This blog will discuss many issues pertaining to current events and encourages others to discuss and do the same. The goal is to raise the level of discourse and hopefully have a good time sharing thoughts and ideas.
Greetings from the West Coast! Since moving out of Cincinnati to Los Angeles a few months ago, the whirlwind of activity has led to a great lull of posting activity on my part. I have no immediate timetable for a more regular posting schedule, but I did want to pass along this item that has been overlooked by the rest of the corporate media.
I'm sure many of you vividly remember when Fox News and other media outlets began running this video through much of their 24-hour news cycle. It is a video of Conservative activists James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles going into ACORN offices and supposedly getting all sorts of free advice on how to legally get away with prostitution:
The news media, especially Fox, acted as judge, jury and executioner treating O'Keefe as a celebrity (until he was arrested for breaking into a Congressmember's office) and creating such a stir that Congress pulled all Federal funding for the organization.
...a preliminary probe by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)of ACORN has found no evidence the association or related organizations mishandled the $40 million in federal money they received in recent years.
So this is yet ANOTHER instance of ACORN being exonerated of any wrong doing.
I am sure glad that Fox News has issued corrections and given these findings the coverage that they gave to the pimp and prostitute videos.
Wait...they HAVEN'T given this any coverage? Oh well, at least an organization devoted to helping the poor didn't have to fully shut down operations or anything.
The other night, Jon Stewart slammed Fox News for their inconsistency and hypocrisy. Of course this is nothing new, but when Bernie Goldberg lashed out at Stewart on The O'Reilly Factor, Stewart decided to respond.
I've listened to preachers
I've listened to fools
I've watched all the dropouts
Who make their own rules
One person conditioned to rule and control
The media sells it and you live the role
Photo courtesy of here and the lyrics are from Ozzy Osborne's "Crazy Train".
Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) appeared on Glenn Beck's show this afternoon in what can only be described as a complete train-wreck.
Massa has made news as of late due to his announcement that he is resigning his Congressional Seat due to intense pressure from the White House surrounding his potential vote for the health care legislation. The White House has denied this claim and shortly after Massa made this claim, Glenn Beck jumped at the chance to let Massa tell exactly how the White House had pressured him to resign.
This situation got even more complicated earlier today when it was revealed that Massa was being investigated for inappropriately groping male staffers.
Glenn Beck was quite intrigued by the "White House forcing out a Congressman" angle of the story and desperately tried to get Massa to give him all the juicy details. Massa had nothing to offer aside from the "shocking" revelation that Washington is a town that has fallen victim to partisanship.
Beck set up the segment saying that he didn't know who this guy was or if he was a bad guy, but that the allegations of being forced out of office made this an interesting story. After a five-minute build-up, Beck introduced Massa and the first words out of Massa's mouth were:
"Can I just start off with something? I wasn't forced out, I forced myself out. I failed. I didn't live up to my own codes. I own this."
Wow, glad that was settled so quickly! Not only that, but Massa continued on and admitted that he did grope a male staffer and "tickled him until he couldn't breath". Beck was clearly taken aback from the very beginning and it only got crazier from there. Watch the whole intro and the first segment:
Picture of x-ray's, tickle fights, a reversal of position and that is all within the first segement of this program. It actually looks like Beck is the sane one in these clips. Massa would go on to describe an encounter that he had with a naked Rahm Emanuel in the House of Representative's communal shower. From the Huffington Post:
"I was in my first two months," he said. "I was in a battle about the budget, Rahm was angry with me. He poked his finger in my chest while we were in the shower. I went through it on the radio show. Not only did it happen, I will never forget it. Rahm Emanuel doesn't like me. I get it."
Despite all of this, Beck continued to plead with Massa to tell the public something new about how he was forced out of office by the White House, but Massa continued to give him absolutely nothing:
This all led Beck to apologize to his viewers for "wasting their time" with the interview. Just watch Beck's face during this last segment as he realizes that he has successfully booked someone on his show who is spouting off something crazier than him:
This was truly a crazy interview, one that Beck certainly did not see playing out as it did. Former Rep. Massa showed signs of dealing with some intense pressures that are obviously affecting him and led to his being all over the place during this hour of television. I think it can be surmised that the White House probably didn't force him from his job and that there is more that has yet to have been discovered regarding the investigation into Massa's "groping" of his staffers. Massa even stated that there are "probably text messages" out there that could be wrongly perceived.
Beck expected Massa to come on and spill the beans about how the White House is full of unprecedented corruption and how they threw their weight around, forcing Massa to resign. What became clear to Beck from very early on was that his plan backfired in a big way. Massa is obviously having some problems in his life right now and his behavior in this interview exemplified why it was probably a mistake for Beck to try and embrace him politically.
In case you missed it, last week the District Attorney in Brooklyn, NY cleared the local ACORN office of wrong-doing in the incident where Conservative activists James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles posed as a pimp and prostitute to solicit advice from ACORN employees.
What is more is that a law enforcement source brought to light what many have been suspicious of the entire time. From the New York Daily News:
While the video by James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles seemed to show three ACORN workers advising a prostitute how to hide ill-gotten gains, the unedited version was not as clear, according to a law enforcement source.
"They edited the tape to meet their agenda," said the source.
O'Keefe and Giles - who visited ACORN offices in several cities, including its Brooklyn headquarters - stirred controversy when they posted the videos on their Web site.
They were hailed as heroes by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and their footage led several government agencies to temporarily cut funding for ACORN as the prosecutors opened an investigation.
"On Sept. 15, 2009, my office began an investigation into possible criminality on the part of three ACORN employees," Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes said in a one-paragraph statement issued Monday afternoon.
"That investigation is now concluded and no criminality has been found."
So not only was the Brooklyn ACORN office cleared of wrong-doing, but it has become clear that O'Keefe edited his videos in a misleading way.
It is also important to remember that O'Keefe's fellow Conservative activist Hannah Giles, (who played the role of the prostitute in these videos), confirmed that O'Keefe did NOT wear the outlandish pimp outfit when he went into the ACORN offices as many had thought. From BradBlog:
I asked Giles about a criticism that’s often been leveled against them — that they hyped up the video by wearing outrageous clothes in promotional materials and the videos’ introductions that they didn’t wear in the actual stings.
“We never claimed that he went in with a pimp costume,” said Giles. “That was b-roll. It was purely b-roll. He was a pimp, I was a prostitute, and we were walking in front of government buildings to show how the government was whoring out the American people.”
But it's not like O'Keefe contributed to this "confusion" by letting everyone think that he wore that outfit during the "stings" right? Oh wait...
Apparently he was only dressed in khaki's and a white shirt and posed as the concerned boyfriend of Hannah Giles who wanted to protect her from an abusive pimp. Quite different than what Fox News and the likes of Andrew Breitbart led the public to believe.
O'Keefe is currently still under investigation for reportedly trying to conduct some type of "sting" in the office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) back in January. Despite all of this, both O'Keefe and Giles spoke this weekend at the 2010 California Republican Assembly conference in an apparent show of support from some on the political Right.
Remember yesterday when I highlighted Sarah Palin's claims that she joined Fox News because they are "Fair and Balanced"?
Well the Daily Show also found much humor in this statement and not only went after Palin, but Fox News in general. It would be even funnier if the overall impact on today's journalism wasn't so depressing. Regardless, enjoy:
As if we needed another example of how out of touch Sarah Palin is with society, we have this from her interview with Jay Leno earlier this week (h/t Alex Seitz-Wald):
PALIN: I studied journalism, my college degree there in communications. And now I am back there wanting to build some trust back in our media. I think the mainstream media is quite broken and I think there needs to be the fairness, the balance in there — that’s why I joined Fox. Fair and balanced, yes. You know because, Jay, those years a go that I studied journalism it was all about the who, what, when, where, and why, it was not so much the opinion interjected in hard news stories. … As long as there is not the opinion under the guise of hard news stories — I think there needs to be clear differentiation.
There is endless documentation of how Fox News is anything BUT objective and for Palin to state that she joined the organization because they are a positive contributor to the quality of journalism, is laughable on its face.
Glenn Beck's rousing keynote address at CPAC last week was filled with his views on American values, American history and how the Conservative movement must move forward.
One of the most interesting and provocative comments that Beck made during his speech was his belief that the progressive movement is a "cancer" to America. Beck also called for its "eradication". Watch:
This tactic is an interesting strategy that moves forward a certain kind of "elminationist rhetoric" as has been described over at Crooks and Liars. This rhetoric doesn't call for a countering of ideas and debate, it labels a movement as a deadly disease that must be fought and wiped out to ensure the survival of the country. Serious stuff.
Author, journalist and radio-host David Sirota says that we should all thank Glenn Beck...seriously:
We owe this talk-show-host-turned-political-leader gratitude for using his televised keynote address to the Conservative Political Action Conference to so frankly outline what the conservative movement has become — and why it repulses so many Americans.
[...]
The lesson was eminently clear, coming in no less than the keynote address to one of America's most important political conventions. Beck taught us that a once-principled conservative movement of reasoned activists has turned into a mob — one that does not engage in civilized battles of ideas. Instead, these torch-carriers, gun-brandishers and tea partiers follow an anti-government terrorist attack by cheering a demagogue's demand for the physical annihilation of those with whom he disagrees — namely anyone, but particularly progressives, who value "community."
No doubt, some conservatives will parse, insisting Beck was only endorsing the "eradication" of progressivism but not of progressives.
These same willful ignoramuses will also likely say that the Nazis' beef was with Judaism but not Jews, and that white supremacists dislike African-American culture but have no problem with black people.
Other conservatives will surely depict Beck's "eradication" line as just the jest of a self-described "rodeo clown" — merely the "fusion of entertainment and enlightenment," as his radio motto intones. But if Beck is half as smart as he incessantly tells listeners he is, then he knows it's no joke.
[...]
Really, the threat isn't even veiled. To understand it, just ponder comparisons. For instance, ask yourself: What is the difference between Beck's decree and that of Rwanda's genocidal leaders in the 1990s? The former broadcasted a call to "eradicate" the "cancer"-like progressives; the latter a call to "exterminate the cockroaches." Likewise, what separates Beck's screed from a bin Laden fatwa? They may employ different ideologies and languages, but both endorse the wholesale elimination of large groups of Americans.
Sirota does bring up an interesting point in questioning just how one is to separate the calls for the eradication of a movement from the eradication of the members of that same movement. Beck is a massive figure in the tea-party and conservative movement and when he continues to rant and rave about progressivism being a disease and that it must be eliminated, it only throws red meat to the base.
Remember that this is the man who started the "9/12 Project" and who is the hero of many members of the "Tea-Party" movement.
What is continually interesting about Beck isn't just his circus-like antics that make you question his stability, but also how he has fun with facts. Take this recent spat between Beck and Rachel Maddow which Maddow addressed on her MSNBC show the other night:
Rahm Emanuel recently made news when it was publicized that he had called liberals "fucking retarded" during a private conversation.
This sparked outrage from Fox News Contributor Sarah Palin (who has a child with disabilities) who called for Emanuel to resign.
On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh jumped on Emanuel's comments and proceeded to call liberals "retarded" as well. Take a listen:
This set the stage for Sarah Palin to be questioned about Limabaugh's use of the slur versus its use by Rahm Emanuel. Palin was asked about this on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace this past Sunday:
So if you are keeping score at home, in Sarah Palin's mind it is wrong for Rahm Emanuel to call liberals "fucking retarded", but it is okay for Rush Limbaugh to call liberals "retards" because of some perceived level of satire. I, for one, would be interested to hear Palin's analysis of how Limbaugh's so-called "satire" was artfully used on his radio show.
In the meantime, we have the witty and on-point Stephen Colbert to analyze the situation for us:
For the first time in four years, Bill O'Reilly had Jon Stewart on The O'Reilly Factor this past week. I watched the interview as it appeared on the program and found it to be kind of dull. They would both make some uneasy jokes about each other, Stewart would get in some zingers about Bill and Fox, there would be some more funny comments, etc. It was somewhat entertaining, but nothing to write home about.
This was apparently what the producers at the O'Reilly Factor wanted to convey as is evidenced by the full, unedited interview that has since been released (h/t Dave Neiwert). The clips below are compiled by Crooks and Liars to show some extended segments that were edited out of the interview that originally aired on Fox. Stewart really takes it to Fox with some on-point criticisms of the network and it is far better than anything that O'Reilly actually put on the air:
Stewart nails Fox's behavior on several issues and when O'Reilly tries to defend the network, Stewart dismisses him with a "please" and a hand-wave. Fox's behavior as a so-called "news" organization is so obvious and blatant at this point, that it seems ridiculous for O'Reilly to try and put together any kind of defense.
I'll take these unedited clips over what aired any day.
Roger Ailes, President and CEO of Fox News, made a rare appearance as a member of the "Roundtable Dicussion" on ABC's This Weekearlier this morning. Rounding out the panel was Washington Post columnist George Will, Founder of the Huffington Post Arianna Huffington, and economist Paul Krugman. There was some discussion on the election of Scott Brown to the Senate, health care, and the media, but I knew that things were going to be interesting when Ailes began the segment by offering to pose nude for $100.
By watching this discussion it is crystal clear to see why Fox News operates as it does. Ailes defends the crazy rhetoric of Glenn Beck, his network's coverage of President Obama, and the idea that Fox is a "fair and balanced" network. Also funny is how Ailes rails against other media outlets for being slanted and then proceeds to defend Beck's misinformation and spout the same Republican talking points that hosts on his channel espouse.
In Ailes' defense of Glenn Beck he tries to turn the tables on Arianna Huffington by claiming that her website calls him awful names. Ailes, just like Bill O'Reilly has done, accomplishes this by quoting from the "user comment" section of the Huffington Post and trying to project the views of some anonymous commenter onto the founder of the site. These are the fun tactics that we have come to expect from Fox and Ailes shows that not only is this part of his business model, but the views that he finds acceptable for his network. Below are the full videos of the Roundtable segment from this morning:
If you were watching television last night, chances are that you came across the "Hope for Haiti" concert and telethon that was orchestrated by George Clooney to help raise money for relief efforts. This is because the vast majority of television networks made the decision to pre-empt their regular programming to air this event.
If you were watching television last night during this time period and had no idea that this telethon was happening, then chances are, you were watching Fox News who decided to air their normal programming instead of the telethon. (h/t digby)
Perhaps this is not a surprise if you have been watching Fox's (lack of) coverage on the earthquake recently. Either way, here are a few notable moments from last night's telethon and concert that you will hopefully enjoy. Below the videos are also a couple of links that will take you to sites that have helpful information on donating to the relief effort should you feel so inclined.
Glenn Beck is back in 2010 for another year of crazy and he devoted an entire hour of his program to interviewing former Governor of Alaska and new Fox News Contributor Sarah Palin. It's an hour of paranoia, self-victimization, and rehashing everything that you have known about these two figures since 2008. Below is the full interview in various segments, but I also wanted to share how Palin prepared for this interview (according to Beck) to demonstrate Palin's mindset. Listen to this clip from Beck's radio program as he describes what happened pre-interview.
Here is the interview:
and of course, Jon Stewart had a fun take on this interview as well:
Two items of note within the corporate media that struck me today.
The first is that Sarah Palin was hired by Fox News to be an on-air commentator and analyst. While this piece of news is far from shocking, what I found interesting was that Fox deliberately hired Palin to be a polarizing figure. Here are the comments of Fox News Executive Vice President for Programming Bill Shine talking about what he hopes Palin will bring to the network:
"She is one of the most talked about and politically polarizing figures in the country...first off, we hope she brings that."
Palin will begin her tenure on Fox this evening on The O'Reilly Factor. If O'Reilly's comments from yesterday are any indication, he will be welcoming Palin with open arms in her quest to further her political goals.
Won't it be interesting to see how Fox plans to cover news about Palin's political future considering that they are now paying her?
The second media moment that struck me today is yet another reflection of just how out of touch and out-of-whack the corporate media can be. Last night on NBC Evening News, host Brian Williams delivered this introduction to NBC's lead story on the "shocking" revelation that Mark McGuire admitted to using steroids:
Because this is a family broadcast, we probably can't say what we'd like to about the news today that Mark McGwire, the home run hitter, the fan favorite from the St. Louis Cardinals, stopped lying today and admitted that he did it while on steroids. For those of us who were raising young baseball fans and baseball players who looked up to Mark McGwire, that summer of '98 was magical stuff as he and Sammy Sosa vied back and forth for the title of single season home run king. He didn't tell the truth to Congress or to his fans until, finally, formally coming clean today. He's been unable to get into the hall of fame, and apparently, even for him, the shame here was too much.
I was struck not just that this was NBC's lead story of the evening, but at the contempt that Williams had in his denouncement of McGuire. Charles Pierce of the Boston Globe puts it nicely in his post entitled "Brian Williams is Four Years Old":
Oh, for heaven's sake.
Apparently, Brian Williams, the anchor of the NBC Nightly News, had his widdle illusions all broke to pieces yesterday. There are two wars going on. The economy is staggering around like a BC sophomore outside Mary Ann's on St. Patrick's Day. The country is trying to reform a health-care "system" that is killing people out of sheer neglect, and this is what gets Williams -- whose outrage meter seems, well, erratic -- chewing on his own liver? Cronkite on Vietnam, this is not.
Glenn Greenwald agrees:
If Williams has expressed even a small inkling of an objection -- let alone righteous outrage -- over things like torture, lies that led to the Iraq War, chronic surveillance lawbreaking and the like, I'd be quite surprised. Walter Cronkite famously and unusually abandoned precepts of journalistic "objectivity" in order to stand up to the U.S. Government's lies over the Vietnam War; Brian Williams -- who was embedded in the Iraq War and was a reverent commentator regarding everyone involved -- does so in order to stand up to a detested, powerless baseball player. In that contrast one finds a nice illustration of what our modern press corps is.
I have stayed far away from the problems that have surrounded Tiger Woods as of late, but this clip from Fox News is a commentary on Brit Hume, not on Tiger Woods.
On Fox News Sunday, Hume gave Tiger Woods some advice: convert to Christianity to be an example for the world and so that he can be forgiven. Tiger Woods is said to be Buddhist. Watch:
Because if you are Christian, you can commit all the wrongdoings you want and then, be forgiven like nothing ever happened right?
Yesterday, I highlighted this item, where Jon Stewart and the Daily Show caught Fox News and Sean Hannity falsifying video footage in order to make a tea-party protest seem like it was attended by a larger number of people.
Last night on his show, Sean Hannity addressed the criticism he received by Stewart and admitted the error:
While I still have my suspicions that this was done unintentionally (after all, Fox has been instrumental in promoting these events in the past), you have to give some kudos when errors are admitted to on the air. You also have to give kudos to a satirical comedy show that acted as a watchdog on the supposed "Fair and Balanced" network. I wonder if this incident has sparked Hannity to ponder how many other times the Daily Show has been "right" on issues.
This clip is self-explanatory. The Daily Show catches Fox News and host Sean Hannity using old video footage to try and make last week's Tea-Party event in Washington D.C. appear as if it were attended by a larger number of people. (h/t Huffington Post)
This is from a network who continues to claim that they don't have an agenda. Looks like they also don't have an agenda to factually represent the news.
Blogging has been a little sparse as of late due to some research that has consumed some of my time but this item was pretty revealing.
I know it can be hard to keep all the antics of Glenn Beck straight in your mind, but think back to the summer when Beck stated that President Obama was a "racist" and that he had a "deep seated hatred for white people".
Remember that?
Well, media mogul and creator of Fox News has now come out in an interview and stated that while Beck probably shouldn't have said it, he was right to call Obama a racist:
If you didn't want to watch the entire video, here is the quote:
Speers: Glenn Beck who you mentioned has called Barack Obama a racist, and he helped organize a protest against him and others on Fox have likened him (Obama) to Stalin is that defensible?
Murdoch: No, no, no, not Stalin, I don't think, ah, not one of our people.
On the racist thing, that caused a (unintelligible). But he (Obama) did make a very racist comment. Ahhh -- about, you know, blacks and whites and so on, and which he said in his campaign he would be completely above. And um, that was something which perhaps shouldn't have been said about the President, but if you actually assess what he was talking about, he was right.
Dave Neiwert over at Crooks and Liars has a good breakdown analyzing the "who said what and when" in this entry. Here is a clip:
Now, what exactly was it that Obama said that brought Beck to this conclusion -- and which Murdoch claims was a "racist" thing for him to say? Well, he was talking about the Henry Louis Gates arrest:
"Now, I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts what role race played in that, but I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry. Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. And that's just a fact.
As you know, Lynn, when I was in the state legislature in Illinois we worked on a racial profiling bill because there was indisputable evidence that blacks and hispanics were being stopped disproportionately. And that is a sign, an example of how, you know, race remains a factor in this society. That doesn't lessen the incredible progress that has been made. I am standing here as testimony to the progress that's been made. And yet, the fact of the matter is that, you know, this still haunts us. And even when there are honest misunderstandings, the fact that blacks and hispanics are picked up more frequently and often time for no cause cast suspicion even when there is good cause, and that's why I think the more that we're working with local law enforcement to improve policing techniques so that we're eliminating potential bias, the safer everybody's going to be."
And this was racist exactly how?
I suppose if you redefined "racism" to include "bringing up historically and factually accurate information about racist behavior of white people", then I suppose you could say that. I don't think we're there yet, but Rupert Murdoch is obviously working on it.
Just watch how Wallace characterizes Rush Limbaugh in this online video from Fox:
Wow, Limbaugh is "nice", "sweet" and "vulnerable". Don't hold back there Chris. As for the actual interview, Wallace lobs softball after softball at Limbaugh like he did for Cheney. Here are a few of my favorite excerpts:
WALLACE: If you had to bet now, does Barack Obama win re- election in 2012?
LIMBAUGH: If I had to bet now, he will not.
WALLACE: Have you got a name of somebody who’s going to beat him…
LIMBAUGH: No.
WALLACE: … can beat him?
LIMBAUGH: No. I have no clue about that.
WALLACE: If he does win, how is Rush Limbaugh going to handle seven more years of Barack Obama?
LIMBAUGH: You know, I’m glad you asked me that, because one of the questions I always get is, Rush, isn’t Obama — aren’t these Democrats in power good for your business? The way I go about my business, I’m out to get the highest ratings I get every day. I’m going to attract the largest audience I can regardless the news. It’s my — it’s my talent that draws the crowd. The news is incidental to it. No. I’m worried, seriously worried, about the future of the country. I would never put my personal success in front of what I think is something that’s disastrous for the country.
[...]
WALLACE: I think you’re a great broadcaster. How can you possibly be worth that kind of money?
LIMBAUGH: Very simply. Value is determined by what somebody will pay you to do what you do. I’m probably worth more. I’m not complaining. Do not — do not misunderstood. But you know, this whole question — see, because I’m a capitalist. You’re worth whatever you can get. You’re worth whatever your value is, and that’s determined by what somebody’s willing to pay you for it. And the only reason I get that money is because the people who invest in me get results beyond their expectations.
[...]
WALLACE: In the Time Magazine article about Glenn Beck recently…
LIMBAUGH: Oh, yeah.
WALLACE: … they write just as you found your place as the triumphant champion of the age of Reagan, that Beck is tapping into the fear and anger on the right today. Is that why you think he’s struck such a chord, because he taps into the fear and the anger of the conservatives today?
LIMBAUGH: There is a lot of fear. There’s a — there’s a tremendous amount of fear in the country over what is happening in Washington to individual liberty and freedom. He may well have tapped into that. The anger — I think that’s — that’s sometimes overplayed, because it’s become a cliche for the left to say angry white men as a way of denigrating conservative energy and ideology. But there’s no question there’s a lot of anger. And if — and if he’s tapped into that, I wouldn’t be surprised.
WALLACE: When you look at Glenn Beck and you see this explosion, what do you feel?
LIMBAUGH: Well, I’m kind of — I’m kind of proud.
WALLACE: No envy, no competition?
LIMBAUGH: No, no, no, no, no. I mean, my radio audience is astronomically high. I’m — look it, in 1988 there was nobody doing what I’m doing. Nobody. You had — CNN was the only cable network, and you had the three networks and the newspapers. And now look. Now look what’s out — all of this conservative media, conservative talk radio, television, Fox News, the conservative blogosphere. I mean, I — in one way, I could — I could — if I wanted to have my ego to be as big as Obama’s is, I could say, Look what I created. So any success out there on my side, conservative media — damn, if it’s going to help us get this country back, bring more in.
You can watch the whole interview here and remember, this is the "news" programming that Fox claims is "Fair and Balanced".
