This past week provided me with two great examples of liberal media hypocrisy. I will rant about them for this week’s edition of The Truth. First, the Huffington Post, after receiving complaints from far-left/quasi-Marxist organization Color of Change, announced that conservative Andew Breitbart’s articles would no longer be featured on the front page of the site, due to Breitbart’s ad hominem attacks on far-left 9/11 truther (and former Obama “green jobs” advisor) Van Jones.
Second, Jon Stewart interviewed Fox News anchor Bret Baier and showed an ignorance of Fox News programming. Like all Fox-haters, he’s only seen a few clips on Media Matters (a far-left media “watchdog” funded by evil billionaire George Soros). Stewart’s interview wasn’t very hypocritical, but he often criticizes the media for doing things that he does himself. Rather than man up, he hides behind the “but I’m a comedian” curtain that somehow allows him to be a hypocrite without getting in trouble for it.
So first up, the Breitbart story. For those who don’t know him, Andrew Breitbart is an internet media entrepreneur who’s started popular sites like Big Government and Big Journalism. He also worked with liberal Arianna Huffington to develop her website.
It was always an eyebrow-raising relationship: Arianna Huffington, the Republican turned ultraliberal, palling around with Andrew Breitbart, the Matt Drudge acolyte who grew into his own rabble-rouser of the right. Huffington brought on Breitbart to help develop her fledgling website, the Huffington Post, back in 2005. Drudge had introduced the two, back when Arianna was on his political team, and even after Breitbart left to focus on his new sites, BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, his writing continued to appear in blog form on the Huffington Post. As his profile rose and his positions became more antagonistic to the left, Arianna stood by Breitbart and continued to publish his writing on her home page. Until yesterday: After the Daily Caller published an interview in which Breitbart called former White House adviser Van Jones a “commie punk,” a “cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak,” a “cockroach,” and a “human toxin,” Huffington agreed to take his works off the HuffPo homepage.
Yes, he called Van Jones a lot of bad names, but that’s Breitbart’s style. This post has nothing to do with Andrew Breitbart’s attacks on Van Jones (although I applaud them because Jones is a commie punk), but with HuffPo’s hypocrisy. The online news organization reacted to Breitbart’s attacks on Van Jones, which were said in an interview and not in a HuffPo piece, by banning him from the front page.
The Huffington Post removed Breitbart’s blog posts from its front page as a result of a pressure campaign from far-left group, Color of Change, launched after the conservative publisher attacked its founder, Van Jones, in comments to TheDC.
“Andrew Brietbart’s [sic] false ad hominem attack on Van Jones in The Daily Caller violates the tenets of debate and civil discourse we have strived for since the day we launched,” [HuffPo spokesman Mario] Ruiz said in a statement on Thursday. “As a result, we will no longer feature his posts on the front page.”
Breitbart told TheDC that The Huffington Post’s front page bloggers have made countless ad hominem attacks against him.
HuffPo bloggers make ad hominem attacks against pretty much every high-profile conservative, but Arianna doesn’t care because vicious attacks by liberals get her more page views because, well, her entire audience is liberal. And I would also like to point out that Breitbart’s blog posts for HuffPo did not contain ad hominem attacks, but the remarks that got him banned from the front page were made in an interview with the Daily Caller. Many liberal bloggers have actually made such attacks in HuffPo pieces
The Daily Caller compiled such attacks. Here are some examples:
The Huffington Post published an article by actor John Cusack in November 2005 that called Republicans “a league of bastards” and said that Iraq war supporters “are human scum.”
Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote an article appearing on The Huffington Post a day after the death of Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist in September 2005. Dershowitz wrote that Rehnquist “started out his political career as a Republican thug” and that “Rehnquist’s judicial philosophy was result-oriented, activist, and authoritarian.”
Rehnquist was a “friend of corporations, polluters, right wing Republicans, religious fundamentalists, homophobes, and other bigots,” Dershowitz wrote.
“Cheney is a terrorist. He terrorizes our enemies abroad and innocent citizens here at home indiscriminately,” wrote actor Alec Baldwin in February 2006.
Baldwin wrote in a subsequent post, “I want to apologize to all of the readers of this blog for referring to Vice President Cheney as a terrorist… How about something more measured, then? How about… a lying, thieving Oil Whore. Or, a murderer of the US Constitution?”
In March 2007, Charles Karel Bouley wrote on The Huffington Post that former White House Press Secretary Tony Snow deserved the cancer that later took his life. Bouley wrote, “Work for Fox News, spinning the truth in to a billion knots and how can your gut not rot? I know, it’s terrible.” The article was edited to remove the references to Snow following public outrage.
Comedian Bill Maher wrote in August 2006 that then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should be “tried, convicted, and deported.”
In September 2010, Maher wrote that Ben Stein should not complain about taxes, and that he should be “thanking God and/or Ronald Reagan that [he was] lucky enough to be born in a country where a useless schmuck who contributes absolutely nothing to society can somehow manage to find himself in the top marginal tax bracket.”
Huffpo’s ad hominem hypocrisy is astounding, but not surprising. They banish Breitbart for remarks in an interview, but continue to publish vile crap by lame lefties. In fact, Arianna herself ought to be banned for her crap:
Huffington calls Bush “deluded, “cockeyed” (as modifiers for “optimist,” oddly enough) and a “zealot.” In this one, she calls Sarah Palin a “Trojan moose.” In fact, given the date on that one, September 8, 2008, it’s fair to wonder if Huffington herself launched the extreme hate campaign against Palin that still rages.
Yes, according to Huffington, Palin is a moose. The Trojan part of the insult seems to imply that if she is elected President, Greek soldiers will climb out of her and burn down Washington. If you have no idea what I’m referring to, please read up on the Trojan War. Huffington’s attacks are more creative than what Bill Maher has called the former Governor, but are still just as offensive.
Big Journalism has compiled more ad hominem attacks from the pages of HuffPo. They cite reporting from the Daily Caller:
Here’s what HuffPowriter Jason Linkins wrote in 2008 about right wing writer Jerome Corsi:
I want to end today by offering my thanks to Jerome Corsi, white-supremacist Swift Boat turd heel un-American wouldn’t-piss-on-ya-if-you-were-on-fire foamy chancre on the ass of subhumanity extraordinaire. You want to talk about voter enthusiasm? Well, Mr. Corsi, the thought of casting vote against everything you stand for doesn’t just make me feel enthusiastic, it makes me feel ten feet taller, and I get the coppery taste of the gladiator in my mouth. So thank you, pig.
Arianna, is that ad hominem enough for you? Will you ban your liberal bloggers from the front page?
I won’t be holding my breath. Anyway, check out Big Journalism’s post, announcing plans to help HuffPo enforce the new blogging policy. The post also uses video to prove that Breitbart is correct when he calls Van Jones a “cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak. And a commie. And an eco-fraudster.” Here’s the link.
And now, Jon Stewart. I don’t feel like writing much about him, so I’ll include some of my reaction to his interview of Bret Baier, along a few more comments.
So first, what are Stewart’s views? Fox News chief Roger Ailes, after having an hour-long conversation with him, said this:
“He hates conservative views. He hates conservative thoughts. He hates conservative verbiage. He hates conservatives.”
There was more.
“He’s crazy. If it wasn’t polarized, he couldn’t make a living. He makes a living by attacking conservatives and stirring up a liberal base against it.”
I tried to interrupt.
“He loves polarization. He depends on it. If liberals and conservatives are all getting along, how good would that show be? It’d be a bomb.”
Why is Stewart a hypocrite? In one way, he decries polarization, yet thrives on it. While making fun of the news media and decrying their standards, he himself frequently takes things out of context. But according to Stewart and his stoned fans, that’s okay because Stewart isn’t a journalist. Okay, so if “news” is somewhere in the name, you cannot do this bad stuff, but if “comedy” is, you can basically do whatever the hell you want. While I am sympathetic to that viewpoint, it fails to explain why Jon Stewart is capable of criticizing the media’s standards when he himself doesn’t have any. How can you meaningfully criticize something you know nothing about?
Stewart also criticized financial media, particulary CNBC’s Mad Money program. He interviewed the host, Jim Cramer, and acted like somehow he knows more about finance than Cramer, a successful Wall Street man.
Basically, Stewart was blaming Cramer for all sorts of trouble for describing illegal and unethical methods. We cannot understand how the interview caused any harm and think that blaming the messenger is asinine. It would be like blaming the Encyclopedia Brittanica for an asteroid hitting the earth two years from now because we once read about how asteroids may have killed the dinosaurs in the 1995 edition. Stewart continued hammering Cramer until the guy apologized for everything, even things he could not possibly have caused.
All of our ranting and raving here boils down to this: Jon Stewart is a tool. He’s your standard east coast-bred, son of a college professor, limousine liberal with an ego the size of all outdoors who thinks he’s smarter than everyone. His modus operandi has been to mock the right at all opportunities and attack anyone with whom he disagrees. He’s a hypocrite who castigates others for shoddy journalism while engaging in the same methods himself. We don’t buy the excuse that his show is a satire because he has repeatedly stepped out of that role to directly take aim at his opposition. sure, his monologues are winking and sarcastic, but his interviews are full of the shortcuts, red herrings, and shouting matches he decries in others.
So, now to the Bret Baier interview. Stewart, who knows nothing about the news business, told Bret Baier, the host of Special Report, the top cable news show that focuses on politics, that the “main thrust 0f Fox News is not objective news gathering.” Stewart, tell that to Greg Palkot, who was nearly beaten to death in Cairo, or Steve Centanni, who was captured by radical Islamists and nearly killed.
How about Rick Leventhal and Steve Centanni, who are currently covering the fighting in Libya? Mr. Stewart, if you really care about your credibility, why don’t you get on a plane and meet with Fox News journalists who are out in the field in Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Japan? How about you stop being a pompous prick?
Stewart, attacking Fox News programming, asked Bret if he ever watched other Fox News shows other than his own. Jon, have you ever watched? Stewart is such a tool, he just says thinks to make his (stoned) audience clap and cheer, meanwhile Stewart is using the same dishonest tactics that he attacks journalists for using. Pathetic.
Will Stewart admit to being a hypocrite? Will he actually watch FNC, instead of getting his info from the far-left Media Matters?
Again, I won’t be holding my breath.