A Rap "Song" About Killing Bill O'Reilly and Michelle Malkin

Wired magazine was apprently the first to report that a rap group called "East Coast Avengers" has made a song entitled "Kill Bill O'Reilly." And for good measure, the Avengers "sing" about killing Michelle Malkin. The lyrics can be found here.

This is outrageous, of course, and such an open incitement to violence should not be tolerated.

But here are two more points to add:

First, the East Coast Avengers are hosted, if that's the right word, on MySpace, which is owned, of course, by the parent company of Fox, the News Corporation. So much for synergy, at least positive synergy.

Second, the repeated references to "media matters" and the remarkable detail in the lyrics--"Malmedy"-- makes me wonder if these rappers, whoever they are, didn't have some help from someone who obsessively covers O'Reilly. Like, maybe, someone with a, uh, close familiarity with Media Matters?

Just asking.

"Sexist banter on CNBC" Where's The Outrage? Where's Anita Hill? Where's Media Matters?

That's the blunt headline atop Marisa Guthrie's tough-minded and well-researched story on CNBC's Dylan Ratigan in today's Broadcasting & Cable.

Or should it be Dylan RAT-igan? Guthrie (pictured above) reports, you decide:

On Friday morning’s edition of The Call, CNBC correspondent Melissa Francis, who was reporting on frenzied gasoline trading from NYMEX, asked Ratigan: “Is it as crazy on your exchange as it is here?”

Ratigan’s comeback: “I think if I was blond and beautiful I could draw a big crowd.”

Francis, visibly irked, responded: “That’s not what it is all about.”

As Guthrie observes, such pig-talk is part of a pattern at CNBC. Speaking of Ratigan, she writes, "He's been doing his best lately to alienate female viewers." She continues, "Sadly, such comments are hardly atypical from Ratigan and his band of merry he-men." Here's another one:

Thursday on Fast Money – CNBC’s signature market broadcast which was recently shifted to the high-profile 5 p.m. time slot to coincide with the close of the markets – Ratigan and Fast Money contributors Jeff Macke and Karen Finerman were discussing the upcoming auction season and Finerman’s adoration of investor Carl Icahn.

Finerman apparently bought a painting of Icahn at auction, paying several hundred thousand dollars for it. (Finerman can afford it. She runs a multimillion dollar hedge fund). Icahn joined the conversation via phone – and that’s when Macke took the discussion down several notches by suggesting that Finerman would have paid considerably more for a naked portrait of Icahn.

“She would have gone $2 million for a nude, Carl,” said Macke.

To which Icahn responded: “I would have bid that for (Finerman).”

After more back and forth about Finerman’s crush, Ratigan closed by thanking Icahn for “playing with us.”

But it's CNBC, and the liberals are rallying around CNBC--when they can. But we might wonder: What if these exact same words had been uttered on the Fox Business Channel? In that case, you can bet that Media Matters and all the other liberal pressure groups would have been all over this story.

But it wasn't Fox, it was CNBC, and so only a few gutsy reporters, such as Guthrie, are chasing after the story.

John Gibson Rips Olbermann, OK. But Gibbie Gobbles Gabler, Too! Man Bites Fox!!

It's not overly surprising when Fox News' John Gibson rips into MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. That's standard inter-network Cable Gaming.

But listen to what Gibson has to say says about FNC "News Watch" panelist Neal Gabler. Calls him all sorts of names, starting with "low life."

Now Gabler is about as left-wing--and, many would say, obnoxious--a figure as there is in The Cable Game. Yet there he is, every weekend, popping off on Fox.

Yes, Fox is heavy with O'Reilly and Hannity, but the channel makes room for Gabler, too--and then, of course, for Gibson to blast Gabler. Gibson routinely invites Gabler on the show; I hope that Gabler takes him up on it.

Say what you wish about Fox--they really do mean it when they say, "fair and balanced."

And it's interesting, as Gibson observes, that Media Matters never takes note of what Gabler says, in all its endless/tendentious fine-toothing of every word that is said on Fox. MM is listening, and recording, but not writing up.

Why not? Here's why. Because a left-winger blasting the right--and, frequently, Fox News itself--doesn't fit MM's preconceived ideo-partisan template, which holds that FNC is in the tank for the Bush admininistration and the neocons.

Thanks, of course, to Johnny Dollar for catching this audio item!

Mark Levin Was Right! -- Come On, Media Matters, Sue Him!! Inquiring Minds Want To Discover The Hillary Clinton Connection!!!

So is Hillary Rodham Clinton part of the vast left-wing conspiracy? It sure seems that way! But don't take my word for it--look and listen to Clinton herself
talking about helping to start up various liberal groups, including Media Matters.

On Sunday, The Cable Gamer took note of what Mark Levin's words about Media Matters. Not to put too fine a point on it, Levin accused MM of being a bunch of criminals. In other words, he practically begged MM to sue him for libel. Why? Because as Levin said last week, during the course of that lawsuit, the "discovery" process would open up a lot of cans of a lot of worms, about possible IRS violations by MM. That was Levin's claim; the fact that there's been no law suit from MM suggests that maybe Levin had it pegged.

And now it's interesting--another data point--to hear Hillary bragging about her role in the creation of MM, among other liberal groups, as captured by The Washington Times:

"We are righting the balance ... and really putting together a network in the blogosphere and a lot of the new progressive infrastructure, institutions that I helped start and support like Media Matters and the Center for American Progress."

It seems to the Cable Gamer that these words of Hillary's are, if not quite a smoking gun, then a pretty good indicator that there's some legal fire under this political smoke.

Mark Levin Accuses Media Matters of Criminal Matters! Bring On The Lawsuit, Please!! So We Can All Get To Look Inside David Brock's Toy Chest!!!

Mark Levin is more of a radio guy than a Cable Gamer, but he should be doing more of both media. Why? Because he is both entertaining and enlightening. And oh yes, as a third "ing," he is thought-provoking. And maybe, fourth, lawsuit-enticing? And maybe, fifth, David Brock-ensnaring?

Here's an example of Mark being all three: As downloaded and preserved by the always-valuable Olbermann Watch, Levin speculates that Media Matters could, in fact, be a criminal organization.

That's a strong charge. Just to make sure that everyone heard him loud and clear, Levin repeated the accusation several times on his Friday show. Levin is clearly asking for legal trouble, because clearly he figures he can stare down that legal trouble.

Criminal? Really? How so? Criminal in the sense, Levin argues, that Media Matters might well be playing fast and loose with the tax laws. That is, according to Levin--and he's a lawyer, so he has an informed opinion, unlike this humble Cable Gamer--MM's tax exemption requires that it be non-partisan. Tax-exempt outfits can't get involved in elections,and they have to sign and swear that they are abiding by the law when they send in their papers to the IRS. And it's a no-no, of course, to fib to Uncle Sam.

And, Levin asserts, if there were a process of discovery, such that every e-mail and phone call to and from MM were revealed, it would be clear enough that MM is in league with partisan Democrats and thus had violated its tax-exempt status. And that's a crime, such as perjury, Levin says--certainly it's a crime if it's done knowingly.

Now The Cable Gamer is in no position to judge the legal merits of these comments. I don't know whether or not MM is in violation of the law as it is written, given all the loopholes and whatnot. But I sure know--we all sure know-that MM leans way to the left.

As Levin sez, MM never attacks a liberal or a Democrat--it's always conservatives and Republicans. So don't sue me, MM, because I am merely passing along some news about Levin said, without warrantying that what he said was true. (Although I have great respect for Levin's legal judgment, gained over the decade since he burst on the scene during the Clinton Scandal Years. Which could mean, of course, that we'll be seeing a lot of him in the future.)

In this excerpt, Levin also had some great stuff to say about some Cable Game figures, such as MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, whom he called "a weasel," and of course, Levin ripped into Keith Olbermann , whom he called a conscious cog in the liberal conspiracy, whereas Scarborough is more of a useful idiot. And Levin also defended Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh against MM's ridiculous cut-and-paste attacks.

But I do hope that MM sues Levin for libel, or defamation, or whatever the exact term might be.

In fact, I am sure that Levin wants Media Matters to sue him! Levin is baiting MM, TCG reckons, precisely because he knows that if there is a lawsuit, then Levin & Co. can gain access, through discovery, of MM's files. And we can find out where the MM bodies are buried, who's lurking in MM chief Brock's closet, and so on. You never know what you'll discover when you go into a haunted house. George Soros, anyone? Connections to the Hillary Rodham Clinton prsidential campaign?

And that's why I predict that MM will simply ignore Levin, no matter what Levin says about MM. MM wouldn't dare sue Mark, and open up that can of worms.

And finally, thanks, as always, Johnny Dollar!

MRC Rights Wrongs! Takes on Liberal MSM Bias!!

The Media Research Center, founded by Brent Bozell, is an invaluable resource for Cable Gamers. Over the last two decades, it has done heroic work in chronicling media bias--and it was, in fact, a major inspiration to the founding of The Cable Game.

The MRC is, indeed, "The Leader in Documenting, Exposing, and Neutralizing Liberal Media Bias."

A case in point is MRC's exhaustive treatment of the Bill O'Reilly vs. Media Matters flap is a case in point. Here's MRC, in all its analytical, let's-go-to-the-tape glory:

The morning after CNN and MSNBC began salivating over a potential "Imus moment" pushed by a far-left group to suppress Bill O'Reilly over a supposedly racist remark, CBS and NBC on Wednesday advanced the liberal group's cause with multi-part segments on the topic. But while NBC's Today at least provided some balance and proper labeling, CBS's Early Show, with "In Hot Water" and "O'Race Factor" on screen, aired a story which failed to identify the ideology of Media Matters and followed with Julie Chen pressing the only guest to agree O'Reilly's comment was racist and that he must issue an apology. Amazingly, neither show bothered to mention that Juan Williams, the black journalist who was on O'Reilly's radio show when the FNC host made the remarks in question, defended O'Reilly: "It had nothing to do with racist ranting by anybody except these idiots at CNN."

Harry Smith teased Wednesday's Early Show: "Bill O'Reilly in hot water over race remarks. The controversy ahead, early this Wednesday morning, September 26th, 2007." Chen hyped a "firestorm" over O'Reilly before reporter Bianca Solorzano innocuously described Media Matters as a "watchdog group." Solorzano asked an employee at the Harlem restaurant O'Reilly talked about: "Do you feel Bill O'Reilly's comments about his meal here are racist?" The woman affirmed: "Definitely. One of the worst stereotypes ever of our customers, of our people." Chen next interviewed Alex David of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. She pressed him: "You say ignorance, but do you think racist?" Chen also urged him to agree: "Does he need to apologize at this point, do you think?"

In contrast, Today co-host Matt Lauer properly tagged Media Matters and gave O'Reilly's point of view, teasing at the top of the show: "Bill O'Reilly is in the headlines again, this time for some comments he made about race in America. He says his comments were taken out of context and he's being targeted by a left-wing Web site. In fact he says he was complimenting African-Americans and speaking out against racism. We're gonna get into that debate." Co-host Meredith Vieira considered the possibility that O'Reilly is the victim and not the perpetrator, "Still ahead: Bill O'Reilly catching some flack for comments he made about a Harlem restaurant, but is he the victim of a smear campaign?"

In the subsequent segment, following a set-up piece, Lauer interviewed Paul Waldman of Media Matters as well as Republican strategist Joe Watkins who defended O'Reilly. Lauer even challenged Waldman with the larger context of O'Reilly's remarks: "I looked at it, Paul and I, and I thought Bill O'Reilly was saying that we should not be surprised. That, in other words, it's only for the small group of people who look at the entertainment of somebody like a 50 Cent or a Ludacris and thinks that represents all of African-Americans, that those people, need to get out and live life a little bit. You didn't see it that way?"

For much more on Tuesday coverage, the context of O'Reilly's comments and more of what Juan Williams said Tuesday night on The O'Reilly Factor, see the September 26 CyberAlert rundown, "CNN Sees 'Imus Moment' for O'Reilly, Williams Calls CNN 'Idiots,'" online at: www.mediaresearch.org

The key quote from O'Reilly featured by CBS and NBC, from O'Reilly's recollection on his radio show last week about dinner at Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem with Al Sharpton: "And I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same. Even though it's run by blacks. There wasn't one person in Silvia's who was screaming 'M-Fer I want more iced tea.'"

In "SMEAR 101: Hoping to Create the Next Imus, Enemies Clobber O'Reilly," RadioEqualizer blogger Brian Maloney on Wednesday provided a media outlet by media outlet timeline of the spread of the impugning of O'Reilly. Maloney's posting includes links to audio of O'Reilly's remarks in full as well as examples of inaccurate attacks on O'Reilly by CNN and others. An excerpt from his conclusion:

Under scrutiny, none of the allegations against O'Reilly hold up. Where to begin?

First, placed in their proper context, his comments simply don't come across as inflammatory. O'Reilly's overall theme is that many whites have very little real experience with black people. As a result, their views of African- Americans are clouded by negative perceptions that come from mainstream media consumption.

Are all black people gangsta rappers or convicts? Of course not, but without a lot of personal interaction, many white people may not recognize that.

Does O'Reilly share some of that ignorance? Perhaps, especially when his words are improperly isolated.

Even if he does, so what? Obviously, this a common problem in our society. That should not seem newsworthy to CNN.

Another gaping hole in the Media Matters smear campaign is the fact that the comments in question were made during an interview with liberal African-American pundit Juan Williams. And if you listen to the audio, Williams agrees with O'Reilly on these very points!

In fact, Williams has actually come out swinging in order to defend O'Reilly....Williams makes it clear that their discussion has been turned on its head by O'Reilly's enemies....

Between O'Reilly and Imus, there's no comparison. While the latter was guilty of uttering some outrageous slurs, Bill O'Reilly was doing nothing more than attempting to carry on an intelligent discussion about race relations in America. CNN, CBS and the New York Times are guilty of perpetuating this Soros-funded smear campaign and should truly be ashamed of themselves.

And there's a lot more detail, including all the transcripts, on the MRC website.

Verne Gay Bites Dog -- I Mean, Defends Bill O'Reilly! And Trashes Media Matters!!

Newsday's Verne Gay is about to get slimed by the Liberal Attack Machine. The Cable Gamer has no inside sources, but by the pricking of her thumbs, she knows that if Gay starts telling the truth about Media Matters, MM will, in return, start lying about Gay.

Here's the best of it:

Today, I defend Bill.

This is a highly amusing act, because O'Reilly has attacked me on the air a couple of times. He once called me a "left-wing journalist with an agenda..." I loved that
best of all, for it was so joyously, ludicrously wide of the mark. He used to refer to me as "that guy" too. He couldn't bring himself to call me by name.

But this isn't about me. It's about Bill. He was attacked by a self-described "progressive" media "watch-dog" site called Media Matters. Apparently these people at MM have nothing better to do than spend their days and nights looking for conservative bias in the media, and now - are you ready for this? - they've come after Newsday.

Newsday!

TCG will interpolate here: Newsday is a terrific newspaper, with great coverage of Long Island, but like most MSM papers, it leans left. So for MM to attack it, well, that just shows how far over MM really is.

And by direct association, me, whose byline was on that article.

This time, I'm actually on this guy's side.

That is to say, Gay is defending O'Reilly against MMM--Media Matters Mud. Now back to Gay:

Here's what MM posted on their site: "The headline of a Newsday article on Bill O'Reilly's controversial remarks about a Harlem restaurant run by African-Americans asserted, 'O'Reilly lashes out at CNN over misquoted report,' but the article provided no examples of a 'misquot[ation],' nor did it quote O'Reilly claiming to have been 'misquoted.' The article also stated that 'Mediamatters.org released a partial transcript' of O'Reilly's comments. In fact, Media Matters provided the relevant transcript and audio clip of O'Reilly's remarks, which included the full context of his statements."

Now, let me give you a little lesson in journalism, Media Matters Person. When you quote someone out of context - as you did - it's the same as misquoting them. You may as well make up their words, because the import is the same - a disingenuous conveyance of information that had no bearing on the speaker's intent.

Second, let me take issue with the weasel word "relevant." In fact, it WAS a partial transcript, both print and audio. The print transcript that MM has on its website is in fact HEAVILY redacted, and the audio - or at least the audio posted Tuesday when this whole thing exploded - was only a small portion of a conversation that lasted an hour.

What did Bill say?

Here's my own transcript of the conversation and any mistakes are mine alone. There are many small elisions here and there, but I've tried to be faithful to the general tone, tenor and context of the conversation. (This is about eighteen minutes of the full hour - the RELEVANT eighteen minutes.)

My summation: It's O'Reilly’s standard-issue anti-rap diatribe. I've heard it before, and so have you. And if he’s guilty of anything here, it's of being a flat-footed white guy with a tin ear. But he's always been guilty of that, so what else is new? The comments about Sylvia’s were – of course – silly but part of a much broader context which I think renders them harmless.

Verne, you're a brave man for writing all this. I pray that you will survive the MM counter-attack, because it's coming!

O'Reilly Goes On The Offensive Against Media Matters

The Big O is kicking some major butt on his counter-offensive against those weasels--yes, it's a weasel-rich environment out there!--at Media Matters. He is going after them, speaking the truth, on his show, and it's clicking with the public, which is tired of leftwingers trying to intimidate people--the Silent Majority, the folks who pay the taxes and maybe watch Fox--into bowing down to George Soros -type political correctness.

And he has the public with him, as measured by a new AOL poll. According to data summarized here, 130,671 people (at the time of this posting) had voted on whether or not Bill O'Reilly had said anything offensive on his "Radio Factor" show on September 19. And here are the results, by percentage: Inoffensive: 60, Offensive: 32, No Opinion: 8.

TCG has followed the whole debate, and found nothing offensive in what O'Reilly said--Indeed, he was actually making a point in favor of tolerance! (Not that those schmucks at Media Mattters care, since they have to meet their quota of Fox-bashing items every day, no matter what, and so MM is not giving up in its jihad against O'Reilly.

So of course, especially if it "whips" its own Koolaid-drinking followers, MM can find a third of the people who will vote "their" way. But only a third, or slightly less. Because the vast majority is with O'Reilly!

Jesse Jackson on "The O'Reilly Factor" Thursday Night

Jesse Jackson and Bill O'Reilly on "The Factor" tomorrow night. The Cable Gamer will eat her (many) hats if the subject of Media Matters and all that does NOT come up.

Jackson is too old, and to well established as a civil rights legend, to pull any punches. So if JJ thinks that BO is a racist, he will say so.

But TCG predicts that while the two will have a spirited discussion, both will agree that despite their disagreements, each man deserves credit for operating from a spirit of good will and fair play--which is more than one can say for those weasels at MM.

David Brock Gets Caught! (Although Secretly, He Probably Loves Being Naughty and Nasty)

Media Matters, of course, is the notoriously left-wing hit group, founded by that flamboyantly self-hating conservative apostate, David Brock. Brock has that rare distinction of being accused of being dishonest by both liberals and conservatives alike. But don't take my word for it: Here's what you get if you type "David Brock liar" on Google: 168,000 hits.

Johnny Dollar nails Brock's Media Matters here. on the fabricated pseudo-issue of Bill O'Reilly's alleged racism. That's to be expected, because J$ is such a sharp news hawk--as distinct from a blunt-instrument news hound!

But amazingly, MM was so outrageous in its distortion and misrepresentation of O'Reilly's words that even the liberal Matt Lauer, of NBC's "Today Show," called 'em on it, as we see here, and here.

CNN: "Failure Leads to Desperation"

Bill O'Reilly clobbered CNN tonight over the ludicrous allegation, spread around by CNN's Rick Sanchez --who shouldn't be throwing stones, as Cable Gamers know (see posting earlier on Tuesday night), along with those professional lefties at Media Matters that Bill, in arguing against racism, was somehow a himself a racist.

The accusation is absurd, not made more true by turning up the volume. But Media Matters has a quota of Fox-bashing flapjacks to make every day, so this item was just another Foxberry pancake for them to flip.

And as for CNN, well, I'll Bill explain their motivation, making use of his usual incisiveness, as he did in his "Talking Points" tonight:

Failure leads to desperation. The Factor has been number one for six consecutive years and defeats our cable news competition combined. The other cable news outlets are ratings disasters. Last night, The Factor had six times as many viewers as CNN at 8pm. But that is no excuse for being dishonest.

And Juan Williams, always a stand-up guy, stood up for O'Reilly here--brought to you c/o Johnny Dollar.

Actually, the whole of Bill's "Talking Points" is worth reiterating. So I will, from the top:

“Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight. CNN goes over to the dark side. That is the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo.

Every weekday we do three hours of commentary -- two on the radio, one on TV. And, everyday, the far-left smear website Media Matters takes that commentary out-of-context and feeds defamation out to the public.

Media Matters, which acts in concert with the now notorious MoveOn, has labeled me anti-black, anti-Hispanic, homophobic and anti-Semitic. I'm sure I'll be a member of the Manson family shortly.

Of course, this is all non-sense and we usually ignore it until it is picked up by the so-called mainstream media. Elements at NBC News have made a living parroting media matters garbage and now, sadly, CNN has jumped into the swamp.

Recently on the Radio Factor, I did an hour on how racism is dumb, how it is driven by fear and I even used my own late grandmother as an example. Now you can hear that radio hour on billoreilly.com. It's a very interesting discussion and we didn't hear one complaint about the program that ran on more than 400 radio stations.

Well, yesterday Media Matters distorted the entire conversation and implied I was racist for condemning racism.

Stunningly, CNN echoed the defamation on at least three of its programs. The reason CNN did this is because its ratings are abysmal. It is getting hammered by Fox News so they are desperate for attention and smearing me is one way to get it.

Unfortunately, many in CNN’s audience have no idea what I said and some believe the garbage they are hearing.

Now I talked to CNN last night before that program. It was obvious they didn’t listen to the Radio Factor so I explained the deal. They went ahead with the racist angle anyway.

This is dishonest and dangerous. If a slime machine like Media Matters can get its far-left propaganda on CNN and NBC News, the nation is in trouble.

Talking Points has said many times on this broadcast that we respect CNN. We have not attacked them in any way and in the past, they have been responsible. But this is absurd. The Media Matters defamation was also picked up by the local ABC affiliate here in New York City -- again, totally irresponsible.

Finally, CNN did a documentary a few weeks ago by Christiane Amanpour. In that documentary, Ms. Amanpour put forth that religion has caused a lot of pain in the world. Now, some considered her presentation anti-Semitic and anti-Christian. We could have easily hammered CNN and Ms. Amanpour. It would have been simple to do that. But we did not. They reported -- the audience is smart enough to decide if anti-religion bias was present.

Failure leads to desperation. The Factor has been number one for six consecutive years and defeats our cable news competition combined. The other cable news outlets are ratings disasters. Last night, The Factor had six times as many viewers as CNN at 8pm. But that is no excuse for being dishonest.

And that's the memo.

What would Jesus Say to Tucker Carlson?

Tucker Carlson has always come across as a smug rich kid--and now we know that he's an arrogant and self-congratulatory gay-basher, too. One has to wonder how long MSNBC will keep this jerk on the air. C'mon MediaMatters and GLAAD--do your thing!

Plenty of observers have chronicled the Carlson story, in which he bragged about beating up a gay man, but here's a good wrap-up from Washington insider Steve Clemons, guest-blogging for Andrew Sullivan.

TCG thinks it's fine to keep order in public restrooms--sorry, Larry Craig!--but vigilantism and violence are never acceptable. (Which, come to think of it is, a good reason for having cops keep track of things, to protect everyone from thuggery, including gay cruisers, who need help, not a thrashing.)

But The Cable Gamer will simply add this to the Carlson story: What would Jesus Christ say to Tucker Carlson? I think I know: He would cite John 8, from the New Testament, in which the Lamb of God said, so memorably to a crowd of bullies: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone."

That would have been good advice for young Tucker. If an incident really happened, he should have called the cops, or a security guard, and let the duly constituted authorities handle the matter. Instead, he was a brutal punk. And still is, in his soul, as we can all see. Definitely a stone thrower.

God, of course, will always forgive anyone--after appropriate contrition, of course!

But the rest of us, with only our human power, should judge him, in our own lesser way. And judge him harshly. But we don't need to beat him up, of course, except with our clickers. We can just stop watching his fatuous TV show. That will go a long way toward wiping the smirk off Carlson's mouth, although he will still be a rich kid.

Finally, The Cable Gamer believes that God is with us, everywhere--even in the bathroom. The Almighty is totally pure, of course, and can never be defiled (the filth will always washed away immediately) but at the same time, His presence is always with us, whereever we might be.

So we might all reflect on the Divine message of redemption: We never know what will happen in someone's heart, so long as it is beating, and so to repeat, there's still time for Larry Craig and Tucker Carlson. And all the rest of us sinners. But the path to salvation begins by admitting mistakes and apologizing for them.

Come to think of it, that would make a good show for MSNBC! A show that legitimately wrestled with issues of sin, and, just as importantly, forgiveness.

But nah. The secular liberals who run that channel would never permit it. They would rather have Carlson as an apologetic gay-basher--and you can bet that Carlson will be groveling soon enough before gay groups, attending "sensitivity training" alongside Isaiah Washington--than as a sincere Believer, delivering a genuine moral voice on the air. Can't have that!

But The Cable Gamer thinks that there's a market hungering for just such a show--to be led, say, by someone such as Rick Warren. Let's get his take on the news. Not to argue, not to condemn, but rather, to observe and opine, from a Bible-based perspective. Nobody would have to watch, or agree, of course--but I'll bet that a lot of people would.

Scott Collins vs. The New Spike*

Another headline could be, "Scott Collins Breaks With the Left, Keeps Faith With Readers."

Collins' "Channel Island" column in The LA Times has always been a must-read for Cable Gamers. But this piece of his, on the Democrats' effort to spike Fox News, is dyn-o-mite.

The issue at hand is the Democrats' attempted effort to squelch Fox News. The immediate flashpoint, of course, is the fracas over the upcoming FNC-sponsored debate, but the larger issue is the question of whether politics can flatten the First Amendment.

So read it fast, it before Media Matters and NewsHounds and FAIR, and all the other Democratic tools and lefty hitpersons, get it yanked offline. Here're some excerpts from Collins' truly brave piece:

So it needs to be said: The Democrats are dead wrong not to debate on Fox News. And it's hypocritical for the supposedly nonpartisan media to stand by and do nothing while a TV network ... is trashed by mega-million-dollar political campaigns in the heat of a White House primary battle. When politicians, one of whom may very well be the next president of the United States, start using their platforms to lob missiles at news-gathering organizations they don't like, it's hard to see how that's much different than President Nixon's infamous "enemies list." ...

What's happening with the Fox News debate is the latest stop in that sorry journey of behind-the-scenes manipulation of what viewers see and hear ...

If Democrats get away with spurning Fox News now, there's nothing to stop campaigns from barring other news organizations whenever they feel like it...

The boycott is questionable on both tactical and strategic grounds as well. As the No. 1 cable news network, Fox News could provide a critical forum for the Democratic contenders... The boycott will have the unintended effect of teeing up the eventual GOP nominee to make a noisy demand to meet his Democratic rival on Fox News before the election.

But those are matters best left to political advisors. The main point is that it's a horrible precedent to allow presidential candidates to boycott and pillory major news organizations as propaganda machines. Are politicians free to play favorites and punish transgressors in the press corps? ...

Shutting down a legitimate debate, however, is carrying things way too far and does a disservice to all Americans. ... Those who would lead the nation shouldn't be able to get away with it..

* The Spike was the title of a 1981 best-selling novel by Arnaud de Borchgrave and Robert Moss, detailing the ways in which a useful-idiot Western media imposed political correctness on the truth about communism. Today, the New Spike is the effort of the same MSM to dictate p.c orthodoxy of thought on politics and policy in America.

The Spike reminded us that we need a diverse media with real resources--not just bloggers in their pajamas, as much as I love my own kind--to speak truth to power and back it up with journalistic muscle. We need a robust Fourth Estate, including Fox News, to speak that truth to power--all kinds of power.

Which is to say, nothing much has changed in the past quarter-century!

Obama went to a madrasah--Fox was right! But don't hold your breath for a retraction from the Fox-bashers

Remember the kerfluffle a couple of months ago, when Fox News got pounded for reporting that Barack Obama had attended a Muslim madrasah school in Indonesia? Liberal outfits such as Media Matters blasted Fox for alleged inaccuracy. (Even as those same "watchdogs" of ethics were curiously uncurious about Hillary Clinton's role in all this anti-Obama material finding its way into the mediastream.)

Well, now Paul Watson of The Los Angeles Times has
something remarkable: He has traveled to Jakarta, Indonesia, and tracked down many of "Barry" Obama's friends and teachers from the 60s, and found documents and photographs as well. All of which "say Obama was registered by his family as a Muslim at both of the schools he attended."

And what does that mean? "That registration meant that during the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class." In other words, according to the Times, Fox was right--Obama attended a madrasah.

A few reporters, such as Philip Weiss in The New York Observer, have already gotten the Obama-madrasah story right, and noted that Fox got it right, but now, finally, we see more confirmation.

But TCG doesn't expect Media Matters and the Center for American Progress and all the rest to apologize to Fox. The Cable Criticism Game just doesn't work that way.

MSNBC = Manifestly Seeking to Nuzzle the Bi-coastal Crowd

If you live in New York City and Los Angeles or San Francisco, or thereabouts, the chances are pretty good that you are loving the new editorial line that's emanating from MSNBC--bicoastal blue-state all the way.

To be sure, there are plenty of conservatives in those parts of the country, albeit nowhere near a majority. But above all else, "bicoastal" is a state of mind: It involves, of course, a certain de rigeur liberalism, combined with a certainly equally chic disdain for ordinary folks in the heartland.

A case in point comes courtesy of Media Matters, the George Soros-inspired lefty media watchdog outfit. MM is a great resource for transcripts and videos, but its analysis is simply not to be trusted. For example, MM chronicled, lovingly, all the Fox News-bashing going on at MSNBC, and got the words right, then got it all wrong at the end when it tried to guide the reader toward a palpably wrong conclusion. Here's what MM posted tonight:

"On the January 8 edition of MSNBC's 'Tucker,' Newsweek senior editor Jonathan Alter compared Fox News' Bill O'Reilly to a 'blimp ... balloon in one of those parades,' adding that O'Reilly is 'so full of himself' and is 'so inflated, it's coming out of his ears.'" That's pretty good analysis, huh? Really gets down to the essence of O'Reilly. One doesn't have to like O'Reilly to insist upon more intelligent commentary than Alter's.

But Alter's ad hominem attacks were good enough for host Tucker Carlson, who had earlier asked Alter what he thought of "the meltdown occurring in public of Bill O'Reilly." Carlson added that fellow MSNBC-er Keith Olbermann, host of "Countdown," has, Carlson's words, "set out to drive Bill O'Reilly crazy, and apparently he's succeeded."

Well that settles that, doesn't it? O'Reilly is crazy because Olbermann made him so. And Carlson provides the proof. Any more questions of the sages at MSNBC?

Just one question, actually, for MM: Why is that you wouldn't know a real conservative if one fell on your head? And proof that MM has no answer to that question comes from its attempted defense against one of O'Reilly's attacks. Quoth MM: "O'Reilly falsely claimed, 'There isn't one conservative ... not one conservative commentator that works for NBC News at this time.'" Well, in TCG's opinion, that's not true: Pat Buchanan is a genuine conservative.

But MM offered an absurd answer: It declared that Carlson and Joe Scarborough are conservatives.

Well, Carlson and Scarborough have a right to think whatever they want, but they certainly don't have the right any more to call themselves conservatives. Those two ex-conservatives (although Carlson was always a wink-wink double dealer) are simply too deep in the tank of MSNBC and Olbermann and all the rest of MSM liberals--you know the folks concentrated in the Northeast and in California--to have any remaining claim on the word "conservative."

And if MM says that they are conservatives, well, that's just MM being a) delusional or b) trying to reassure unsuspecting readers that MSNBC is anything other than what it is: a third-rate, third-place network Manifestly Seeking to Nuzzle the Bi-coastal Crowd.