This week was a big one for our friends at Fox News. Sure, the Left loves to talk about the Dominion defamation lawsuit against the network, but the Fox hate was cranked up to 12 (because 11 just won’t do) because of Tucker Carlson showing previously unreleased security footage from January 6th. You know, that insurrection that simultaneously could have destroyed the nation and was run by dumb Trump supporters?
Well, since both Leftists and, well, other Leftists are losing their collectivist shit over the footage, I figured it was time to take a look at the little cable network that could…bitch slap CNN and MSNBC into oblivion.
Fox News
What the Left thinks it means – a radical right wing network that lies to the country, thus becoming a national security threat
What it really means – a right-leaning network that represents everything the Left fears/hates
Fox News Channel began in 1996 from humble beginnings. Well, as humble as can be while being funded by a wealthy Australian. Anyway, Fox News was established as an alternative to the media, who lean so far left they walk at a 5 degree angle perpendicular to the ground, and it proved to be very successful. No longer did we have Leftist talking heads telling us what and how to think about the events of the day. Now, we had “fair and balanced” news.
Kinda.
It’s hard to overcome personal biases in the media, but Fox News at least tried to do it for a long time, and they still do. But try to convince a Leftist raised on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of that. They’ll continue to say Fox News isn’t really news because of all the lies they tell.
Seriously? Have you fucknuckles looked in the mirror lately?
Where the Left gets things twisted is a common blind spot for people: separating news from opinion. To the Left, the two are inseparable as they believe their opinions are facts. Granted, the Right does this as well, but in their defense people on the Right can be persuaded with facts most of the time. Their ego isn’t tied to being correct. The Left’s is.
But actual reporting has little to do with ego. The journalism of even the past 50 years has gone from hitting the pavement to hitting up a Leftist politician on Twitter to get a quote for a story that’s pretty much plug-and-play. Just add a quote or two, make Republicans look bad, and you’re done.
Fox News’ actual reporting isn’t anything like that from what I’ve seen. For one, they get blocked by Twitter Leftists. But more importantly the reporters on staff do amazing work. Even former Fox News contributors like Catherine Herridge found work after leaving it because of her reputation as a strong, driven reporter. And if you look at the body of her work, you’ll find a common theme: report the facts without emotional attachments. She’s like a female Data.
This blurring of lines between news and opinion actually makes the rest of the media look bad, mainly because they assume Fox News does what they do, only with more of a conservative bent. Of course, Leftists think…excuse me…AHAAAHAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAA!
So, where was I? Oh, yes, Leftist media.
Being anything to the right of the Socialist Socialite makes you incredible to Leftists, and not in a good way. Once you get branded as a conservative, Leftists no longer consider you to be human, let alone credible. Just ask Matt Taibbi, a reporter that used to work for Leftist rag Rolling Stone and is now reporter-non-grata for his role in the Twitter Files.
Yet, this is lazy thinking. Dismissing a source solely because of political leanings is silly. You need to take the time and really look at the body of work before you determine how badly they suck. Then, you can dismiss them.
In the case of Fox News, I can’t completely dismiss them for having no credibility. Their news side is consistently running circles around the competition by being good at their jobs. It’s the commentary side that ultimately hurts the network. Sure, they have solid contributors like Brit Hume, Greg Gutfeld, Tammy Bruce, and Tulsi Gabbard, people whose opinions aren’t hidden and even-handed.
Then, there’s the hard pro-Trump side like Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity, neither of one I can stand because they just find ways to say the same things over and over again night after night. If I wanted to hear Trump talking points, I would go right to the source, not filtered through people whose opinions I care less about than the insane homeless man I see on my way to work. Although the homeless guy did give me some great stock tips…
Regardless, Fox News is doing something right because they continue to dominate the cable news ratings. Granted, ratings doesn’t always mean quality. I’m looking right at you “Friends.” You owe me 3 years of my life back watching Ross and Rachel. And no number of times singing “Smelly Cat” will make up for it.
Yet, Fox News has enough crossover appeal that it gets people on the Left and the Right to watch. This link is from 2019, so the numbers may have changed, but the fact Fox News continues to dominate month after month, year after year, makes it harder to dismiss the network as niche. Even with the Dominion lawsuit looming over them, it just doesn’t matter.
And that’s what pisses off Leftists the most. No matter what they do, no matter how many boycotts or hashtags they come up with, Fox News keeps chugging along, making CNN and MSNBC fight for the scraps. Or scrap for the scraps, if you prefer (and I do).
Of course, the Left can’t let that happen, so they’re doing what they can to attack Fox News. Hence, the accusations they’re a threat to national security and lie all the time. And hence the reason they have to lie about what Fox News is.
A lot of the “Fox News is a national security threat” bullshit arose in the aftermath of January 6th, a dark day in our history where…let me check my notes…a bunch of people attended a rally in Washington, DC, to protest an election they felt was stolen and some asshats decided to be destructive dicks. Apparently, protesting the results of a contested election is a national security threat to the Left.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries? Please pick up the white courtesy phone. You may be a national security threat.
Where Fox News comes into the picture is related to the Dominion lawsuit in that the network is alleged to have lied to its viewers about the 2020 Presidential election being stolen, which prompted the January 6th “insurrection,” which as we’ve been told is worse than 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and another “Scary Movie” sequel…combined.
I won’t dispute Fox News had a hand in the “stolen election” narrative. What I do dispute is that they knowingly lied. I didn’t vote for Trump or Puddin’ Head Joe, so I don’t really have a dog in the hunt, but I can’t completely dismiss the idea there was some funky shit going down at the polls. Polling places running out of ballots, allegations of renewed counting after most of the vote counters had left, and other irregularities became the coin of the Trump realm. I can’t say every accusation of election irregularities could be substantiated with facts, but there were enough to make me question whether the results we got on Election Day 2020 were real or Memorex. And, me being the curious boy I am, I want to get to the bottom of it.
And apparently Fox News did, too. When the rest of the media dismissed the possibility of election fraud out of hand (while saying the 2016 election was fundamentally flawed because of Russia, Russia, Russia), Fox News became the contrarian and started to look at what happened with a critical eye.
You know, like reporters are supposed to do?
But is this questioning a threat to national security? In a word. In two words, fuck no. In three words, fuckity fuck no. In four words…well, let’s just say there’s a lot more variations of “fuck” used.
The First Amendment says Congress cannot pass laws prohibiting the redress of grievances against the government. If a rally about possible election fraud isn’t a redress of grievances, I don’t know what is. At the very least, the January 6 protestors had a Constitutional right to do what they did. Once they breached the rules of decorum to commit criminal acts, that protection goes the way of Kamala Harris’ Presidential hopes in 2024.
On top of that, the concept of January 6th being a “riot” or an “insurrection” is being undone by the security footage being shown. Most of the people at the rally stayed outside, and those who gained access to the Capitol mostly…took a tour, some with the help of the Capitol Police on duty that day.
But wait a minute! Wouldn’t that prove the Left’s narrative about January 6th is full of shit? Why, yes…yes it would! But they can’t just say “The real reason we lied about January 6th is because we got scared by a bunch of non-violent Americans who disagree with us” because it would go over as well as giving David Duke an NAACP Image Award.
And not to put too fine a point on this, but who was President on January 6, 2021? That would be Donald Trump, not Puddin’ Head Joe. There was no transfer of power, no transition (except maybe for some members of the Biden Administration), and no attempt to overthrow the government. For January 6th to be an actual insurrection, the protestors/”rioters” would have to be seeking to overthrow…the man they supported for President in 2020. Fox News broadcasting security footage doesn’t make the lack of logic behind the “insurrection” go away, nor is it nearly as horrible as the Left wants to make it out to be. The only real threat with releasing the security footage isn’t to national security, but to the security of the Leftist narrative.
Now, for the lying. Not on my part, but to the allegations Fox News misinforms its viewers. Let’s just say any major media outlet that pushed even one-tenth of the stories about Russiagate being real should take all the seats. Much of what passes for reporting these days revolves around lying, whether it be omitting context, fabricating stories to advance a narrative, or spinning events to make one side look better than the other. In fact, most of the “reporters” today should get an additional pay for being the DNC’s steno pool.
Fox News is no different, except for the DNC steno pool bit. They do exactly what the rest of the media do, only for the Right instead of the Left. That’s not meant as an excuse, but rather an observation built over 35 years of studying the media both formally and informally. It’s hypocritical for the Left to hold Fox News to a higher standard than they hold themselves, but it’s par for the Alinsky course. Not that you’d ever get an actual admission of dishonesty from the Left, mind you. They’re still clinging to the “very fine people on both sides” lie as though it were a security blanket.
So, is Fox News as bad as its critics say it is? Yes, and no. They are a product of the current media environment and are guilty of at least some of the sins attributed to it. Overall, they’re no better or worse than any other media outlet, and much of the criticism levied against it is the result of partisan hyperbole. Having said that, Fox News has a lot of room to improve. Don’t fall back on reciting RNC/Donald Trump talking points and go back to reporting that lives up to the “fair and balanced” standard.
Oh, and fire Geraldo Rivera. He’s as useful as tits on Michael Moore.
Tag: tucker carlson
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If the Left didn’t hate Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy before now (spoiler alert: they did), giving access to tens of thousands of hours of surveillance footage from January 6th to Tucker Carlson. With Leftists already believing Carlson is a Russian asset, this has given them the opportunity to talk about national security. After all, letting a Russian asset (in their opinion) gain access to security footage from January 6, the most horrifying day in American history up there with Pearl Harbor and 9/11 (again, in their opinion), has to be a national security risk, right?
Well, to paraphrase the Commander in Briefs Bill Clinton, that depends on what your definition of national security is.
national security
What the Left believes it means – ummm…they’re still working on it
What it really means – a concept that means less and less with each passing year
To put it mildly, national security is a pretty big fucking deal. It’s essential to all of our lives, even if we don’t give it a first thought, let alone a second thought. It allows us to live free, or at least as freely as the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration will allows us to live. It ensures we don’t have to worry about foreign countries invading us and destroying America.
By the way, I’ve got my eye on you, Canada! No trying to get us to adopt the metric system on my watch!
If you really think about it, and I do because I have to entertain myself somehow since prices are higher than Willie Nelson on any day ending in day, national security touches every aspect of our lives on some level. So, why do we take it for granted?
A huge part of it is how invulnerable we’ve felt as a country since the Cold War. After the Berlin Wall fell, there were no more superpowers to challenge us. The Soviet Union was no more, China was years away from firing up its economic power, and the Middle East was, well, the Middle East. For all intents and purposes, we were untouchable.
Then 9/11 happened. That woke us up, at least for a little while, to how vulnerable we could still be. Granted, the warning signs were there if we had bothered to put 2 and 2 together and come up with something other than potato (thanks to Simon Miller for that joke). After all the outpouring of sympathy, all the brave words that we’d find who was responsible and bring them to justice, all the patriotic bunting and good feelings, we promptly…forgot about it after a year or so. But in our defense “Friends” was on, so…
Since then, our approach to national security has been spottier than a freckled-faced Jackson Pollock impersonator using a cheetah for a canvas. (Not something I’d recommend, by the way, especially if your clothes are dry clean only.) It’s become a stock talking point for both sides that has a level of gravitas and a seemingly untouchable nature about it that prevents Joe Sixpack or Taemmi Soylatte from thinking any deeper about it than “It’s good.”
And that’s where both parties fuck us at the drive-thru.
For decades, our national security has been tied to how much we’re willing to spend on it. With Republicans, it tends to be neat new weapons, gadgets, and tech, and with Democrats it tends to be more “soft” spending on diversity, diplomacy, and making sure other country’s fee-fees don’t get hurt by us. Yet, with all of that spending, we aren’t that much safer. If anything, we’ve gotten more lax due to an unhealthy cocktail of political gaslighting and social media.
Let’s start with the gaslighting since it’s the most pervasive and, thus, more fun to talk about. Both sides use this tactic to bolster their own version of national security. If you don’t approve of spending $450 on a screwdriver you can get at Home Depot for $8, the Right thinks you support China, North Korea, or dare I say it Trinidad Tobago marching down our streets and making us their bitches. If you don’t agree to using military (i.e. taxpayer) dollars to combat global climate change, the Left thinks you want to pollute the Earth to the point only cockroaches and the Kardashians would survive.
Both sides are wrong in the same bipartisan way. It doesn’t matter how much you spend on a security system if you never turn it on. And guess what, kids? We have been forgetting to turn it on for decades, all the while keeping every door unlocked and all our valuables in one convenient and highly visible spot for anyone to come along and take them.
And, yes, I’m about to talk about the balloon incident.
On January 28th, a Chinese balloon was able to fly over Alaska, western Canada, and parts of the United States before it was shot down over the East Coast. On February 4th. Even if you buy the multiple excuses the Left gave for why the balloon wasn’t shot down over, well, Alaska, the fact remains it took 8 fucking days and an entire cross country trip for us to do anything. And then, as if to try to balance out the dumbfuckery, we got hyper-vigilant and started shooting down balloons that weren’t even Chinese.
It’s one thing to double down after making a mistake. But the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration decided to double, triple, and quadruple down on the mistake just to show how serious they were. Which is to say not serious at all. The very fact a single balloon made it into American airspace, was recognized, and was allowed to go coast to coast without so much as a dart thrown at it is a serious breach of national security.
After all, we don’t know what kind of equipment the balloon had, if it had any. We are just being told that it was either harmless due to spy satellites giving better information or that it was made harmless because we jammed any transmissions (neither of which, I might add, has been established with any factual information). In other words, Leftists want us to believe the same balloon was ineffective because shut up.
After the Chinese balloon debacle, it’s a good thing there wasn’t a train derailment or…oh, wait. Never mind.
Even with what people observed, we had to endure Leftists telling us it wasn’t a big deal and people who said we should have shot the balloon down sooner were “bedwetters” as Senator Chris Murphy put it so inelegantly. To try to get Puddin’ Head Joe as far away from the blame as possible, they even tried to pull Donald Trump into it, saying he also had Chinese balloons come into American airspace during his Presidency, a claim that was later debunked by former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who said it didn’t happen. I mean, it was obvious, considering it was claimed those alleged balloon flights under Trump weren’t discovered allegedly until the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration…according to the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration.
I’m as shocked as you are the Administration would lie to cover up the Administration’s clusterfuck! And to try to make us feel bad or foolish for not buying the bullshit? That’s lower than an earthworm’s belt buckle.
Now, onto social media. Granted, I don’t have a high opinion of social media to begin with, but there’s one out there that is actually being used for surveillance against us. I’m speaking of TikTok, a popular app that has been linked to spying on journalists and has the potential to track information of American citizens and government workers.
Oh, and it should be pointed out the Trump Administration called this out in 2020, and people mocked them for it, saying it was a conspiracy spun for political advantage. Yeah…chalk up another “conspiracy theory” that wound up being a fact.
Before we take a victory lap at the Left being wrong again, consider the implications of what we know. China has access to information, which is in and of itself a matter of national security, not just because government employees might be doing a stupid dance for tens and tens of people to see. The thing that makes TikTok so dangerous is the fact so many Americans voluntarily give up this information.
In our society’s rush to be “Internet famous,” we have opened ourselves up to invasions of privacy and, yes, security. Say what you will about the Chinese, and believe me I have, but they have figured us out in 2023 America. Just give us a dopamine hit for meaningless videos and we’ll let them mine our data. Brilliant!
Although neither major party has it exactly right, I do have to say Republicans take national security more seriously. After all, the Left keeps saying domestic terrorism is the greatest threat to our national security right now. And by “domestic terrorism” they mean “anybody who disagrees with us and aren’t afraid to say anything about it.”
Look at how they painted parents who were concerned/outraged over pornographic books teaching children about homosexuality and blow jobs in elementary school. You would think these parents were one step below the Manson Family the way the Left talked. But when you get people of all stripes to come out against what you’re trying to push in elementary school, it’s no longer a matter of hatred, fear, or even national security. Maybe, just maybe, your ideas suck ass.
While the Left gets their collectivist panties in a bunch over people pretending to be badasses, we still have real issues with national security we need to address. And with China and Russia united over a) hating us, b) wanting to fuck our shit up as much as possible and c) having the means to do both electronically, we can’t afford to be asleep at the switch anymore.
But we need to be honest here. Neither major party is doing jack shit about protecting ourselves, mainly because we continue to confuse the definition to fit their ideological needs at the time. Is ANTIFA a national security threat? No, nor should they be considered such. Are Trump supporters national security threats? No, and they shouldn’t be considered such either. Once you start pulling away the layers of this fetid onion, you get closer and closer to the core of what national security actually looks like.
And what does it look like? A strong and vigilant population who strive for the same goal of protecting America regardless of their ideological differences. As we’ve seen since Kevin McCarthy’s actions involving January 6 footage, we’re a long ways off from that.
But, hey, at least we can still use TikTok, right?
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
There are times when I shake my head in disbelief at what the Left takes seriously. This is one of those times.
It starts with New York Times tech reporter Taylor Lorenz taking her role to new depths by attempting to publicly shame a conservative mother online through bullying her daughter. Rightly, Lorenz has been called out for this behavior. Then, she started complaining about online harassment she’s received, which caused many a Leftist to ignore the utter garbage she did to warrant the attention. Thanks to Tucker Carlson naming Lorenz and using a photo of her available on the Times website, the victimhood meter got turned up to 11 through the invocation of a magical phrase the Left has been using for the past few years, “online violence.”
Let’s demystify this term, shall we?
online violence
What the Left thinks it means – mistreatment of minorities and women online, including taunts, insults, and trolling
What it really means – a made-up controversy with real-life inspiration
With the advent of the World Wide Web (thank you, Al Gore…not!), American society changed forever. Even though we were able to chat with people around the world, our worlds shrank inward. Things we wouldn’t say to people in public were said online, often with our real names attached to them. And don’t get me started on Rule 34. If you don’t know what that is, please don’t ask. You really don’t want to know.
Out of that change came troll culture, which then turned into American culture. And as exchanges got more heated, egos got more fragile. People on social media go from bully to victim in a matter of keystrokes. Hell, I’ve been shit-talked by 12 year olds playing Call of Duty.
Does it cross lines of civilized society? Absolutely. Should we be trying to do better than throwing more shade at people than Rosie O’Donnell sunbathing? No doubt. Is it violence? In a word, no. In two words, fuck no.
Words, by definition, cannot be violence because they lack the ability to be physical. When spoken, they are the expulsion of air through the mouth combine with muscular actions. Even a literal tongue lashing doesn’t involve actual lashing of the tongue. Words can inspire violence (i.e. fighting words), but the words themselves don’t commit the violence.
Now, let’s add in the online element. This may come as a shock to many people, but online life isn’t real life. Even if you believe words are violence (which just confirms you’re a dumbass), the fact the words occurred in the cyber-ether renders your opinion more useless than Eric Swalwell’s security clearance.
So, why are so any people convinced online violence is really? One, online life has made people dumber than a bag of hammers. More importantly, though, it’s a clever play on words the Left uses to convince people it’s a serious problem by playing to their emotions through the negative implications of violence. Let’s be honest. There are very few positive aspects to violence, and those that are positive usually cost at least an extra $50…not that I’d know about that, mind you…
Where was I again? Oh yeah, Leftist word play. By invoking the concept of violence, the Left counts on us to fill in the blanks and assume the worst. Adding the word “online” makes it seem widespread and a direct threat to us personally because everybody and their Grandmother is online these days. Although I get a chuckle imagining an octogenarian trolling a 20 year old over his or her taste in anime, the desired effect is to get us afraid of what could happen.
And by creating that fear, the Left can take your voice, equating legitimate criticism with the modern equivalent of an elementary school taunt, only with more vulgarity. As with other times the Left attempts to manipulate us through creative wording, the key to countering it is to recognize it for what it is and call it out. What Taylor Lorenz and her enablers are trying to do is to escape responsibility for being reprehensible to someone with less power than they have. With Tucker Carlson calling her out, the shoe is on the other foot and now Lorenz is getting a taste of karmic justice.
Let’s just say she’s not a fan. Which makes it all the funnier to me. So, win-win!
Meanwhile, don’t fall prey to the emotional manipulation the Left is using here. They want you to avoid using your brain and simply believe, just like one of the Left’s online darlings Anita Sarkeesian says: Listen and Believe. But when what you’re being told to believe is absurd on its face, you have my blessing not to listen.