of his race as a KKK might be (in different way, of course).

Matthews forces any facts and realities into his own narrative, even to the point of twisting them. With the advent of our first black president, Matthews has brought back a fond narrative from his Peace Corp days. That the country has changed since then does not fit in to that narrative, but the narrative is more a tale of Matthews and his goodness than one of the president. Matthews’ narrative too, is convenient for lobbing bombs at political opponents.

So Matthews has the impetus to elevate this narrative because in it he sees his goodness, and because it hurts his enemies. Count on his rhetoric getting more self-referential and more more hateful.

Cecelia says:
February 1, 2010 at 12:06 pm
I don’t think Matthews is a “racist”,

It’s too bad that Matthews doesn’t give others the benefit of the doubt that you, Beck and others give him.

Count on his rhetoric getting more self-referential and more more hateful. – is that possible? hhaha

Well, my knowledge will just have to date me. I’m lucky in my relatives too. Specifically a father (my mother died when I was two) who talked history, banned the tv from our home, and bought books that he expected us to read and talk about.

I know a few things about the Roman Empire too. I”m sure you remember the Romans from your days of sucking up to Caesar.

“And when she finally did, she lied.”

I thought perhaps that she didn’t really remember the post.

The surreptitious way her blogged rebuttal to Ailes was changed, sort of makes me wonder now.

“So, see, I do like and admire strong women (as long as they don’t wear pants in public and don’t talk nasty).”

He means he admires them as long as he can borrow their clothes.

Royal King’s statement that he’d rather listen to Al Jazeera says a lot. And I love how he stereotypes broad swaths of people (West Virginia, Tennessee, Alabama) yet would recoil in horror if someone did the same to all members of a minority group. Unless the member of the minority group happens to be conservative. Then it’s perfectly okay for Keith Olbermann to call Michael Steele an idiot, or Michelle Malkin a slut and a whore. Somehow when the left does it, it doesn’t really count.

Notice I said Al Jazeera English. Have you ever watched it? It might surprise you. Mainstream. Largely objective, more objective than FOX or MSNBC, but with a perspective, to be sure.

I”m sure you remember the Romans from your days of sucking up to Caesar.

—

I assume you mean Augustus? I couldn’t stand Julius. Fascist twerp!

Actually, no Writer. It is not “okay” for Olbermann to use stereotypes and slurs as he does. It is every bit as deplorable as when Bill, Glen(n) and Sean do it.

Cecelia says:
February 1, 2010 at 12:21 pm
“And when she finally did, she lied.”

I thought perhaps that she didn’t really remember the post.

Could be…

but they/she still continued the falsehood on their blog, in the post. not until they were busted did they print the truth. Personally, I think if she didn’t know what he was talking about, she woudn’t have jumped to the conclusion it was a commenter, and not an actual article. Does she really think Ailes reads the comments on her site? lol!

While we’re being Roman, we don’t you just go ahead and crucify Ms. Huffington, Sara(h) N. Italy? It does not appear anything else will satisfy you. And, perhaps Ailes might enjoy it as much as he did crucifying journalistic integrity in the US. I’m, sure you’d also take well-deserved pleasure in making Ailes smile.

Yeah! Good point! Huffington would have, at least, shown some hesitation if she couldn’t remember the piece that Ailes had mentioned.

So it’s not “okay” to call names. But it only brings out your vitriol when conservatives do it. And is it really necessary, when making a point, to stereotype anyone living in the South, or anyone living in a trailer, etc.? If stereotyping is so evil for the right, doesn’t it also apply to the left? Guess not.

SteveMG says:
February 1, 2010 at 9:37 am

“When is this new Mao or Hitler supposed to arrive?”

Like usual, they arrive for the people under their rule when
it was too damn late to do anything to stop them. :(

“Besides, many other countries in Europe have embraced the sort of
progressive/statist/expansive state that Beck says will lead to
dictatorship. France, Britain, Sweden, Denmark…..Where is
their Hitler/Mao? ”

Same rule can apply though you may have to debate whether they are actually
‘progessives’ as much as socialists, which are similair but different philosophies.

“Warning about the dangers of expansive government and the dependency and
bureaucracy that it leads to is fine. Tocqueville recognized this about 170 years
ago. But comparing this sort of “soft despotism” (as Tocquevilled called it) to
the mass slaughter engineered by Hitler or Mao is absurd. And obscene.”

Even if that is a possible ending? Turn off the blinders and see the possibilities.

writer says:
February 1, 2010 at 1:55 pm

So it’s not “okay” to call names. But it only brings out your vitriol when conservatives do it. And is it really necessary, when making a point, to stereotype anyone living in the South, or anyone living in a trailer, etc.? If stereotyping is so evil for the right, doesn’t it also apply to the left? Guess not.

—

Is something a stereotype when demonstrably true? The Republican party is and has been strongest in the South for a number of years. South Carolina has the highest percentage of its population living in mobile homes (over 20%). Mississippi, Alabama and North Carolina all have 15-20%. My friend, we’re talking about demographics!

As for France, Britain, Sweden and Denmark, the French are the happiest in the world with their lifestyles. Sweden and Denmark are close behind. That might be seen by some to indicate that they have created for themselves the type of democratic systems they desire. That would seem to be the antithesis of what Beck says is happening. By the way, the United States is not very high on that list. Could it be that we are less democratic than France, Sweden and Denmark?

Damn Cecelia all that crap you bring from Koldys Dung pile does not work here, no Johnny or IM an Idiot to come to your defenses, no banning, no you have to agree with me or else. Trust me Cecelia you are out of your league, I will put it plain and simple for you Ailes is a good liar, Fox News is good at lying and spinning the GOP agenda.
Obama would be doing a much better job if Fox News would cut the lying shit out and just show the facts like BBC America and CNN does. Unlike the “We decide for you” Fox News tag line.

Mr. Kerkauer, I’m having difficulty with your claim that Arianna says the writer of the Ailes piece was not “employed” by Huff-Po. I’ve listened to it several times now and she clearly says that the piece wasn’t by anyone “approved of” by Huff-Po.

We certainly know Bill Mann is “approved of ” on a site that posts his column.

“Damn Cecelia …”

Awwww…give it up, coward. And get a new act!

I do believe this thread has set a new record for number of posts at mediaite.

The lefties really have a hard time handling the truth and revert to name calling and cursing. LOL

@Cecelia: The correction to this post was made late last night and I suspect that it wasn’t done by Steve, nor that it was caused by the comments in this thread. Instead, I have a theory about who administered the update and I assume it was done to reflect the most recent HuffPo-published info on the subject.

As to whether anyone “approves” the blogger posts to Arriana’s site, I’m under the impression that “approval” is automatic and if they aren’t just mirroring, they may allow for self-publishing.

In my head, there’s just too many posts from too many bloggers for there to be a lot of editorial oversight, especially for things that may not be linked from the mainpage and as I said in an earlier comment: I doubt Arriana reads each and every post or is even familiar with most of the content.

I have to say, Magister, I think we now have the informed, definitive resolution. You don’t seem to be in 100% agreement with Cecelia, so you can still expect some grief. You have, in fact, described a process not at all unique to HuffPo but fairly common in the industry. Many thanks.

magister,

Read anything by Michael Mann. The type of language that he used for Ailes (a “tumor”) wasn’t a new rodeo for this cowboy. Huffington certainly knows that he indulges in just this sort of pariah-making verbal carnage and that was Ailes’ point in the first place.

errr… I’d classify most of my comments to this thread as process-oriented and other than making a distinction between a personal insult and political rhetoric, I can’t say that any of my contributions have been remotely ideological.

Which is a row, I try to always hoe on media blogs. Though there have been rare occasions on this website, when the original post has a political point of view that I may try to address as part of a larger issue, all the while trying to keep it as close to the media angle as possible.

But thanks, nonetheless.

Magister,

Here’s Bill Mann’s bio from his blog site dcweasels.com

I seriously doubt that Huffington was unaware of his presence at Huff-Po or of his style.

“Humorist/media critic Bill Mann has been TV-radio columnist at the San Francisco Examiner, Oakland Tribune, and the New York Times Newspaper Group, and two Pulitzer Prize-winning dailies. He writes a humor column for MarketWatch.com, once scripted a comedy series on Canadian network TV, and wrote a humor book about Canadians (!), “The Retarded Giant.” He’s also a regular Media section blogger at Huffington Post, and several of his recent posts have become the most-viewed pieces at that entire site.”

I’m not sure I understand your point, Cecelia. First, I think you have misread Ailes’ point which was to be disagreeable and defensive in the rather civil and sedate world of broadcast news*. He succeeded very well. Secondly, am I correct in assuming that you believe it wholly improper to take exception to anything Ailes ever says or does? It appears that is what you are suggesting. Frankly, having Ailes at all and Ailes going on were terrible mistakes. I am not sure what ABC’s motivation was, perhaps to appear “fair and balanced” but the effect of the invitation was to hurl a physically unappealing, perhaps even physicallt repulsive person into our living room by dawn’s light** to watch a remarkably disingenuous wink-wink, nod-nod routine older than that trunk in which Fred and Ethel Mertz kept their vaudeville costumes. How did ABC miss the point that “fairness and balance” refers to complete accord with rightist positions? Ailes’ point was, I assume, to obfuscate, a pursuit at which he normally greatly excels but paradoxically miserably failed yesterday. Apparently, he requires the FOX-hermitically sealed pod*** in which his very vapors are prized more the oxygen by the few, the feeble, and he goes languid and impotent in fresh air and light. In any event, we can rest assured neither side accomplished its goals and the endeavor was yet another Walters’ flub. Perhaps, Ailes will do better on the “View”. By the way: I shouldn’t be surprised if in your heart of hearts your don’t find Ailes off-putting. [Notes: *A most foreign place to Mr. Ailes. **Alas, I had made a delicious onion bagel with cream cheese and lachs which set not at all well thanks to Mr. Ailes. ***A pod which embraces the FOX Fan Klub sites, as well.]

@Cecelia: The updated story on the Huffington Post refers to Bill Mann as a “longtime TV critic” and I believe that in one incarnation it used the word “respected”, so his posts may get a bye.

I’m pretty sure the thing closes tags automatically, but if not, the link should end now

Magister,

If by “bye” you mean his posts are allowed without the scrutiny of an editor, that may well be the case. But Mann says that several of his posts were the “most viewed” at Huffington Post.

We both know that generally that most viewed posts are the ones that are especially inflammatory. Huffington is not THAT old a site, that it could take such things for granted, or that Arianna wouldn’t be aware of them.

Saying that Mann wasn’t “approved of” or even “employed” there is a cop-out that would never be allowed to stand if it were Murdoch saying it about anything on FoxNation or FoxNews.com.

Actually I think Roger aqquitted himself well. Arrianna went after Beck and Ailes pointed out that her own blogs
are not ‘clean’ Then at the end of the show/segment arrianna threw a zinger in to get her ‘progressive
cred’ back then Walters jumped in as well to double team Ailes. He did quite well.

Be honest, Royal King. From your earlier comments, it’s clear what you meant. All Southerners are stupid. Anyone living in a trailer is stupid. Anyone who’s a Republican is stupid. You might as well throw it all in. All plumbers are stupid. Anyone driving a pickup is stupid. Anyone disagreeing with the left is stupid. At least when you stereotype and look down on people, you could be honest enough to admit it.

writer says:

“you could be honest enough to admit it.”

No, writer, he can’t.