This is what MEDIAMATTERS does.

[Calabrio]

Media Matters Gives Glenn Beck’s Co-Hosts The Shirley Sherrod Edited Audio Treatment
by Steve Krakauer
August 6th, 2010


Let’s end the week with some Shirley Sherrod-ing – editing a clip to make it sound like a person is saying something that is actually the complete opposite of what they’re saying.

In this case, the offender is Media Matters, which tries to prove that Glenn Beck’s radio co-hosts were saying Keith Olbermann was responsible for the deadly Manchester workplace shooting.

Here was Media Matters’ (sic’ed) headline: “Beck sidekicks Gray and Burguiere: Keith Olberman and media responsible for Manchester shooting.”

The sidekicks are Pat Gray and Stu Burguiere, who co-hosted with Beck out today. And why did Media Matters write this? Well, because that is what Gray and Burguiere said – at first. Gray: “Obviously Keith Olbermann is responsible for those eight people dead.”

And Burguiere: “A guy like that who’s a little bit unstable anyway can’t help but react to the constant pressure of Keith Olbermann on the air on MSNBC and all of MSNBC talking about all the racism there is out there.”

But the problem is, the co-hosts were being sarcastic, to make a point. A minute later they get serious, and Stu says “Keith Olbermann was not responsible for any shooting,” but that part is conveniently out of the Media Matters audio. Because Media Matters cut the audio right before they make it clear.

Right after the Media Matters edit, Burguiere says:

Obviously we’re making a point here. Let’s move that to the case against the tea party members. They’re constantly convinced that the government is after them, that they are going to come take their guns. Well, who is always talking about that? Glenn Beck. So therefore he’s responsible for every time anyone does anything, even, you know, violent.​

Later, Gray says, “Just like he can’t blame Keith Olbermann for this dumb racist thing.” And Burguiere reiterates: “Keith Olbermann was not responsible for any shooting. Keith Olbermann is not, it’s not possible for him to sit there and inspire that by talking about a topic.”

> Update: MMFA has updated their post:

CORRECTION: The original headline on this clip did not make clear that Beck’s co-hosts were being satirical when they linked MSNBC host Keith Olbermann to the Manchester shooting. The original clip also did not include their subsequent statements that Olbermann was not responsible for the shooting. Media Matters regrets the error.

In other words – the exact opposite of Media Matters’ post. Here’s the full audio of the segment:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/medi...rrods-glenn-becks-co-hosts-with-edited-audio/

 

[Calabrio]

This is what Media Matters does.

As first reported by Mediaite: Media Matters Gives Glenn Beck’s Co-Hosts The Shirley Sherrod Edited Audio Treatment.

Of course, Media Matters does this sort of thing all the time. It is their entire business plan. They intentionally take people out of context to try and fire up their very stupid readership in effort to get conservatives off the air. Sure, they’re typically not quite as obvious about it, but their entire existence is based on a modified version of what happened on Friday.

As Mediaite put it:

Let’s end the week with some Shirley Sherrod-ing – editing a clip to make it sound like a person is saying something that is actually the complete opposite of what they’re saying.
In this case, the offender is Media Matters, which tries to prove that Glenn Beck’s radio co-hosts were saying Keith Olbermann was responsible for the deadly Manchester workplace shooting.
Here was Media Matters’ (sic’ed) headline: “Beck sidekicks Gray and Burguiere: Keith Olberman and media responsible for Manchester shooting.”​

Why would we say such a thing? Well, here’s an indicator from approximately two sentences after their transcript ended:

Right after the Media Matters edit, Burguiere says:
Obviously we’re making a point here. Let’s move that to the case against the tea party members. They’re constantly convinced that the government is after them, that they are going to come take their guns. Well, who is always talking about that? Glenn Beck. So therefore he’s responsible for every time anyone does anything, even, you know, violent.

Then, after rehashing one of the more recent and pathetic attempts at blaming Glenn for murder, we went a little further:

Later, Gray says, “Just like he can’t blame Keith Olbermann for this dumb racist thing.” And Burguiere reiterates: “Keith Olbermann was not responsible for any shooting. Keith Olbermann is not, it’s not possible for him to sit there and inspire that by talking about a topic.”

The best part about this fiasco is not that Media Matters tried to take us out of context, that’s what they do every day. It’s not even that they were caught in such an embarrassingly public way that they were forced to issue a correction.

The best part is that Media Matters is one of the most guilty parties when it comes to idiotically blaming hosts for violence. When the target is Glenn Beck they find this “blame the host for violence” line of thinking to be completely sensible truth telling. But, when the name is switched to Keith Olbermann, it becomes so ridiculous that it warrants some sort of mega-media-alert.

In other words, Media Matters’ arguments are so awful, that when the names change, they issue alerts on themselves.

Here’s the truth. It’s ridiculous for either side to engage in this nonsense. If you want to blame celebrities for the murders committed by people who watch them—why stop there? Blame the magazines they read, the sports teams they are fans of, and the cereal they eat.

Did anyone blame Jodie Foster for inspiring John Hinckley to shoot Reagan? It wasn’t Jodie Fosters fault. It was Hinckley’s. If someone blamed Foster, than they were as idiotic as Media Matters is today. Crazy people do crazy things. Unless Keith Olbermann starts advocating for the murder of Tea Party members, it’s probably best that we just keep it simple–blame the murderers for their murders—and leave it at that.

Read more here, here, and here.

VIDEO: And, don’t miss our Sherrod-esque firing from this morning…

 

[Calabrio]

Media Matters "corrected" the webpage after the public shaming, however the original, priceless "comments" still remain.

 

[fossten]

chirp, chirp

chirp, chirp

 

[Calabrio]

It's a little early for the crickets.... it's not even lunch time on the West coast.

 

[fossten]

Just making a prediction.

Those who point out "hypocrisy" rarely if ever bother to recognize the beam in their own eye.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

CORRECTION: The original headline on this clip did not make clear that Beck’s co-hosts were being satirical when they linked MSNBC host Keith Olbermann to the Manchester shooting. The original clip also did not include their subsequent statements that Olbermann was not responsible for the shooting. Media Matters regrets the error.

So when MM makes an error in context, they issue a correction AND an apology, whereas Breitbart does NOT. Got it.

I wouldn't put it past Keith or Rachael to chastize MM on air either, something unheard of at FauxNews.

LIBERAL TROLL WARNING:​

The above post was made by a LvC member that has been branded a “LIBERAL TROLL” by the “Established Members” of the LvC Politics & Current Events Forum (P&CEF). The content of the above post is exclusively that of the “LIBERAL TROLL” and in no way reflects the opinions of the “Established Members” and in fact, is subject to the following actions by the “Established Members”: Ridicule, dismissal, ad hominem personal attacks, misconstrue, misdirection, projection, rejection, censorship, fact-free criticism, and flat-out talking bad about his mother.

Other LvC P&CEF members are free to, and are in fact encourage to establishing “street-cred” by joining the “Established Members” in their participation of the above actions. Your participation in piling on this and all other “LIBERAL TROLLS” will be rewarded with 24/7 online moral support by the “Established Members” and like-minded LvC P&CEF moderators. If you don’t agree with something that this, or any other “LIBERAL TROLL” posts regardless of factual basis used, merely notify one of the LvC P&CEF moderators and they will promptly edit or delete offending post as appropriate. We, the “Established Members” of the LvC P&CEF strive for political unity on this forum and will stop at nothing to purge all “LIBERAL TROLLs” to achieve that goal.

 

[Calabrio]

So when MM makes an error in context, they issue a correction AND an apology, whereas Breitbart does NOT. Got it.

Do you think that some one on that webpage honestly made a mistake?
If so, how?

The reality is, this wasn't an isolated incident with Media Matters, this is their MO.
They are not simply a website with an opinion or editorial slant, it is a political propaganda machine funded by George Sorros. This example presented by Beck simply demonstrates this very vividly and with no uncertainty.

The "correction" was only made after they were "caught" in a fairly high profile way, days later.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

So you are saying that MM essentially does the same thing as Breitbart, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Malkin, that ugly blond horse-faced bitch and Limbaugh? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you that there is political activism on the left to counter that on the right!

Your argument: "Wahh, wahh, they do it too!!" is immature at best.

 

[fossten]

Media Matters good, Breitbart bad, got it.

Hypocrite.

 

[FIND]

Those who point out "hypocrisy" rarely if ever bother to recognize the beam in their own eye.

Just wanted to quote this, because it makes me laugh. I bet you if you searched this forum for hypocrisy or hypocrite, more hits would turn up on posts you make than ANY other person on here.

 

[Calabrio]

So you are saying that MM essentially does the same thing as Breitbart, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Malkin, that ugly blond horse-faced bitch and Limbaugh? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you that there is political activism on the left to counter that on the right! :rolleyes

Your argument: "Wahh, wahh, they do it too!!" is immature at best.

That's not my argument at all. You're projecting.
Breitbart, and the rest of your list, don't do this.
Media Matters does.

But thanks for your mature response.
Good thing you have a disclaimer.

 

[shagdrum]

So you are saying that MM essentially does the same thing as Breitbart, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Malkin, that ugly blond horse-faced bitch and Limbaugh? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you that there is political activism on the left to counter that on the right!

So, it has grown from Breitbart to include Beck, Hannity, etc.?! You have any proof for those claims?

At best you can point to one questionable incident with Breitbart. However, since it's inception Media Matters has had a pattern of taking people out of context and misrepresenting. to equate the two is to mislead.

 

[foxpaws]

Sorry foss - just got on, and just noticed this after writing in another thread...

Gak - I hate it when this happens - Media Matters should know better, and should be hoisted on their own petard. I think what they did was really quite reprehensible - especially since it was obvious that they had to have had the complete show.

I hope they learn a lesson - and skewer them all you want - they deserve it. This is indefensible.

 

[fossten]

Sorry foss - just got on, and just noticed this after writing in another thread...

Gak - I hate it when this happens - Media Matters should know better, and should be hoisted on their own petard. I think what they did was really quite reprehensible - especially since it was obvious that they had to have had the complete show.

I hope they learn a lesson - and skewer them all you want - they deserve it. This is indefensible.

Fair enough, fox...

Looks like you're on your own, Johnny.

 

[FIND]

Fair enough, fox...

Looks like you're on your own, Johnny.

I don't think he was really defending them much either....

I think the closest he got to it was when he sarcastically responded with "shock" to the news that mediamatters does the same thing you see on FauxNews every day.

 

[shagdrum]

I think the closest he got to it was when he sarcastically responded with "shock" to the news that mediamatters does the same thing you see on FauxNews every day.

Considering you are referring to "Faux" News, I would assume you would agree with that sentiment. Do you have any evidence?

 

[fossten]

I'll bet FIND never watches Fox News. He just assumes it's fake because somebody told him.

 

[Calabrio]

I hope they learn a lesson - and skewer them all you want - they deserve it. This is indefensible.

That's what they do daily.
That's basically what they do exclusively. Take comments either completely out of context, or transcribe three and four hour radio shows and then showcase when the host misspeaks or gaffes.

Everyone knows that Media Matters isn't a non-partisan website.
But we both know that Media Matters is a political tool, an attack machine that injects fake "news" into the mainstream media echo chamber.

It's funded by George Sorros (indirectly) and it's virtually the same organization as the Center for American Progress. Podesta is directly involved in both of them.

It's not a watchdog, along the lines of the Media Research Center, which has an opinion, but does so fairly. It's a political hit machine-

 

[FIND]

Considering you are referring to "Faux" News, I would assume you would agree with that sentiment. Do you have any evidence?

...One would think that the tongue in cheek nature of that reference would be obvious..... The only reasons I call it Faux news is because 1: it works just like when you were in grammar school and called people names based upon their name. 2: It is a sensationalist slanted "news" network, not to say that CNN isn't slanted either. 3: Somewhere deep inside of myself, it gives me pleasure to make fun of things that so obviously beg for it.

Honestly, if you guys weren't SO hard core right wing, and so nuts about things like that, I have plenty of crap I complain about on the left too. I just don't feel like giving you guys ammunition, since you don't ever want to step down from your pedestals and talk like decent human beings.

LIBERAL TROLL WARNING:​

The above post was made by a LvC member that has been branded a “LIBERAL TROLL” by the “Established Members” of the LvC Politics & Current Events Forum (P&CEF). The content of the above post is exclusively that of the “LIBERAL TROLL” and in no way reflects the opinions of the “Established Members” and in fact, is subject to the following actions by the “Established Members”: Ridicule, dismissal, ad hominem personal attacks, misconstrue, misdirection, projection, rejection, censorship, fact-free criticism, and flat-out talking bad about his mother.

Other LvC P&CEF members are free to, and are in fact encourage to establishing “street-cred” by joining the “Established Members” in their participation of the above actions. Your participation in piling on this and all other “LIBERAL TROLLS” will be rewarded with 24/7 online moral support by the “Established Members” and like-minded LvC P&CEF moderators. If you don’t agree with something that this, or any other “LIBERAL TROLL” posts regardless of factual basis used, merely notify one of the LvC P&CEF moderators and they will promptly edit or delete offending post as appropriate. We, the “Established Members” of the LvC P&CEF strive for political unity on this forum and will stop at nothing to purge all “LIBERAL TROLLs” to achieve that goal.

 

[FIND]

I'll bet FIND never watches Fox News. He just assumes it's fake because somebody told him.

And I'll bet you masturbate to Megyn Kelly instead of actually watching her segments.



See what I did there? I made a stupid insult for no reason too.

LIBERAL TROLL WARNING:​

The above post was made by a LvC member that has been branded a “LIBERAL TROLL” by the “Established Members” of the LvC Politics & Current Events Forum (P&CEF). The content of the above post is exclusively that of the “LIBERAL TROLL” and in no way reflects the opinions of the “Established Members” and in fact, is subject to the following actions by the “Established Members”: Ridicule, dismissal, ad hominem personal attacks, misconstrue, misdirection, projection, rejection, censorship, fact-free criticism, and flat-out talking bad about his mother.

Other LvC P&CEF members are free to, and are in fact encourage to establishing “street-cred” by joining the “Established Members” in their participation of the above actions. Your participation in piling on this and all other “LIBERAL TROLLS” will be rewarded with 24/7 online moral support by the “Established Members” and like-minded LvC P&CEF moderators. If you don’t agree with something that this, or any other “LIBERAL TROLL” posts regardless of factual basis used, merely notify one of the LvC P&CEF moderators and they will promptly edit or delete offending post as appropriate. We, the “Established Members” of the LvC P&CEF strive for political unity on this forum and will stop at nothing to purge all “LIBERAL TROLLs” to achieve that goal.

 

[Calabrio]

And I'll bet you masturbate to Megyn Kelly instead of actually watching her segments.

See what I did there? I made a stupid insult for no reason too.

No, you projected again.

 

[foxpaws]

That's what they do daily.
That's basically what they do exclusively. Take comments either completely out of context, or transcribe three and four hour radio shows and then showcase when the host misspeaks or gaffes.

Everyone knows that Media Matters isn't a non-partisan website.
But we both know that Media Matters is a political tool, an attack machine that injects fake "news" into the mainstream media echo chamber.

It's funded by George Sorros (indirectly) and it's virtually the same organization as the Center for American Progress. Podesta is directly involved in both of them.

It's not a watchdog, along the lines of the Media Research Center, which has an opinion, but does so fairly. It's a political hit machine-

It is why I don't use Media Matters as source - it is biased. They watchdog - but they also need watchdogging. You need to tender their comments...

However, by your standards Fox News would also have to come into question because of ownership and management, as well as their past actions. Just having Ailes as the head of Fox News should send as many warning bells going off as having Sorros funding MM.

Can Fox News be a good news source - of course, but I think you also have to look at them closely, they are not 'unbiased'. When you run ads for rallies that are political in nature (such as the tea party rallies), which are not paid for by outside sources, but are produced and aired at the expense of the network, that is changing the focus from just reporting the news.

Having opinion is one thing - I like opinion, give me the goods and the bads - and give me your opinion if you are someone who is knowledgeable. But, Fox News has begun moving away from opinion and straight reporting, and is starting to 'create' news.

If CBS news ran ads in 2004 for the groups that were protesting the war in Iraq and were calling for the removal of Bush, produced those ads, and those ads were for rallies held across the country, and CBS did it for free, at no cost whatsoever, ran no disclaimers, pushed it like 'independent news' everyone would have been screaming for heads to roll at CBS.

Rightly so.

When you start to be a part of the news, a 'creator of news' rather than a reporter of news, or stating opinions on the news, things start to shift. When you support, with air time, and production time, a political party, your focus is shifting from merely reporting to making a political statement. You have a stake in the game - which alters your view of the game. How much of your reporting is going to be skewed favorably to your players in the game? Fox News, with the types of ads it has produced and ran for free, now has a monetary interest in the game. They need to have some sort of return for that investment. That 'free airtime' and 'free production time' need to produce income - income in the form of added viewership.

I think there are parts of Fox News which have merit, but the actions of management to create news has a tendency to then create a pall across the entire network. You have to question, to some extent, how far are they going to go to bolster their investments?

 

[Calabrio]

Are you equating Roger Ailes to George Sorros?
Explain to me how they are the same.

Ailes has been in the media his entire career and was associated with Republicans as a media consultant through 70s and 80s.

George Sorros.....
from former radical leftist David Horowitz's website:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977

And a list of organizations that he's donated tens of billions of dollars to:
Organizations that, in recent years, have received direct funding and assistance from George Soros and his Open Society Institute (OSI) include the following. (Comprehensive profiles of each are available in the "Groups" section of DiscoverTheNetworks.org):

* Alliance for Justice: Best known for its activism vis a vis the appointment of federal judges, this group consistently depicts Republican judicial nominees as "extremists."

* America Coming Together: Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to coordinate and organize pro-Democrat voter-mobilization programs.

* America Votes: Soros also played a major role in creating this group, whose get-out-the-vote campaigns targeted likely Democratic voters.

* American Civil Liberties Union: This group opposes virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government. It supports open borders, has rushed to the defense of suspected terrorists and their abettors, and appointed former New Left terrorist Bernardine Dohrn to its Advisory Board.

* American Constitution Society for Law and Policy: This Washington, DC-based think tank seeks to move American jurisprudence to the left by recruiting, indoctrinating, and mobilizing young law students, helping them acquire positions of power. It also provides leftist Democrats with a bully pulpit from which to denounce their political adversaries.

* American Family Voices: This group creates and coordinates media campaigns charging Republicans with wrongdoing.

* American Friends Service Committee: This group views the United States as the principal cause of human suffering around the world. As such, it favors America's unilateral disarmament, the dissolution of American borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, the abolition of the death penalty, and the repeal of the Patriot Act.

* American Immigration Law Foundation: This group supports amnesty for illegal aliens, on whose behalf it litigates against the U.S. government.

* American Library Association: This group has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's War on Terror -- most particularly, Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, which it calls "a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users."

* The American Prospect, Inc.: This corporation trains and mentors young leftwing journalists, and organizes strategy meetings for leftist leaders.

* Amnesty International: This organization directs a grossly disproportionate share of its criticism for human rights violations at the United States and Israel.

* Arab American Institute Foundation: The Arab American Institute denounces the purportedly widespread civil liberties violations directed against Arab Americans in the post-9/11 period, and characterizes Israel as a brutal oppressor of the Palestinian people.

* Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now: This group conducts voter mobilization drives on behalf of leftist Democrats. These initiatives have been notoriously marred by fraud and corruption.

* Bill of Rights Defense Committee: This group provides a detailed blueprint for activists interested in getting their local towns, cities, and even college campuses to publicly declare their opposition to the Patriot Act, and to designate themselves "Civil Liberties Safe Zones." The organization also came to the defense of self-described radical attorney Lynne Stewart, who was convicted in 2005 of providing material support for terrorism.

* Brennan Center for Justice: This think tank/legal activist group generates scholarly studies, mounts media campaigns, files amicus briefs, gives pro bono support to activists, and litigates test cases in pursuit of radical "change."

* Brookings Institution: This organization has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including one that aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush's tax cuts in 2003.

* Campaign for America's Future: This group supports tax hikes, socialized medicine, and a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs.

* Campus Progress: A project of the Soros-bankrolled Center for American Progress, this group seeks to "strengthen progressive voices on college and university campuses, counter the growing influence of right-wing groups on campus, and empower new generations of progressive leaders."

* Catholics for a Free Choice: This nominally Catholic organization supports women's right to abortion-on-demand.

* Center for American Progress: This leftist think tank is headed by former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta, works closely with Hillary Clinton, and employs numerous former Clinton administration staffers. It is committed to "developing a long-term vision of a progressive America" and "providing a forum to generate new progressive ideas and policy proposals."

* Center for Community Change: This group recruits and trains activists to spearhead leftist "political issue campaigns." Promoting increased funding for social welfare programs by bringing "attention to major national issues related to poverty," the Center bases its training programs on the techniques taught by the famed radical organizer Saul Alinsky.

* Center for Constitutional Rights: This pro-Castro organization is a core member of the open borders lobby, has opposed virtually all post-9/11 anti-terrorism measures by the U.S. government, and alleges that American injustice provokes acts of international terrorism.

* Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: Reasoning from the premise that tax cuts generally help only the wealthy, this organization advocates greater tax expenditures on social welfare programs for low earners.

* Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington: This group litigates and brings ethics charges against "government officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests" and "betray the public trust." Almost all of its targets are Republicans.

* Coalition for an International Criminal Court: This group seeks to subordinate American criminal-justice procedures to those of an international court.

* Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund: Defenders of Wildlife opposes oil exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It condemns logging, ranching, mining, and even the use of recreational motorized vehicles as activities that are destructive to the environment.

* Democracy Alliance: This self-described "liberal organization" aims to raise $200 million to develop a funding clearinghouse for leftist groups. Soros is a major donor to this group.

* Democracy 21: This group is a staunch supporter of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act.

* Democratic Party: Soros' funding activities are devoted largely to helping the Democratic Party solidify its power base. In a November 2003 interview, Soros stated that defeating President Bush in 2004 "is the central focus of my life" ... "a matter of life and death." He pledged to raise $75 million to defeat Bush, and personally donated nearly a third of that amount to anti-Bush organizations. "America under Bush," he said, "is a danger to the world, and I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is." Claiming that "the Republican party has been captured by a bunch of extremists," Soros accuses the Bush administration of following a "supremacist ideology" in whose rhetoric he claims to hear echoes of "Nazi slogans."

* Earthjustice: This group seeks to place severe restrictions on how U.S. land and waterways may be used. It opposes most mining and logging initiatives, commercial fishing businesses, and the use of motorized vehicles in undeveloped areas.

* EMILY's List: This political network raises money for Democratic female political candidates who support unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

* Feminist Majority: Characterizing the United States as an inherently sexist nation, this group focuses on "advancing the legal, social and political equality of women with men, countering the backlash to women's advancement, and recruiting and training young feminists to encourage future leadership for the feminist movement in the United States."

* Free Press: This "media reform" organization has worked closely with many notable leftists and such organizations as Media Matters for America, Air America Radio, Global Exchange, Code Pink, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, the Revolutionary Communist Party, Mother Jones magazine, and Pacifica Radio.

* Funding Exchange: Dedicated to the concept of philanthropy as a vehicle for social change, this organization pairs leftist donors and foundations with likeminded groups and activists who are dedicated to bringing about their own version of "progressive" change and social justice. Many of these grantees assume that American society is rife with racism, discrimination, exploitation, and inequity and needs to be overhauled via sustained education, activism, and social agitation.

* Gamaliel Foundation: Modeling its tactics on those of the radical Sixties activist Saul Alinsky, this group takes a strong stand against current homeland security measures and immigration restrictions.

* Human Rights First: This group supports open borders and the rights of illegal aliens; charges that the Patriot Act severely erodes Americans' civil liberties; has filed amicus curiae briefs on behalf of terror suspect Jose Padilla; and deplores the Guantanamo Bay detention facilities.

* Human Rights Watch: This group directs a disproportionate share of its criticism at the United States and Israel. It opposes the death penalty in all cases, and supports open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.

* Immigrant Legal Resource Center: This group claims to have helped gain amnesty for some three million illegal aliens in the U.S., and in the 1980s was part of the sanctuary movement which sought to grant asylum to refugees from the failed Communist states of Central America.

* Independent Media Institute: This group provides leftist organizations with "strategic communications consulting, training, coaching, networking opportunities and concrete tools" to help them "achieve their social justice goals."

* Institute for Policy Studies: This think tank has long supported Communist and anti-American causes around the world. Viewing capitalism as a breeding ground for "unrestrained greed," IPS seeks to provide a corrective to "unrestrained markets and individualism." Professing an unquestioning faith in the righteousness of the United Nations, it aims to bring American foreign policy under UN control.

* Institute for Women's Policy Research: This group views the U.S. as a nation rife with discrimination against women, and publishes research to draw attention to this alleged state of affairs. It also advocates unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, stating that "access to abortion is essential to the economic well-being of women and girls."

* International Crisis Group: One of this organization's leading figures is its Mideast Director, Robert Malley, who was a President Bill Clinton's Special Assistant for Arab-Israeli Affairs. His analysis of the Mideast conflict is markedly pro-Palestinian.

* Joint Victory Campaign 2004: Founded by George Soros and Harold Ickes, this group was a major fundraising entity for Democrats during the 2004 election cycle. It collected contributions (including large amounts from Soros personally) and disbursed them to two other groups, America Coming Together and the Media Fund, which also worked on behalf of Democrats.

* Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: This group views America as an unremittingly racist nation; uses the courts to mandate race-based affirmative action preferences in business and academia; has filed briefs against the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to limit the wholesale granting of green cards and to identify potential terrorists; condemns the Patriot Act; and calls on Americans to "recognize the contribution" of illegal aliens.

* League of United Latin American Citizens: This group views America as a nation plagued by "an alarming increase in xenophobia and anti-Hispanic sentiment"; favors racial preferences; supports the legalization of illegal Hispanic aliens; opposes military surveillance of U.S. borders; opposes making English America's official language; favors open borders; and rejects anti-terrorism legislation like the Patriot Act.

* League of Women Voters Education Fund: The League supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; supports "motor-voter" registration, which allows anyone with a driver's license to become a voter, regardless of citizenship status; and supports tax hikes and socialized medicine.

* Lynne Stewart Defense Committee: IRS records indicate that Soros's Open Society Institute made a September 2002 grant of $20,000 to this organization. Stewart was the criminal-defense attorney who was later convicted for abetting her client, the "blind sheik" Omar Abdel Rahman, in terrorist activities connected with his Islamic Group.

* MADRE: This international women's organization deems America the world's foremost violator of human rights. As such, it seeks to "communicat[e] the real-life impact of U.S. policies on women and families confronting violence, poverty and repression around the world," and to "demand alternatives to destructive U.S. policies." It also advocates unrestricted access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

* Malcolm X Grassroots Movement: This group views the U.S. as a nation replete with racism and discrimination against blacks; seeks to establish an independent black nation in the southeastern United States; and demands reparations for slavery.

* Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition: This group calls for the expansion of civil rights and liberties for illegal aliens; laments that illegal aliens in America are commonly subjected to "worker exploitation"; supports tuition-assistance programs for illegal aliens attending college; and characterizes the Patriot Act as a "very troubling" assault on civil liberties.

* Media Fund: Soros played a major role in creating this group, whose purpose was to conceptualize, produce, and place political ads on television, radio, print, and the Internet.

* Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund: This group advocates open borders, free college tuition for illegal aliens, lowered educational standards to accommodate Hispanics, and voting rights for criminals. In MALDEF's view, supporters of making English the official language of the United States are "motivated by racism and anti-immigrant sentiments," while advocates of sanctions against employers reliant on illegal labor seek to discriminate against "brown-skinned people."

* Meyer, Suozzi, English and Klein, PC: This influential defender of Big Labor is headed by Democrat operative Harold Ickes.

* Midwest Academy: This entity trains radical activists in the tactics of direct action, targeting, confrontation, and intimidation.

* Migration Policy Institute: This group seeks to create "a North America with gradually disappearing border controls ... with permanent migration remaining at moderate levels."

* Military Families Speak Out: This group ascribes the U.S. invasion of Iraq to American imperialism and lust for oil.

* MoveOn.org: This Web-based organization supports Democratic political candidates through fundraising, advertising, and get-out-the-vote drives.

* Ms. Foundation for Women: This group laments what it views as the widespread and enduring flaws of American society: racism, sexism, homophobia, and the violation of civil rights and liberties. It focuses its philanthropy on groups that promote affirmative action for women, unfettered access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, amnesty for illegal aliens, and big government generally.

* NARAL Pro-Choice America: This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, and works to elect pro-abortion Democrats.

* NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund: The NAACP supports racial preferences in employment and education, as well as the racial gerrymandering of voting districts. Underpinning its support for race preferences is the fervent belief that white racism in the United States remains an intractable, largely undiminished, phenomenon.

* The Nation Institute: This nonprofit entity sponsors leftist conferences, fellowships, awards for radical activists, and journalism internships.

* National Abortion Federation: This group opposes any restrictions on abortion at either the state or federal levels, and champions the introduction of unrestricted abortion into developing regions of the world.

* National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy: This group depicts the United States as a nation in need of dramatic structural change financed by philanthropic organizations. It overwhelmingly promotes grant-makers and grantees with leftist agendas, while criticizing their conservative counterparts.

* National Council for Research on Women: This group supports big government, high taxes, military spending cuts, increased social welfare spending, and the unrestricted right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

* National Council of La Raza: This group lobbies for racial preferences, bilingual education, stricter hate-crime laws, mass immigration, and amnesty for illegal aliens.

* National Council of Women's Organizations: This group views the United States as a nation rife with injustice against girls and women. It advocates high levels of spending for social welfare programs, and supports race and gender preferences for minorities and women in business and academia.

* National Immigration Forum: Opposing the enforcement of present immigration laws, this organization urges the American government to "legalize" en masse all illegal aliens currently in the United States who have no criminal records, and to dramatically increase the number of visas available for those wishing to migrate to the U.S. The Forum is particularly committed to opening the borders to unskilled, low-income workers, and immediately making them eligible for welfare and social service programs.

* National Immigration Law Center: This group seeks to win unrestricted access to government-funded social welfare programs for illegal aliens.

* National Lawyers Guild: This group promotes open borders; seeks to weaken America's intelligence-gathering agencies; condemns the Patriot Act as an assault on civil liberties; rejects capitalism as an unviable economic system; has rushed to the defense of convicted terrorists and their abettors; and generally opposes all U.S. foreign policy positions, just as it did during the Cold War when it sided with the Soviets.

* National Organization for Women: This group advocates the unfettered right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; seeks to "eradicate racism, sexism and homophobia" from American society; attacks Christianity and traditional religious values; and supports gender-based preferences for women.

* National Priorities Project: This group supports government-mandated redistribution of wealth -- through higher taxes and greater expenditures on social welfare programs. NPP exhorts the government to redirect a significant portion of its military funding toward public education, universal health insurance, environmentalist projects, and welfare programs.

* National Security Archive Fund: This group collects and publishes declassified documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act to a degree that compromises American national security and the safety of intelligence agents.

* National Women's Law Center: This group supports taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; lobbies against conservative judicial appointees; advocates increased welfare spending to help low-income mothers; and favors higher taxes for the purpose of generating more funds for such government programs as Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, foster care, health care, child-support enforcement, and student loans.

* Natural Resources Defense Council: One of the most influential environmentalist lobbying groups in the United States, the Council claims a membership of one million people.

* Pacifica Foundation: This entity owns and operates Pacifica Radio, awash from its birth with the socialist-Marxist rhetoric of class warfare and hatred for capitalism.

* Peace and Security Funders Group: This is an association of more than 50 foundations that give money to leftist anti-war and environmentalist causes. Its members tend to depict America as the world's chief source of international conflict, environmental destruction, and economic inequalities.

* People for the American Way: This group opposes the Patriot Act, anti-terrorism measures generally, and the allegedly growing influence of the "religious right."

* Physicians for Human Rights: This group is selectively and disproportionately critical of the United States and Israel in its condemnations of human rights violations.

* Physicians for Social Responsibility: This is an anti-U.S.-military organization that also embraces the tenets of radical environmentalism.

* Planned Parenthood: This group is the largest abortion provider in the United States and advocates taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand.

* Ploughshares Fund: This public grantmaking foundation opposes America's development of a missile defense system, and contributes to many organizations that are highly critical of U.S. foreign policies and military ventures.

* Prison Moratorium Project: This initiative was created in 1995 for the express purpose of working for the elimination of all prisons in the United States and the release of all inmates. Reasoning from the premise that incarceration is never an appropriate means of dealing with crime, it deems American society's inherent inequities the root of all criminal behavior.

* Project Vote: This is the voter-mobilization arm of the Soros-funded ACORN. A persistent pattern of lawlessness and corruption has followed ACORN/Project Vote activities over the years.

* Proteus Fund: This foundation directs its philanthropy toward a number of radical leftwing organizations.

* Public Citizen Foundation: Public Citizen seeks increased government intervention and litigation against corporations -- a practice founded on the notion that American corporations, like the capitalist system of which they are a part, are inherently inclined toward corruption.

* Sentencing Project: Asserting that prison-sentencing patterns are racially discriminatory, this initiative advocates voting rights for felons.

* Sojourners: This evangelical Christian ministry preaches radical leftwing politics. During the 1980s it championed Communist revolution in Central America and chastised U.S. policy-makers for their tendency "to assume the very worst about their Soviet counterparts." More recently, Sojourners has taken up the cause of environmental activism, opposed welfare reform as a "mean-spirited Republican agenda," and mounted a defense of affirmative action.

* Thunder Road Group: This political consultancy, in whose creation Soros had a hand, coordinates strategy for the Media Fund, America Coming Together, and America Votes.

* Tides Foundation and Tides Center: Tides is a major funder of the radical Left.

* Urban Institute: This research organization favors socialized medicine, expansion of the federal welfare bureaucracy, and tax hikes for higher income-earners.

* USAction Education Fund: USAction lists its priorities as: "fighting the right wing agenda"; "building grassroots political power"; winning "social, racial and economic justice for all"; supporting a system of taxpayer-funded socialized medicine; reversing "reckless tax cuts for millionaires and corporations" which shield the "wealthy" from paying their "fair share"; advocating for "pro-consumer and environmental regulation of corporate abuse"; "strengthening progressive voices on local, state and national issues"; and working to "register, educate and get out the vote ... [to] help progressives get elected at all levels of government."

* YWCA World Office, Switzerland: The YWCA opposes abstinence education; supports universal access to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand; and opposes school vouchers.

 

[fossten]

Honestly, if you guys weren't SO hard core right wing, and so nuts about things like that, I have plenty of crap I complain about on the left too. I just don't feel like giving you guys ammunition, since you don't ever want to step down from your pedestals and talk like decent human beings.

So, it's personal with you - you don't want to share your issues with the left because you dislike people you've never met. Awesome. Just so you know, it's exceedingly myopic and immature to feed into stereotypes. Imagine if you did discuss your problems with the left - you might actually agree with us on some issues, and then you'd have no conflict - oh NOES!!!! But I digress - I'm trying to reason with you when you've made it perfectly clear that you aren't interested in such claptrap.

You'll forgive me if I seriously doubt the veracity of this statement. And considering more than 50% of your posts are devoted to calling people retarded and demanding that they supply you with mountains of facts while you casually and nastily dismiss them, you'll understand why I find your statement ironic as well as dishonest.

In short, I'll believe it when I see it.

And I'll bet you masturbate to Megyn Kelly instead of actually watching her segments.

See what I did there? I made a stupid insult for no reason too.

Answer the question yes or no - do you watch Fox News regularly and at any reasonable length? (And by that, I mean more than just a youtube clip)

I notice that you never post things that you see on Fox News that you believe are untrue and then debunk them. You just throw out the 'Faux News' thing as an expletive. So, I'd like to see you back up that assertion with some actual facts.