Libtalkers Invent Accusations To Bolster 'Case' Against Fox News Channel

THEY'RE DESPERATE

Lefty Anti-Fox Quest Increasingly Irrational







You've got to feel sorry for our "progressive" friends: their greatest enemy has survived what until a few days ago seemed like certain defeat.

Following a parliamentary hearing that failed to show News Corp Chairman Rupert Murdoch as a scary monster (perhaps even slightly human), the left can no longer count on a breakup of the company. Worse, Fox News Channel (not a focus of any allegations in the phone-hacking scandal that brought down a London tabloid) is likely to emerge unscathed.

But that hasn't prevented our libtalk buddies from keeping up the fight, adding helpful "evidence" to prove their case.

Too bad it's all made up.


First, watch as talker Stephanie Miller accuses Fox personalities of inciting violence and even murder. Then, giggle as MSNBC's Ed Schultz tell his radio audience that Murdoch is responsible for hijacking the 2004 presidential election:

STEPHANIE MILLER (19 JULY 2011): This (Phone hacking scandal) is like too good to be true for Liberals, isn’t it? Ha ha ha. We’re like we couldn’t have even written this.

MIKE IN CHICAGO: When can we go to the top of Mount Everest and scream, 'we told you right wing tools about Fox News but none of you believed us.'

MILLER: Yeah I mean, somebody wrote a piece Mike that ah we’ve been pointing out from our friends at Media Matters and others for the longest time that you know Glenn Beck for instance has incited actual violence you know this Byron Williams you know Bill O’Reilly in my opinion is largely responsible for Dr. Tiller’s murder. You know it’s stuff like that that you go we have known for a long time that this place is just a, not to mention that it is an arm of the Republican Party. That’s what it is.

And watch as fellow libtalker Ed Schultz claims Murdoch stole the 2004 presidential election away from John Kerry!

ED SCHULTZ (Hour One - 18 July 2011 - 00:58): Two big stories out there - number one, I mean, I'm just hoping and praying that this Fox News story, this Rupert Murdoch thing just doesn't end. Holmy, this could be the downfall, I mean, the only savior could be the personalities across the street at Fox, if they're clean.


[...]


SCHULTZ (02:39): This is a product of deregulation. Because if you didn't have the deregulation of the media, Murdoch would have never been able to put himself in this position. Why isn't anybody doing that angle of the story?


[...]


SCHULTZ (08:24): OK, here's the point. Did Murdoch want Kerry to win?

HOLM: No way.

SCHULTZ: OK.

HOLM: No way!

SCHULTZ: Did he have the power? Did he have the way? Did he have the means? Did he have the template to infiltrate a political campaign? And the answer to that, unequivocally, yes! So, do you think, let me ask you this question, do you think we would have been a different country had John Kerry been president versus Dubya the second time around?

This is big stuff! And the Democrats are sitting there saying, well, let's have an investigation. Investigation?! Hell, let's put the throttle down. This, there's no more, there's no bigger story in America, outside of course whether we're going to pay our bills or not.

It only gets better from here- stay tuned for the next update.