The sickness that infects news and politics, and its commensurate cynicism, can be directly traced to the creation of Fox News — “a political operation that employs journalists,” in the words of Gabriel Sherman, author of the new book on Roger Ailes, “The Loudest Voice in the Room.” There is no bigger media story in the last 50 years than the creation of a news network run by political hacks, says Sherman. I’m inclined to agree.
No, you can’t deny women their basic rights and pretend it’s about your ‘religious freedom.’ If you don’t like birth control, don’t use it. Religious freedom doesn’t mean you can force others to live by your own beliefs.
Nor has it been since Europeans claimed it their own and forced Native Americans out of the way. What O’Reilly means when he says “traditional” is “when no one but White people were in power.” He would deny that, but those are the conditions he’s talking about.
"The white establishment is now the minorty."
This is, of course, false, and could not be argued by any reasoning person since there are more White people than any other kind of person in this country by a wide margin.
"There are 50% of the voting public who want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama."
This is somehow more racist than the other two comments. He’s built his argument that Obama won (he hadn’t won officially yet, but…) based on the dwindling White population and is now saying that the new makeup of the country (we’ve established this to be non-White people) are people who “want things.” “Wanting things” is O’Reilly’s way of saying “welfare.” He’s saying that people of color in America want welfare and don’t want to have to work. He’s saying that White people work hard for what they have and minorities don’t. It’s not thinly veiled racism, it’s traditional racism.
Stephen does Mitt Romney’s “confident half-smile.”
Reposting because I just had a conversation about this. I was kind of shocked to see that the next-day analysis from the mainstream media of one candidates facial expressions during the debates was NOT what Colbert is illustrating here. I heard things about Obama’s smirk but nothing about the this, which I thought was the more egregious facial distortion of the night.
Romney has trouble polling as a “regular guy” for all sorts of reasons and he’ll never be identifiable because the dude is a total political construction. Pause the debate at any point last night. Pause any of his debates from the republican primaries from months ago. Same face. Same benign, construction of synthesized pleasantness designed to betray no real emotion and offend nothing. It’s not that face of a human at rest, nor is it one of any feeling. It’s the type of face a manufacturer might place on a robot while attempting to approximate inert human features while knowing he doesn’t want the thing to appear cold. The result is a total feeling of coldness. It’s like how your parents would scare you more when they were quiet than when they were yelling. You can’t see the anger on Romney’s face because the construct is so solid. You can just feel it.