Mike Flynn

Tags ››› Mike Flynn
  • What The Media Should Know About Trump's "Political Kitchen Cabinet"

    ››› ››› BRENNAN SUEN

    Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump and his campaign have reportedly received advice from an increasing number of controversial Republican figures and political strategists, including former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, political strategist Roger Stone, and former Secretary of Education William J. Bennett. Various members of this "political kitchen cabinet" have launched sexist attacks against Hillary Clinton, claimed Obama does not love America, and denied the science of climate change.

  • Right-Wing Media Disappear Fact That Conservative Money Swamped Union Message In Wisconsin


    Right-wing media are arguing that Wisconsin governor Scott Walker's victory in the Wisconsin recall election was a victory for the grassroots over unions and progressives. But, due to Citizens United and a loophole in Wisconsin campaign finance laws, the progressive message was swamped by conservative special interest money.

  • Fox News' evening shows still pushing falsehoods about Gulf oil leak

    ››› ››› ZACHARY PLEAT

    Fox News' programming on the evening of June 16 was littered with falsehoods about the BP oil leak, including the false claim that the federal government forced BP to drill in deep water and the myth that the Obama administration has refused foreign assistance. In fact, deep-water drilling is tied to the region's oil supply, and foreign aid is being used in the Gulf cleanup.

  • Who's "tone-deaf politically," Obama or BigGovernment?

    Blog ››› ››› MATT GERTZ

    Responding to President Obama's State of the Union speech, BigGovernment.com editor-in-chief Mike Flynn writes:

    Obama seemed to have a gift for perfectly capturing the tone and mood of the public. It may seem a tired cliche now, but his speeches did much to inspire the hope people attached to his candidacy. Even rather vague or pedestrian phrases seemed to soar in his gifted hands. I had accepted it as a given that, if his political fortunes were ever down, Obama would be able to reverse his troubles by pulling just the right speech from his rhetorical bag of tricks.

    No more.

    Obama's State of the Union address last night was not just overly long and dull, it was totally tone-deaf politically. Coming on the heels of a political upset in Massachusetts, with deteriorating poll numbers and anxious members of his own party, Obama badly needed a home-run to change the political dynamics. He struck out.

    Flynn has every right to say that he finds the speech "overly long and dull," but he offers no evidence whatsoever to support his claim that it was "totally tone-deaf politically." If the speech was such a political disaster, surely poll data would show that the American people rejected it. It does not.


    Of the randomly selected 522 speech viewers questioned by CBS, 83 percent said they approved of the proposals the President made. Just 17 percent disapproved - typical of the high support a president generally receives among those who choose to watch the State of the Union. In January 2002 - when George W. Bush gave the State of the Union Address a year into his presidency - 85% of speech watchers approved.

    Six in 10 of those asked said they thought Mr. Obama conveyed a clear plan for creating jobs, and seven in 10 said his plans for the economy will help ordinary Americans. Another seven in 10 said President Obama has the same priorities for the country as they have.

    The same individuals were interviewed both before and after Wednesday's State of the Union, and after the speech, 70 percent said Mr. Obama shares their priorities for the country, up from 57 percent before the speech.


    A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey indicated that 48 percent of speech watchers had a very positive reaction, with three in 10 saying they had a somewhat positive response and 21 percent with a negative response.


    Two-thirds of speech-watchers who were questioned said the president will succeed in improving the economy, with nearly six in 10 saying he'll succeed in creating jobs.

    As Eric Boehlert has noted, the media seem eager to disappear last night's polling results; it doesn't fit the story that they want to tell.

  • Debunked climate email claims return after right-wing media notice top scientist received federal grant

    ››› ››› GREG LEWIS

    Right-wing media outlets have used a National Science Foundation grant awarded to Pennsylvania State University scientist Michael Mann to study the effects of climate change as an excuse to revive debunked claims about emails that were stolen from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, some of which were written by Mann. Those debunked claims include: that Mann used "'tricks' to finesse his data"; that scientists including Mann discussed "efforts to interfere with the peer review process to stifle opposing views"; and that climate scientists like Mann have "knowingly perpetrated a fraud on the global community" with regard to climate change.

  • In LA video, O'Keefe and Giles expose their own dishonesty


    In making public a video he withheld for more than two months, right-wing activist James O'Keefe finally acknowledged that a Los Angeles ACORN employee "would not assist us obtain a house for our illegal activities" -- an admission that directly contradicts claims by his colleague Hannah Giles that no ACORN employees refused to help them. Moreover, O'Keefe's claim in the video that the Los Angeles employee was the "only" ACORN employee who refused to help is contradicted by the fact that ACORN employees in two other cities contacted the police following their encounters with O'Keefe and Giles.

  • Editor-in-chief of Breitbart's BigGovernment.com says Limbaugh was "mau-mau[ed]"

    Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

    From a post by BigGovernment.com editor-in-chief Mike Flynn titled, "The Mau-Mauing of Rush":

    Rush took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to address the mau-mauing that scuttled his NFL dreams. Personally, I'm a little mystified why Rush would want to own part of a football team. Oversized, preening and pampered athletes set in strictly defined roles and running elaborately orchestrated "plays" designed by a full bureaucracy of coaches seems, frankly, I dunno...unAmerican. Quite unlike the other football, where there are no plays, few coaches and wide latitude for individual initiative and improvisation. (How did we get stuck with the collectivist top-down heavy sport?) But, to each his own.

    Of course the NFL is a private institution which can invite -- or deny -- whomever they'd like to join their owners' club. But the manner in which Rush was sidelined is, at best, distasteful and definitely more than a little troubling.