Faux News Spews; I Need Booze

[JMarie]

Tucker Carlson is trying to tell s that Americans have their priorities wrong.  We're all hopped up over immigrant kids being ripped from their parents, but we don't seem to care about all the American kids ripped from their parents (namely fathers) who are incarcerated.  That's where our focus should be, on actual Americans.

I can't watch any more.  I just can't.

[onekidanddone]

1 hour ago, JMarie said:

Tucker Carlson is trying to tell s that Americans have their priorities wrong.  We're all hopped up over immigrant kids being ripped from their parents, but we don't seem to care about all the American kids ripped from their parents (namely fathers) who are incarcerated.  That's where our focus should be, on actual Americans.

I can't watch any more.  I just can't.

Unless those American fathers are men of color.

[Cartmann99]

Pete Hegseth is an asshole.

[JMarie]

https://www.cnn.com/videos/cnnmoney/2018/06/19/fox-coverage-immigration-separation-of-families-judd-apatow-stelter-nr.cnn

(from the video) Sorry, Laura Ingraham, the warehousing of immigrant children is NOT the same as summer camp.

[Smoochie]

How broken do you have to be to hold thoughts like that ... seriously, summer camp!

Not to mention they also pulled out the child actors and that the liberals are giving them scripts crap, what the fuck is wrong with them?????

[JMarie]

Fox News was especially focused on Peter Strzok, along with the usual buzz words (Deep State, DOJ, emails, Mueller, ect)., and how Kirstjen Nielsen's dinner at a Mexican (!) restaurant was interrupted by protesters.  But at the end of her show, Laura Ingraham suggested that, because international adoptions from Central America have declined in the past few years, there are so many children available for adoption, and, well, all those children crossing the border no longer have parents, so they're available for adoption by Americans?  Was she saying that the border is being flooded with little orphans, and we must save them?  Maybe I'm misunderstanding what Ingraham said, or maybe she misunderstood what she said.

[Toothfairy]

5 hours ago, JMarie said:

Fox News was especially focused on Peter Strzok, along with the usual buzz words (Deep State, DOJ, emails, Mueller, ect)., and how Kirstjen Nielsen's dinner at a Mexican (!) restaurant was interrupted by protesters.  But at the end of her show, Laura Ingraham suggested that, because international adoptions from Central America have declined in the past few years, there are so many children available for adoption, and, well, all those children crossing the border no longer have parents, so they're available for adoption by Americans?  Was she saying that the border is being flooded with little orphans, and we must save them?  Maybe I'm misunderstanding what Ingraham said, or maybe she misunderstood what she said.

So this whole thing is for kids to be adopted. Adoption is not the answer to this. I suspect that this is what they may do. An adoption agency just got involved too. Bethany Christian. I hate this country so much. Well, our government 

I can't watch nor listen to faux

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

 

 

[JMarie]

4 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

 

 

Kinda makes you wonder what kind of summer camp Ingraham went to as a kid, and what kind of camp she sends her kids to.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

It's a wonder Shamity can breathe with his head so far up Dumpy's ass: "Fox News’s Sean Hannity: Trump ‘fixed’ the border crisis"

Spoiler

Peril comes with taking up a position in today’s polemical trenches alongside a man with no convictions. In keeping with President Trump’s hard line on immigration, Attorney General Jeff Sessions in April launched a “zero tolerance” policy vis-a-vis “criminal illegal entry.” Noted Sessions, “To those who wish to challenge the Trump administration’s commitment to public safety, national security, and the rule of law, I warn you: Illegally entering this country will not be rewarded, but will instead be met with the full prosecutorial powers of the Department of Justice.”

Omitted from the Justice Department announcement was its core ugliness. The spike in prosecutions, as it turns, out would necessitate the separation of children and parents at the border, with about 2,000 kids so yanked between April 19 and the end of May. Once the backlash surged, so did the gaslighting. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen claimed there was no policy to separate families, that “Congress alone” could fix the matter. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders spoke over and over again about following the law.

Which brings us to Sean Hannity, the Fox News host who appears to seesaw between parroting the White House line and dictating it.

Hannity is known as the president’s “shadow chief of staff,” and a man reaches that exalted perch only via skill. Look, for instance, at how Hannity maneuvered through this week’s awkward events. When criticism of the family-separation policy was peaking earlier this week, Hannity lashed back at the critics by saying such things as, “As I said earlier, no one likes the idea of separating any child from any parent. But this issue has been in the hands of Congress, and right now, the whole issue can be fixed. Every law can be changed, and if they did their job, it would happen. It is the law.” And: “Fix the law.”

Everyone who had stuck a neck out for the Trump-Sessions act of inhumanity — i.e., Nielsen, Sanders, Hannity, Corey Lewandowski, among many others — found themselves exposed on Wednesday, when Trump signed an executive order that backpedaled. “We’re going to have strong — very strong — borders, but we are going to keep the families together. I didn’t like the sight or the feeling of families being separated,” said Trump.

While many of the policy’s defenders can duck the media spotlight for a few days, Hannity has no such luxury. He hosts a weeknight program on Fox News, and his ratings are the envy of his competition. Accordingly, this man has to find the least intrusive, the most logical-sounding, the most plausibly specious way of disappearing his previous remarks and replacing them with a brand-new defense of the president. That genius was fully engaged on Wednesday night, as Hannity offered these words about the executive order:

“And earlier today — by the way, the president has been saying it all week. The president addressed this important issue, and he signed an executive order undoing their damage and ensuring that illegal immigrant families would be kept intact. By the way, not his law, he didn’t pass it. Congress did. Another president signed it, but he fixed it.”

If you’re a Hannity viewer, and you missed the Justice Department policy announcement or the hundreds of fact-checking stories on just who caused this crisis, you might suppose that the family-separation policy fell from the scorching skies of the Southwest onto the vast U.S.-Mexico border. And there it sat, awaiting a “fix” from the president.

Elsewhere in his rant on the matter, Hannity continued casting the impression that the scandal was purely legislative: “By the way, what Donald Trump signed today, let me be blunt, it’ll last five minutes in a courtroom before it’s thrown out, but at least gives Congress time to do their job,” he said.

The contortions showcased on “Hannity” aren’t an isolated or accidental phenomenon. They’re programmatic, not to mention unconscionable. Earlier this week, the general tenor of Fox News prime-time apologism for Trump’s immigration policies caught the attention of Hollywood types working with Fox News’s corporate sibling. In response to a tweet highlighting Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s argument that people should believe the opposite of what mainstream outlets are reporting, “Family Guy” creator Seth MacFarlane riffed, “In other words, don’t think critically, don’t consult multiple news sources, and in general, don’t use your brain. Just blindly obey Fox News. This is fringe [stuff], and it’s business like this that makes me embarrassed to work for this company.”

Antagonism from members of the Hollywood elite, of course, can only delight people such as Hannity, Carlson and Laura Ingraham, the other main feature in Fox News’s prime-time opinion block. In cable news, ratings justify everything, and Fox News opinionators won’t imperil their standing with the backbone of the Trump plume. And that particular demographic cares a great deal about immigration, as voter surveys have concluded. Per the Atlantic:

Contrary to popular narratives, only a small portion—just 27 percent—of white working-class voters said they favor a policy of identifying and deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally. Among the people who did share this belief, Trump was wildly popular: 87 percent of them supported the president in the 2016 election.

We don’t know for sure how many of those folks watch Fox News — probably a great, great number. We do know, however, that Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham fashion their presentations with them in mind. In her remarks this week, Ingraham referred to the facilities holding separated children as “summer camps”; Hannity grasped for any stray talking point to deflect from the president’s culpability; Carlson earlier this year shouted down the president when he appeared to go a bit wobbly on immigration — signals to the Trump White House that if you want to get even more extreme on this policy area, your cheerleaders on cable news remain with you. No one nourishes white cultural anxiety like this crew.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"At least one major advertiser drops Fox News’ Ingraham over migrant comments"

Spoiler

At least one major advertiser has dropped Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show in the wake of her comments on Monday about immigrant children separated from their parents. With advertising time on the conservative daily talk show down since Monday night, it’s possible that other companies have also bailed on “The Ingraham Angle.”

The media and internet company IAC will no longer be running ads for HomeAdvisor or Angie’s List on the show, an IAC spokesperson confirmed on Thursday. The day after Ingraham’s statements, David Hogg, a survivor of the high school shooting in Parkland, Florida, called on advertisers, including IAC, to boycott Ingraham, a reprise of the highly successful boycott campaign he launched against her in April, after she insulted him on Twitter.

During her show on Monday night, Ingraham described the detention centers for immigrant children separated from their parents on the Mexican border as “essentially like summer camps,” further comparing them to “boarding schools.”

Between June 4 and 15, IAC was Ingraham’s second-biggest advertiser, according to Kantar Media, running 13 ads for HomeAdvisor. The company had already stopped airing ads for Match.com in response to Hogg’s previous boycott campaign.

A Fox News spokesperson said the network was unaffected by any advertiser loss resulting from Ingraham’s latest comments.

“There’s been no impact on our business, and new advertisers continue to opt in for our powerful primetime lineup,” the spokesperson said.

The CEO of IAC, Joey Levin, appeared on CNBC late on Wednesday afternoon and seemed to indicate that the company would be pulling its ads.

“Staying politically neutral is a hard thing to do, but I also think it’s an important thing to do,” he said, expounding on the importance of neutrality, before adding, “That’s not to say when we’re seeing things where our ads are, where things are being said that we are not happy with, that we won’t pull them, which is what we did in the case of that particular show.”

Though advertisers have not been as quick to publicly abandon Ingraham as they were during Hogg’s previous campaign — many major national brands are already gone — there was a clear drop-off in advertising time on Ingraham’s show after Monday night. According to Kantar, Ingraham’s show on Monday carried a national advertising load of 10:45, before dropping to 7:40 on Tuesday. Kantar did not have figures available for Wednesday, though a POLITICO review found a roughly two-minute decrease from Monday.

There can be some fluctuation in ad time between programs. According to Kantar’s figures, over the last four weeks, Ingraham has averaged 9:30 in national ads. But Brian Wieser, a senior analyst at Pivotal Research, said that such a sudden drop-off in the middle of a week was “notable.”

“Usually you see stability,” he said. “I’m not aware of most programs changing their ad loads with any regularity. It’s kind of set.”

That would indicate that other companies may have dropped Ingraham, as well. “It’s safe to assume there are more,” said Joseph Bonner, a senior analyst at Argus Research.

Wieser was more cautious about drawing conclusions that additional advertisers had left, calling it “a possibility.”

POLITICO reached out to several advertisers on Ingraham’s show, most of which declined to discuss their ad programs or did not respond.

Though Facebook aired a commercial during “The Ingraham Angle” on Monday, but not Tuesday or Wednesday, a spokesperson for the company said that there had been no changes to the company’s advertising plans with Fox News.

Duracell also aired an ad on Monday, but not Tuesday or Wednesday. A spokesperson for the company declined to say whether there had been any change, however, adding, “Duracell does not comment on media buys.”

Similarly, though Toyota aired an ad on Monday during “The Ingraham Angle,” but not Tuesday or Wednesday, the company declined to answer whether it had dropped Ingraham.

“Toyota’s ads and product placement should not be interpreted as endorsing or condoning the views or actions of the characters or actors, hosts, guests, callers or participants of these shows or events,” a company spokesman said. “We will continue to monitor and make adjustments to our ad placement strategy on an ongoing basis.”

After making her comments on Monday night, Ingraham seemed aware of the reaction forming against her. Toward the end of her show, she tried to address her statements, saying: “Apparently there are a lot of people very upset because we referred to some of the detention facilities tonight as essentially like summer camps. The San Diego Union Tribune today described the facilities as essentially like what you would expect at a boarding school. So I will stick to there are some of them like boarding schools.”

The Tribune story, though, also included the many ways the facilities are not like boarding schools — most notably, the fencing, constant surveillance and the fact that some 10 percent of the children there were separated from their parents at the border. Backlash against Ingraham was swift.

On Tuesday morning, Hogg tweeted, “So @IngrahamAngle we meet again. Who are you biggest advertisers now?”

He then tweeted a list of several Ingraham advertisers.

Prominent figures from the entertainment world have also spoken out against Fox News’ coverage of the child immigrant situation. In response to Ingraham, Steve Levitan, the co-creator of “Modern Family,” tweeted that he would consider taking his show away from Fox’s production studios, saying, “I’m disgusted to work at a company that has anything whatsoever to do with Fox News.”

The previous dust-up between Ingraham and Hogg sprouted from her mocking the Parkland survivor and gun-control activist for lamenting on Twitter how he had been rejected from some colleges. Though Ingraham’s advertising has recovered somewhat from that boycott campaign — which saw companies like Bayer, TripAdvisor, Expedia, Nestlé and Hulu drop the show — her advertising load had not reached her previous levels.

The ardent pro-Trump conservative has courted controversy with other statements, including in February when she said that LeBron James should not express political views, and instead “shut up and dribble.”

After her most recent statements, Fox News released a statement in support of Ingraham, alluding to her adoption of a child from Guatemala.

“Laura Ingraham’s very personal, on-the-ground commitment to the plight of impoverished and abandoned children — specifically in Guatemala — speaks for itself,” a Fox News spokesperson said. “So, too, does her strong belief in a common-sense, legal immigration system, which will continue to be a focus of her show. Fox News will never tolerate or give in to attempts to silence diverse viewpoints by agenda-driven intimidation efforts.”

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

Because of course they did

[Cartmann99]

5 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

According to Brian's Wikipedia page, he is a Catholic and father of three.

Quick & Dirty Agnostic Bible Study Time with your host, Cartmann99

Jesus said, " Hey you see those folks over there who are hungry and thirsty and have no place to stay? When you are a jackass to them, it's the same as being as a jackass to me. If you profess to love me, then don't be a selfish dick to those folks over there who need your help. 

Dude, at the end of this movie, I get the job of dividing everybody up into the cool folks and the jackasses. Trust me, you don't want to end up in the jackass line, so rethink your position while you still have time. "

[fraurosena]

19 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

It's a wonder Shamity can breathe with his head so far up Dumpy's ass

 

Nah, it's not a wonder at all, @GreyhoundFan. Sadly, he can breathe perfectly fine inside that puffed-up windbag.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[JMarie]

6 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Because of course they did

Real World Rachel's husband, Real World Sean, complained about his super generous salary.  Let's see if he gets re-elected in November, here in the real world.

 https://thinkprogress.org/rep-sean-duffy-complains-about-his-174-000-salary-i-drive-a-used-minivan-a717019b8e7c/

[onekidanddone]

7 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Because of course they did

She has friends?

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, JMarie said:

Real World Rachel's husband, Real World Sean, complained about his super generous salary.  Let's see if he gets re-elected in November, here in the real world.

 https://thinkprogress.org/rep-sean-duffy-complains-about-his-174-000-salary-i-drive-a-used-minivan-a717019b8e7c/

What was the name of his co-worker who quit the House to go bitch on Faux? He also threw a hissy fit about his salary, wanted a $30,000 a year housing allowance, and then flounced before his planned exit date.

 

31 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

She has friends?

Only the imaginary kind.

[JMarie]

32 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

What was the name of his co-worker who quit the House to go bitch on Faux? He also threw a hissy fit about his salary, wanted a $30,000 a year housing allowance, and then flounced before his planned exit date.

 

Jason Chaffetz

[Cartmann99]

3 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Thank you for this. I try to keep up with the nutters on Faux, but there was still stuff that I missed in the 500 years that have passed since Monday. 

[Toothfairy]

 

 

This explains how much money they're making off shelters and migrant kids. 

 

 

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/us/migrant-shelters-border-crossing.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur