Author Page | Media Matters for America

Brian Frederick

Author ››› Brian Frederick
  • Carly Fiorina says she apologized to Hannity for her comments about him -- but why?

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    Before an interview with a Sacramento ABC affiliate yesterday, Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina said into an open mic:

    I find it really surprising that on the first day of the general Meg Whitman is going on Sean Hannity. Did you hear that? I think it's bizarre. I mean, she's never been on Sean Hannity. I think it's a very bad choice actually. You know how he is. ... But why, after saying no to all these people, would you go on Sean Hannity? That's not the one you would do. ... Sean Hannity is not an easy interview, you know?

    As ThinkProgress noted, last night on Fox News' On the Record, Greta Van Susteren asked Fiorina about the comments:

    VAN SUSTEREN: And I see that you learned the first lesson about getting caught on a hot mic. And I listened to it, and as I listened, I thought, Uh-oh, Sean's going to be mad at you. [...]

    FIORINA: I talked with Sean a little earlier this evening and I apologized because what I was trying to convey was that he is a tough interview. By the way, that's his job. It's his job to be a tough interview. And I'm going on his show on Friday night and really looking forward to it.

    Why did Fiorina apologize to Hannity? Obviously, she is aware that by upsetting him, she risks upsetting the greatest ally Republicans have on Fox News. Just as Republicans who criticize Rush Limbaugh inevitably apologize to Limbaugh, Fiorina is proving that Republicans cannot afford to lose Hannity's support either.

  • Silver, Chait destroy GMU economist's claim conservatives understand economics better than liberals

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    In an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal, George Mason University economist Daniel Klein purported to show that liberals are less informed about economics than conservatives based on a Zogby poll he conducted with Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic. Klein and Buturovic looked at respondents' answers to eight questions about economics and their political leanings. Here's how Klein explained it in the Journal:

    Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened.

    Consider one of the economic propositions in the December 2008 poll: "Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable." People were asked if they: 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure.

    Basic economics acknowledges that whatever redeeming features a restriction may have, it increases the cost of production and exchange, making goods and services less affordable. There may be exceptions to the general case, but they would be atypical.

    Therefore, we counted as incorrect responses of "somewhat disagree" and "strongly disagree." This treatment gives leeway for those who think the question is ambiguous or half right and half wrong. They would likely answer "not sure," which we do not count as incorrect.

    However, as FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver writes:

    Here's what Klein and Buturovic did. They took a survey using one of Zogby's internet panels, which is by far the worst polling instrument that they could have selected. The panel was not weighted and was not in balance. For example, McCain led Obama 49-43 among respondents to the survey, even though roughly the opposite outcome was observed in the actual election -- and only about 4 percent of the respondents were Hispanic and only 39 percent were female. Then they asked 16 "questions of basic economics", as the Journal's sub-head describes them, and arbitrarily included eight of them in their analysis but threw the other eight out.

    Silver also writes that there are numerous problems with the questions. After taking apart several of them, he concludes:

  • Beck hosts author who has been member of hate group League of the South

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    Just days after pushing the book of an anti-Semitic author, Glenn Beck hosted author Thomas E. Woods, Jr., who has been a member of the League of the South, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has called a hate group. Woods is author of the Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and is author of the upcoming Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century.

    Woods has acknowledged his membership in the League of the South and refused to "repudiate" what he called its emphasis on "the importance of preserving Anglo-Celtic heritage," asking, "Why should every group except Anglo-Celts be allowed to preserve their culture?" (Woods says he is "an Armenian and not Anglo-Celtic at all.")

    Here's how the SPLC describes the League of the South:

    The League of the South is a neo-Confederate group that advocates for a second Southern secession and a society dominated by "European Americans." The league believes the "godly" nation it wants to form should be run by an "Anglo-Celtic" (read: white) elite that would establish a Christian theocratic state and politically dominate blacks and other minorities. Originally founded by a group that included many Southern university professors, the group lost its Ph.D.s as it became more explicitly racist. The league denounces the federal government and northern and coastal states as part of "the Empire," a materialist and anti-religious society.

  • Fox News keeps praising Bobby Jindal -- why?

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    As Fox News and the right-wing media continue their endless attacks on President Obama over his handling of the oil spill, they have elevated Gov. Bobby Jindal as the real leader of this crisis. Eric Bolling's comments on Fox News this morning were pretty typical:

    BOLLING: Here's what they should do. Forget BP. Forget the government. What should happen is BP should open their checkbook up hand it over to Gov. Bobby Jindal and let him fix this problem. He's the only one with a clue. He's the only one doing anything. And the government should say, hey, you know what Governor, your boot's on the ground. You're there. You know what you're doing. We're gonna bypass all these permits that you need to have to build your sand booms and your sand berms and stop the oil from hitting land. Period.

    And here was Mike Huckabee this morning on Fox & Friends Saturday:

    HUCKABEE: Here's what he [Obama] needed to have done. First, immediately go, show presence and identity with the people of the Gulf Coast. More importantly, with the leaders of the Gulf Coast ... Turn the governors loose. Bobby Jindal knows what he needs to be doing. They told him he couldn't build the sand berms because we hadn't done an environmental impact. Well, guess what, sand is a less environmental impact than oil. Let him put the sand ... And sent the Corps of Engineers in.

    Bolling and Huckabee apparently missed the memo, because Jindal said on Wednesday that the federal government did approve his plan to build miles of sand barriers and that they would require BP to pay for it.

    But Jindal is not being praised by Fox News because of the specifics of his sand berms plan, as the quotes from Bolling and Huckabee make clear. Rather, he has become a media darling because of his criticism of the federal government's handling of the situation. Plain and simple.

  • Fox, right-wing advance ridiculous résumé attack on IL Dem candidate Giannoulias

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    Yesterday, the Weekly Standard ran a ridiculous hit piece on Alexi Giannoulias, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Illinois, accusing him of misrepresenting his record. The attack follows Giannoulias' opponent Mark Kirk's false claim that he was awarded a top Navy award for service during NATO's conflict with Serbia. And his false claim that he served in Operation Iraqi Freedom. And his claim that he came under fire aboard an aircraft in Iraq, which he reportedly said may not be true.

    Kirk eventually said, ""I want to be very contrite and say there is a casualness with which I sometimes describe military details. And if it gave the impression that my military record is larger than it was, I want to apologize." (The old non-apology apology.)

    So it was only a matter of time before the conservative noise machine fired back at Giannoulias' résumé. In a post titled, "Giannoulias's Embellishment", The Weekly Standard's Daniel Halper pointed to an error on Giannoulias' official website. The website previously stated: "He [Giannoulias] founded and chairs the AG Foundation, a not-for-profit charity that donates money to treat child-related illnesses, curb poverty and assist disaster relief organizations."

  • LVRJ publisher Frederick playing global warming denier again

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    In a June 3 blog post, Las Vegas Review-Journal publisher Sherman Frederick demonstrated that his daily reading consists primarily of the Drudge Report. Frederick picked up on an article linked to by Drudge from the New Scientist reporting that there are some islands in the Pacific that are growing in response to rising tides. In a post titled "More global warming debunked," Frederick reprinted portions of the article and concluded: "Paging American liberals: Isn't it time for a little public confession on this spectacularly wrong environmental bed time story?"

    Of course, nothing in the article debunks global warming. And putting aside the validity of the study, the article itself states that the scientists behind the study "warn that while the islands are coping for now, any acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise could overtake the sediment build up" and "no one knows how fast the islands can grow." And the article also quotes an expert stating that "it's not possible to simply move people living in urbanised areas to new land."

    But other than that, this one article obviously proves that global warming is a "spectacularly wrong environmental bed time story."

  • Glenn Beck attacks Saudi prince who owns large stake in News Corp

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    Given Glenn Beck's passion for finding hidden connections -- no matter how trivial or tangential -- it failed him big time tonight on his Fox News show. He apparently did not realize, as Think Progress noted, that the Saudi prince he attacked tonight, Al-Waleed bin Talal, is the largest stakeholder in News Corp outside the Murdoch family. Beck referenced the aid Al-Waleed offered the United States after 9-11 and said, "You already sent us help. And you flew that help into the trade centers."

    Beck was defending Israel over the flotilla situation by creating a hypothetical example of Saudi Arabia seeking to park a boat full of its citizens on the Hudson River in the days after 9-11. (Yes, it was as stupid as it sounds.) Beck said the U.S. would be "insane not to" act as Israel did toward the hypothetical Saudi Arabian boat. He then said:

    Didn't we almost do that? Do you remember what happened after 9/11 with Rudy Giuliani?

    Saudi Arabia came and said we want to help. This guy [Al-Waleed] came over and said I want to give you a $10 million check. Rudy Giuliani said you see that over there? I don't think we want your help. You already sent us help. And you flew that help into the trade centers.

    The same prince later blamed policy for the attacks. Giuliani said take your check. We don't want your money.

    Oh to read the internal memos flying around at News Corp right now...

  • Hannity falsely claims Romanoff "is admitting he was offered a job" to exit Senate race


    Sean Hannity falsely claimed that Andrew Romanoff, who is running against incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado's U.S. Senate election, "is confirming just now tonight he was offered a position" if he would exit the race. In fact, Romanoff reportedly stated: "At no time was I promised a job, nor did I request [White House deputy chief of staff Jim] Messina's assistance in obtaining one."

  • CNN's Erickson appears on Fox's Hannity with WND's Corsi -- why?

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    On Tuesday, Hannity's "Great American Panel" included CNN contributor Erick Erickson and senior writer and discredited birther Jerome Corsi. Erickson seemed right at home along Sean Hannity and Corsi, which makes it all the more curious why CNN would allow him to appear.

    It was not Erickson's first appearance on Hannity since joining CNN and Hannity only mentioned Erickson's credentials when introducing him.

    Whether or not CNN was fully aware of (or cared about) Erickson's history of inflammatory rhetoric before hiring him as a contributor, it is now responsible for his rhetoric since he joined the network.

    Since the network's March 16 announcement, Erickson has suggested he'll resort to violence against census workers and claimed that President Obama "really doesn't like the military" because he didn't lay a wreath at Arlington Cemetery on Memorial Day.

    Erickson has said he got a "nice deal" from CNN. So why is CNN still paying Erickson if they're going to let him go on Fox News (presumably) for free?

  • Even Fox News ignoring latest O'Keefe/Breitbart project

    Blog ››› ››› BRIAN FREDERICK

    If you had tuned into Fox today to hear about the latest project of conservative filmmaker James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart, you would have been sorely disappointed. O'Keefe's exposé on purported abuse and waste by U.S. census workers wasn't even mentioned on Hannity, Glenn Beck or The O'Reilly Factor.

    Talk about a flop.

    When O'Keefe's first ACORN video debuted on Beck's show last fall, the next day Fox News devoted at least 17 segments on six different programs to the video.

    So how to explain Fox News' apathy toward the latest video?

    Perhaps Fox News got the memo about trusting O'Keefe and Breitbart.

    Perhaps Fox News found O'Keefe's editing of the latest video to be deceitful.

    Perhaps Fox News fails to see anything egregious or compelling in the video.

    Or maybe Fox News is just upset O'Keefe and Breitbart gave their exclusive to ABC's Good Morning America.

    Whatever it is, let's hope that Fox News' indifference means these two con artists will finally go away.