Once more a dishonest and progressive mainstream media refuses to tell the full story …

• Media Matters is not a legitimate journalistic news organization as its name would seem to indicate.
• Their agenda is targeted at destroying a single news outlet with opinions, lies, distortions and half-truths masquerading as journalistic commentary.
• The primary source of funding appears to be noted internationalist George Soros

Media Matters' war against Fox

The liberal group Media Matters has quietly transformed itself in preparation for what its founder, David Brock, described in an interview as an all-out campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” aimed at the Fox News Channel.

The group, launched as a more traditional media critic, has all but abandoned its monitoring of newspapers and other television networks and is narrowing its focus to Fox and a handful of conservative websites, which its leaders view as political organizations and the “nerve center” of the conservative movement. The shift reflects the centrality of the cable channel to the contemporary conservative movement, as well as the loathing it inspires among liberals — not least among the donors who fund Media Matters’ staff of about 90, who are arrayed in neat rows in a giant war room above Massachusetts Avenue.

“The strategy that we had had toward Fox was basically a strategy of containment,” said Brock, Media Matters’ chairman and founder and a former conservative journalist, adding that the group’s main aim had been to challenge the factual claims of the channel and to attempt to prevent them from reaching the mainstream media.

The new strategy, he said, is a “war on Fox.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51949.html

So why are we not surprised when the progressives put out garbage like this …

Media Matters / By Eric Boehlert -- Fox News Largely to Blame for GOP's Bad Image, Conservative Commentators Too Scared to Say So

Fox News speaks for the Republican Party. Period. But for all the talk of the need for GOP "rebranding," no one dares point the finger at Fox.

Add Commentary's John Podhoretz to the growing list of conservative writers who, in the wake of Obama's easy re-election win, are voicing concern about the Republican Party's approach and are worried that players within the conservative movement are damaging its chances to effectively counter the Democratic president. But also add John Podhoretz to the list of conservatives who refuse to type the phrase "Fox News" when detailing who's  to blame for the GOP's tarnished reputation.

This has become something of a conservative formula in recent months: Bemoan the state of the GOP, denounce its messaging failures, and urge introspection and the courage to change course. Missing from the equation? Singling out any of the culprits, any of the national media voices, to blame for Republican woes.

Podhoretz, for instance, claims that the contradictory caricature of the president created by Obama's critics, that he's a lightweight in over his head who's also a ruthless power-hunger pol, "has done perhaps irreparable harm to the central conservative cause of the present moment." By spending the last five years falsely portraying Obama, and often doing it an outlandish manner via "excessive alarmism," his most fevered opponents have made themselves appear "foolish" and easy to dismiss, Podhoretz wrote. It's time for "serious arguments," he counseled, even though they "may not sell gold coins as quickly."

Fox News speaks for the Republican Party. Period. It owns the party's messaging machine. So if there's an entrenched messaging problem within the GOP (which more and more conservatives seem to think there is), and if more and more voters view the party as out of touch and irrelevant, that's Fox News' fault. But apparently players within the movement aren't supposed to say so.

In January, conservative Erick Erickson beseeched his fellow partisans to ditch the phony outrage that's become so prevalent in right-wing circles and to address more substantial areas of debate. "We're off key and off message. We've become professional victims dialed up to 10 on the outrage meter," he wrote. "Who the hell wants to listen to conservatives whining and moaning all the time about the outrage du jour?"

He even specified that the right wing's endless conspiracies and Obama fantasies related to the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi last year had not been a productive use of the movement's time.

But Erickson, like so many others, refused to single Fox out by name even though the channel practically invented the phony outrage approach that Erickson thinks is damaging the GOP. Indeed, forced indignation represents the centerpiece of Fox's programming model during Obama's presidency. (Fox has mentioned "Benghazi" nearly two thousand times since last September, according to TVeyes.com)

Erickson's blatant omission did prove enlightening in one regard: Days after his column appeared he was hired by Fox News. So by declining to criticize Fox, Erickson was likely able to advance his own career.

I suspect that's why lots of conservatives today refuse to state the obvious: Fox News is hurting the Republican Party.

Eric Boehlert is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America, and a former senior writer for Salon. Source: Fox News Largely to Blame for GOP's Bad Image, Conservative Commentators Too Scared to Say So | Alternet

Nowhere in this story does it acknowledge that the piece is a “hit piece” designed to disrupt Republican efforts and discourage conservative voters. Leaving it up to the reader to discover for themselves the nefarious nature of the author and his media outlet. 

The big lie …

There is absolutely no truth to the statement that Fox News speaks for the Republican Party. One, the Republican National Committee has a qualified public relations arm of its own and crafts its own messaging – not always the best – with guidance from Republican advisors. Two, Fox News, the hard news operation of Fox, is a straightforward news gathering and dissemination effort that bends over backwards to support its mantra “fair and balanced.” Not to be conflated with the opinion commentary of Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity. While O’Reilly casts himself as an independent, for all practical purposes, he appears to be a fiscal conservative (to the point of being notoriously cheap) and social moderate – bringing a modicum of commonsense to the forefront. He is also an arrogant elitist who speaks of his Harvard education while claiming he is a “simple man” looking out for the “folks.” He appears to be a paranoid and prickly man whose off-camera rages have gone viral on occasion. On the other hand, Hannity really is more a man of the people and makes no bones about it. He is Mr. Republican. But a network is not defined by its news nor its commentators unless it is NBC, MSNBC or CNN.

Amusement …

I was greatly amused by the mention of the “contradictory caricature of the president created by Obama's critics, that he's a lightweight in over his head who's also a ruthless power-hunger pol.” Observation of Obama over a period of years demonstrates he is a egoist, possibly to the point of malignant narcissism; he is lazy, preferring to outsource the heavy lifting to others as in allowing the democrats in Congress to craft Obamacare and other important legislation in secret with no input from the Republicans; and he is vindictive and disingenuous, never accepting blame for adverse actions and preferring to throw other people under the bus to preserve his “image” – is essence, the man who votes “present” to avoid having to take a stand on a controversial subject.

Another sign of laziness is that Obama has continued to excoriate George Bush as the reason for his failures in both domestic and foreign policies, although any competent observer would not that he has “doubled down” on these policies and re-branding them to assume ownership. And, should they fail, he disingenuously points to Bush and the blame starts anew.

In addition, Obama’s fellow travelers appear to be second-rate ideologues who are grossly incompetent and malfeasant. And anyone who does not believe that the Chicago political machine behind Obama is not ruthless and power hungry is a delusional fool. A blend of thuggery, corruption and coercion.

Bottom line …

Yes, the Republican Party is in deep trouble. Primarily because of the internal battle between the Northeastern Liberal Elites, with their intellectual advisors and crony capitalism, and the Southern Evangelicals with their religious-based stands on social issues.

The simple fact is that you appear to be disingenuous when you claim you stand for freedom and then deny a woman control over her own reproductive system. Politics has never been about morality as you can’t legislate morality given the diverse viewpoints which exist in the nation. So instead of leaving social issues (abortion, contraception, healthcare, and education) to the states – as dictated by the Constitution – the Republicans divide themselves before any election, twisting themselves in knots to cobble together enough people to actually win.

If the Republicans are to win this next congressional election cycle, perhaps they should stick to fiscal conservatism and the repeal, replacement and reform of legislation which is, prima facie, unconstitutional.

In the meantime, the “folks” should be aware of the hidden agendas behind many media stories and take action accordingly.

-- steve

Related articles

GOP DYSFUNCTION ON DISPLAY: Old aisle-hopping RINOS, John McCain and his BFF Lindsay Graham attempt to marginalize Rand Paul

Jeb Bush not even elected and lying to himself and the American public ...

A String Of Homophobic Tweets From Fox Contributor Erick Erickson

John 'Goldilocks' Podhoretz and the oh so many little bears

Fox News: Obstructionism Is Bad When Dems Do It, Good When It's The GOP

Conservative Author, Tricia Erickson, reports on the irony of CPAC inviting Mitt Romney to speak

Tea Party tells Fox News to 'stop screwing around'