Let’s start by saying, THE WHITE HOUSE MADE A MISTAKE.  First, a White House aide came forward and said that…yes…FOX News is biased, and often serves as the propaganda wing of the Republican Party.  A brief summary of the events following this statement may be found here.  Recently, another White House advisor, Valerie Jarrett, performed another disservice to the Office of the President, by reaffirming that “of course” FOX News is biased, by hedging on whether or not MSNBC is biased, and by saying that this was part of the White House’s ideology of “speaking truth to power:”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULYycgU8zY4

Why is all of this behavior, on the part of White House staff, inappropriate?  Is it because they are somehow curtailing the First Amendment?  No…they have prevented no one from speaking.  Is it because this is somehow, as talking heads on FOX suggest, tyrannical behavior typical of fascist and communist regimes?  No…George W. Bush and the presidents before him have always been critical of one or more news outlets, and it’s not like the government is shutting FOX down and arresting its people.  No…the reason that this is a mistake, is because it is unnecessary.

1) “Speaking truth to power?“  You are the White House.  You ARE “the power.“  By stooping to engage a lesser entity in a verbal sparring match, you miss the obvious opportunity to “rise above them” instead.  Ignoring them, much as one would ignore the attention-seeking behavior of a screaming child, would serve the image of the POTUS better.

2) What you’ve said is true and obviously so…but is pointless, and if anything, will only serve to boost FOX’s ratings.  Why? Because the people who watch FOX either do so because they LIKE that it is biased in such a way as to agree with them, or because they don’t watch anything else, in which case they do not know that it is biased, nor will they ever accept that it is…because it is the source of ALL their information and it provides the interpretation of said information.

If FOX weren’t biased…why would Shepard Smith being receiving so mach hate mail, and so many threats?  For those who do not recognize the name, Shep Smith is perhaps the LEAST biased anchor on FOX News.  Earlier this year, Smith grew tired of listening to his guests attempt to justify the unjustifiable.  He listened to them try to rationalize our country’s use of torture, while clumsily dodging the fact that it is not simply immoral…but also 100%, clearly, illegal.  When Smith had had enough, he erupted: “We are America, we don’t torture! And the moment that is not the case, I want off the train! This government is of, by, and for the people….I’m saying, whatever it is, you don’t do it for me.”  This is the same Shepard Smith, accurately identified former Vice President Cheney’s stance on gay rights, especially given the fact that his daughter is gay, as a “cop out.“  Smith also questioned the fairness of a story which criticized the Canadian health care system while attempting to discredit the current plans in our country to reform health care…and he rightly pointed out that the proposed reforms in the U.S., have absolutely NOTHING in common with the Canadian system.  Quite recently, Smith apologized after a segment where a Republican candidate was interviewed, but the Democratic candidate was not: “Wow. I didn’t know that was about to happen. My apologies for the lack of balance there. If I’d had control it wouldn’t have happened.”

Want to know something about FOX News’ viewers?  Want to know how one anchor’s attempts to remain objective and squelch bias on that network were rewarded?  He is attacked…threatened by viewers of the network, told by viewers, “You don’t belong here,” and harassed in public.  Do these sound like the kind of people who will respond to the White House’s criticism by changing channels?  Do they sound like people who will come to say, “Wow.  We had no idea that FOX was so unbalanced.  We are upset that they are distorting the news in order to communicate conservative dogma and ideology.”

No. They’ll keep watching FOX News.  They’ll watch it because it agrees with them…because it tells them what they want to hear…and because it plays into their psychological defense mechanisms.  That’s right.  There IS actually a psychological explanation for much of the unreasonable “outrage” and the inexplicable “conspiracy theorizing” that we are all observing.  A brief article in Psychology Today, sums up this all-too-human phenomenon quite clearly.  In short…the human brain WANTS to make connections between events and other things in our environment.  It is part of the way that our minds detect threats, and so the brain rewards this behavior with the release of dopamine.  In other words, it feels good to “connect the dots.“  In times of high uncertainty and stress…like say, a recession characterized by financial instability, high foreclosure rates, and rampant unemployment…or perhaps the election of a president who some view as “strange” and/or “different“…our brains may tend to go into overdrive, drawing connections between as many things in our world as possible, in hopes of identifying threats to our lives, our security, our comfort.  Here’s a fun example from Glenn Beck, who has provided us many such examples:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWL-pfCao-U

What should be obvious, is that such theorizing is not created through sound reasoning…and it is, therefore, impervious to facts and reasoning.  For example, if I take the unreasonable position that I was abducted by aliens and replaced by an identical pod person…you are going to have more than a little difficultly “disproving” this, simply because there is nothing factual or logical in it for you to address.  “Conspiracy thinking” is this way because is not the product of logical thinking…but is instead produced through a powerful defense mechanism.  This should be apparent to anyone who has attempted to “talk down” such a theorist through the communication of facts, or by pointing out that some of their “relationships” or “lines of causation” don’t make any sense.  The scholar’s reaction to such questioning would be engagement, and excitement.  The conspiracy theorists reaction…is heightened defensiveness, or even combativeness.  Your attempt to reason with them is a threat to the delicate and implausible “early warning system” they have meticulously built for themselves.  As crazy as it sounds…they feel safer thinking that the threat to their existence is a “president who is a secret Muslim trying to form a communist shadow government“…then for this NOT to be the case, and for them NOT to have any idea where actual threats might exist, which would make them feel blind and vulnerable.

Unfortunately, all this introspection into “why people think what they think” is lost in the media circus engaged in covering this minor and unnecessary dispute.  CNN, its ratings in the basement, decides to get in on the action by crying out (I’m paraphrasing), “MSNBC is as bad as FOX.“  A little transparent, even for you, Miss Campbell Brown.  Of course, Keith Olbermann can’t resist responding back to CNN…pointing out that “CNN seems to still think it is the primary source for its viewers, that they know nothing until they tune in.  This is, ever increasingly, nonsensical. People now watch news on TV for elucidation and context and analysis. They have brought the facts with them, the way we used to bring TV dinners.”  Meanwhile, no one is examining why people watch FOX News at all…and why so many are willing to believe some of the obvious falsehoods and patently inane conspiracy theories espoused on the network.  Maybe…it’s as simple as the psychology of a scared human being reacting to change and uncertain times.  Whatever it is…nobody is better than FOX News at exploiting it, as Jon Stewart of The Daily Show explains:

…and there are always plenty of links, so let’s get started…

POLITICIANS BEHAVING BADLY:

• Representative Gregg Harper’s (R-MS) organization, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, has been recently called “bipartisan” by Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE).  When asked by Polico’s reporter, “What in the world does the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus do,” one might reasonably expect would be an answer along the lines of, “we support the rights and interests of sportsmen, fishermen, and hunters, in Congress.“  What one might NOT expect, was Harper’s response: “We hunt liberal, tree-hugging Democrats, although it does seem like a waste of good ammunition.“  Very nice…very responsible…very bipartisan.
• Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN), known most for conspiracy theories verging on the truly bizarre, has declared that she will not run for the presidency in 2012.  Which makes sense…since she may not even be able to win re-election for the seat she currently holds, as the residents of her district have grown more than a bit weary of her embarrassing statements, and the negative attention they attract.  However, Bachmann did provide an interesting recommendation for who she thinks SHOULD run:  Representative Steve King (R-IA).  That’s right…she’s recommending the man who brought us such hits as being the only vote against a resolution stating that it was wrong to use slaves to build our Capitol,  sponsoring his own resolution “recognizing the importance of Christians and the Christian faith,” and very recently stating that gay rights are a “purely socialist concept.”  Way to really think it through, Michele…he is a winner.
• I guess Republicans just LOVE Twitter.  It’s also being reported…that they love setting up fake Twitter accounts and webpages, where they pretend to be particular Democratic legislators and candidates.  They then use these fraudulent accounts to misinform and offend voters.  Twitter has caught on and is trying to close all the accounts being used by Republicans in this way.  I think I may know why they like Twitter more than actual blogs:  on Twitter nobody expects you to actually use facts and defend your position…you can get away with just blurting out a few words of nonsense.
• The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has put out an ad, claiming that Republicans have wasted over 1,000 hours in the Senate, through exploitation of parliamentary rules and procedures.  The DSCC does little to show how they arrived at this figure…but I would guess that much of what the GOP has fought for in Congress also qualifies as a waste of time.  Need examples? This clip, a spoof on the iPhone commercials, has been making the internet rounds, and I think it nicely sums up the kinds of platforms and positions the GOP is using to distract our attention, delay progress, and otherwise hinder real issues from being addressed:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_IAN081P8I

THE MEDIA -- HACKS, PUNDITS, AND OTHER INVETERATE LIARS:

• A Telling List: Want to see clips of the “Top Ten Distortions Perpetrated By FOX News?“  Well look no further than this link.  It includes such highlights as accusing an Obama czar of condoning statutory rape, editing a clip of Joe Biden quoting John McCain…so that it appeared as if Biden said the quote, editing a clip of Barack Obama so it appeared that he supported a European-style health care system…when he was actually opposing the idea, AND directly repeating, verbatim, GOP talking points as if they were news.  Enjoy…
• Glenn Beck, Part 1: A Hollywood charity is mounting a push to encourage more Americans to volunteer.  Since Obama has also supported volunteerism as important, Glenn Beck could only imagine one thing:  That Obama is using Hollywood…to turn us into Communist China.  No, I’m serious…here’s what he said: “Celebrities are coming together to make it cool to volunteer. Disney gives you a free day at the park. This is all fine, but doesn’t it seem a little bit convenient that all of this comes out now at the same time the Obama administration is calling for it? Obama controls the message through the media he holds in his pocket. Or in his little hand. And soon if you disobey, he’ll just go [Beck slaps his hand]. Now the message will be embedded in television shows. Isn’t this great? Aren’t you proud of what we’re doing? Oh, this certainly is change.“
• Glenn Beck, Part 2: Why is it that every time I write about something Glenn Beck said, I feel the need to also say, “No really…that’s what he said?“  Well, Beck was busy this week providing more ammunition for whomever is filling out the civil commitment papers on him, claiming that progressives/liberals…wait for it…have historically tried to take away everyone’s individual liberties, and could also be called “tyrants” or “slave holders.”  <<Sigh>>…
• Neocon Frank Gaffney has claimed in the past that Obama was some sort of “secret Muslim,” that there is evidence connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing (there isn’t, of course, and shame on you if you didn’t know that), that Sarah Palin learned foreign policy just by living in Alaska, that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (but that the media hid this “fact” from us), and that Democratic officials who criticized former President George W. Bush…should be hanged.  I tell you all this…so it will be of no surprise that Gaffney has no more decency than he has sense.  In a recent appearance on Hardball with Chris Matthews, he told Ron Reagan…that his father would be ashamed of him:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMOBQZwDMAE

• John Stossel of the FOX Business Channel recently condemned Lou Dobbs’, of CNN, for Dobb’s ongoing “rants about immigrants wrecking America.“  Dobbs has now responded, and rather unkindly: “Fox Business News - their new hire John Stossel -- weighing in with his own brand of myopic idiocy and no information whatsoever sat down with self-described rodeo clown Glenn Beck…what a self-important ass…He doesn’t understand basic economics…He’s just a silly little trick waiting to do some sort of Libertarian flip…Immigrants wrecking America -  I’ve never said anything close to that. As a matter of fact, I embrace immigrants to this country, I welcome them, I want more -- and as a matter of public policy, we need them. In no way am I restrictionist, and to hear this ass continue his act over at Fox News. I just can’t wait until he starts blowing bubbles in the air -- that’s about all he’s equipped to do.“  That’s right Lou, you never said the “immigrants are wrecking America“…oh, except the time you accused them of bringing leprosy here…oh, or the time you claimed they were forming a conspiracy to take back their old national territory…oh, and remember the time you said they were a threat to the entire middle class, and working people everywhere?  Dobbs…before you start trying to play “friend to the immigrant,” and “holier than thou” with John Stossel…you might want to watch some your own clips on YouTube.
• How better to wrap up the “Media Gone Wild” segment of the post, than with an Ann Coulter item.  During her appearance on Joy Behar’s talk show, she stated that all Presidential assassins have been liberals: “As I have not only witnessed in my own life but described in ‘Guilty’, every presidential assassination or attempted presidential assassination was committed by some kind of left-wing loon, communist, anarchist, communitarian, or they had no politics at all.“  Behar attempts to point out that this statement is indefensible and patently false…but Ms. Coulter has never been the one to stop talking so that someone else can point out HOW WRONG SHE IS:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHBR8GYwtiM

COURTESY OF THE PENTAGON AND THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX:

• Apparently, there are at least 220 detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Prison…which have been found to have had no ties to terrorism, 9/11, or to pose any other kind of threat to the United States…but we’re still keeping them in prison.  The Supreme Court is preparing to look at this problem…yet another in a list of how Bush’s use of the military prison conflicts with seemingly EVERY aspect of Due Process listed in our Constitution.  A reminder: the base/prison is technically “American soil” and the Constitution does not say that it applies only to “citizens” but rather to all “persons.”  On a related note, a group called New Security Action, with the support of a number of retired generals and other veterans, has released a series of ads pointing out that Congress should step aside and allow Gitmo, which has come to represent nearly everything wrong about the Bush-Cheney way of thinking, to be closed.
• No surprise: Turns out the Pentagon was engaged in a highly organized program to sell the American people on the Iraq War and other Bush security policies.  Big surprise: Well…it wasn’t so much an “ad campaign” or a “public relations program“…as it was a series of psychological experiments being performed on the American citizenry.  Bonus surprise: One of the chief architects of this program?  He still works at the Pentagon in the same position.  Scully…Mulder…where are you when we need you?
• Most people were a bit surprised at the unmitigated gall of the 30 Senate Republicans who voted against Senator Franken’s (D-MN) bill, which would punish government contractors if they tried to keep employees from reporting rape.  Turns out, they’ve got company -- the Defense Department also doesn’t like the bill…because they would hate to have to do without KBR, Blackwater, and other companies that threaten/coerce/bribe victims of rape to be silent.

THE HEALTH CARE CARNIVAL OF DESPAIR:

• Amidst all the talk about a “public option,” few are paying attention to a development almost as big.  Democrats are very close to being able to strip away the anti-trust exemption given long ago to the health insurance companies, which has allowed them to behave as a monopoly.  Want to know why this is so important?  We know how the free market is SUPPOSED to work…but when a company is allowed to monopolize an industry or a region, then there is no competition to force the company to have fair pricing and offer good service…which leads to our situation today where the health insurance companies have high rates, giant profits, deny service, and mistreat customers.  Also…check out this map.  Yes, it’s disgusting: most states’ residents, RIGHT NOW, only have ONE or TWO insurers that they are ALLOWED to choose from.  “Free Market Capitalists“…are you listening?
• First it was “fat babies.”  Then it was “thin babies.”  Then it was “spousal abuse.”  What new excuse for denying coverage did we find out about now?  Yup…insurance companies, almost all of them, will not allow you to purchase a policy with them if you have been treated for RAPE.  To them…it’s just another “pre-existing condition.“
• The push for the public option is in full swing, and polls show it is working.  More of the public supports it each day, the House is within about EIGHT votes of being able to pass it, and we heard the surprising news today that the Senate may be within TWO votes.  Seriously: TWO VOTES.  Here’s a new ad, featuring Heather Graham, explaining why the option is necessary:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvaJYYeXf70

• Interesting fact courtesy of Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY): 55 of the Republicans opposing the public option because it’s “government-run” or “socialism“…they’re currently ON MEDICARE.  Weiner says, “Even in a town known for hypocrisy, this list of 55 Members of Congress deserve some sort of prize. They apparently think the public option is ok for them, but not anyone else.“  Yes, indeed.

GAY RIGHTS…OR THE LACK THEREOF:

• Wow:  It’s rare that someone actually ADMITS that their argument against gay rights and/or gay marriage is hollow and baseless.  Ross Douthat, conservative columnist for the New York Times, was asked while sitting on a panel for “young, bright, neo-cons” what he thought about gay marriage.  His response:  “I am someone opposed to gay marriage who is deeply uncomfortable arguing the issue in public.“  He explained that his reason for feeling “uncomfortable” discussing the subject, was because his argument against it is purely religious, and that it therefore represents “a losing argument.“  He even went so far as to recognize that because he is embarrassed that he has no real, factual objection to gay marriage…and because he is embarrassed to say what his objection really is…perhaps that means he needs to change his position and support gay marriage.  Wow.  Again…wow.
• Related to the previous item, a mailing sent out in Maine is attempting to persuade residents of the state to vote “Yes” in the upcoming ballot item to prohibit gay marriage.  The reasons that it proposes? I happen to have FiveThirtyEight.com’s summations of the reasons…first, the mailing claims that the new law permitting gay marriage “won’t make gay marriage equal to straight marriage. Instead, it will create a new kind of marriage in which gay people and straight people are equal.“  Well, besides not making much sense…that’s certainly not going to “stir up” too many people.  The second reason it offers: “…we may not have proven any connection between gay marriage and public education, our opponents haven’t disproven the connection, and it’s their fault that the subject came up.“  Impressive…that doesn’t really say anything, does it.  I mean, it sounds like it’s saying something…but then it just…doesn’t.  And third, the mailing offers that, “if gay marriage is upheld, then marriage will exist solely to make people happy.“  Well, it’s hard to see how that’s true…would gay people marrying suddenly make heterosexual marriages “meaningless” and about nothing more than “happiness?”  And hell, I know some people who will tell you that marriage has nothing to do with happiness at all…I’m sure they were just kidding…
• Meet Philip Spooner: Want to hear a86-year-old man…lifelong Republican…and WWII veteran who fought on D-Day…defend gay marriage with all his heart?  Yeah, me too:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrEbJBFWIPk

• Despite the calls from Republicans that protecting gay Americans was the equivalent of protecting practitioners of  pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia…the new Hate Crimes Bill has passed.

MISCELLANY:

• The Nation, a well-known progressive magazine, is publishing a “companion piece” to Sarah Palin’s new book, “Going Rogue.”  It’s titled “Going Rouge” and features an almost identical cover, to match the almost identical title.  Some conservatives have complained that this might lead to some people purchasing The Nation’s book by mistake.  Perhaps they’re right…seeing as both books will likely be placed next to each other on a shelve in the “Humor” section…and due to the fact that many of the people seeking Palin’s book might not know how “rogue” is properly spelled.

That about wraps it up for this week in Reality Liberation.  Have a wonderful weekend, and we’ll see you on Monday…

I wrote that the fundamental difference between most commentary on the left and commentary on the right, is as follows:

Commentary from media outlets and personalities on the left, such as Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, consists primary of opinions, backed up by facts, and infused with passion…with the intention of inciting the passions of their viewers to act on the aforementioned facts and opinions.  This, I called “activism.”

Commentary from media outlets and personalities on the right, such as Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, consists primary of opinions, backed up by misinformation/disinformation, and infused with passion…with the intention of inciting the passions of their viewers to act on the aforementioned misinformation and opinions.  This, I called “propaganda.”

Some insist that this assessment reflects an opinion.  Some attempted to explain that which side is in possession of facts is subject to interpretation.  But see, that’s the funny thing about facts…they are facts REGARDLESS of what my opinion my be.  In truth, they are facts with no regard for who speaks them, or for who believes them.  I will explain, as I believe that there exists in this country a fundamental misconception regarding “fact” and “opinion.”

A SIMPLE EXAMPLE:

If I say that the sun is a near-perfect, non-solid (plasmatic) sphere, consisting primarily of hydrogen and helium…that is a FACT.  It is a fact, because it is supported by a wealth of evidence, stemming from extensive research.  This would be a fact if Keith Olbermann said it…or if Rush Limbaugh said it.  It would be a fact even if I didn’t like Keith Olbermann or Rush Limbaugh and they said it.  It would be a fact even if nobody accepted it…in fact, for a prolonged period of human history, this was either “not known” or “not accepted,” but this didn’t make it any less true, or any less a fact.

If you say that the sun (we’re assuming you’re not speaking metaphorically) is a giant flashlight, that God turns on in the morning and off in the evening…that is FALSE.  It would be just as false if Keith or Rush said it…and just as false even if everyone agreed with you.  You might even offer up facts to support the claim: “It is bright and emits light, like a flashlight…and it is dark at night and bright in the day.“  It should be obvious, however, that these facts do not make the end assertion and more true or and less false.  It is still…not a FACT.

If I say that God made the sun…that is an OPINION.  I can list any facts I wish to support this, but as it is completely impossible for the statement to be proven true or false, it will remain in the realm of opinion.  I might as well have said that “the sun is good” or that “the sun is stupid.“  These value judgments similarly express opinions, and no amount of “proving my case” will change that.  Similar to facts, the opinions do not gain any merit based on who utters them, nor based on how many people share them.

A MORE COMPLEX, AND CURRENTLY RELEVANT EXAMPLE:

If I say that America tortured detainees through the use of waterboarding…that is a FACT.  It is a fact, because it is supported by a wealth of evidence.  It is documented and admitted that we waterboarded detainees, and waterboarding meets every available definition of torture, whether we are looking at Webster’s Dictionary, at our own federal law, or at international treaty language.  This would be true if Keith said it or if Rush said it.  It would be true even if not one single American believed it.

If you say that waterboarding was performed legally…that is FALSE.  Whether or not the President approved it, or Department of Justice attorneys approved it…they do not make federal law (only Congress has that power) and they do not interpret the law (only the courts have that power).  Waterboarding is torture, by all available definitions and it is clearly forbidden according to our federal law and the international treaties that we have entered into.  Keith or Rush could make any statements they wished to to justify it…it would still be illegal and false to say otherwise.  Any facts regarding it’s efficacy (or lack thereof), it’s intended use to “make us safer,” or of the threat presented by a particularly detainee…would do nothing to render this statement any more true, or any less false.  It is still…not a FACT.

If I say that torturing detainees is un-American…that is an OPINION.  I can cite any Christian or historical objections I may have, I may mention that it is an illegal act, but in the end I am making a value judgment  which cannot be proven true or false.  This will remain an opinion regardless of whether Keith or Rush speaks it…regardless of how we feel about those speakers…regardless of how many people agree or disagree with it.

THE ORIGINAL ARGUMENT:

So, when I say that Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow use facts upon which they base opinions, this is a statement which does not reflect my views of them nor their opinions.  The facts which they employ, and which I have extensively researched, would be facts even if they were not the people uttering them.  They would be facts even if I disliked Keith and Rachel…even if I did not believe what they were saying was true.  Now, that being said…they use these facts to formulate opinions, and those opinions I do not always agree with.  That’s to be expected…I may disagree with their opinions…but disagreeing with the facts upon which they form those opinions would be pointless, and indeed, foolish.

In much the same way, when I say that Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Bill O’Reilly use misinformation and falsehoods to form their opinions, this is ALSO a statement which does not reflect on my views of the speakers nor their opinions.  The falsehoods which they employ, and which I have extensively researched, would be false no matter who spoke them.  They would be false regardless of my feelings towards Limbaugh, Beck, and O’Reilly…false whether I liked or disliked them, agreed or disagreed with them.  Sometimes, as with the “flashlight” example above, these individuals will use facts to attempt to “prove” their false statements…but as in the “flashlight” example, these facts do not make their statements any less false.  That being said…since it is these falsehoods which they use to form their opinions, I am most likely to disagree with their opinions.  The falsehoods themselves, being false, do not require my “agreement” nor “disagreement“…but the opinions based upon those statements ARE subject to judgment, and will likely only be agreed with by those who either do not require that opinions be based on facts, or those who do not know that their falsehoods do not represent facts.

To people who do not value the truth, or who cannot tell falsehood from truth, or who cannot separate statements of fact from statements of opinion…their lives AND OPINIONS are at the mercy of any speaker who knows how to capture their interest and how to speak to their fears and prejudices.  Sadly…about one quarter of Americans fit this description, and even more tragically they’re not reading this right now…they’re listening to Rush or watching FOX.