How Rodger Ailes Built the Fox News Fear Factory

Tim Dickinson of Rolling Stone begin his article with the following: 

"At the Fox News holiday party the year the network overtook archrival CNN in the cable ratings, tipsy employees were herded down to the basement of a Midtown bar in New York. As they gathered around a television mounted high on the wall, an image flashed to life, glowing bright in the darkened tavern: the MSNBC logo. A chorus of boos erupted among the Fox faithful. The CNN logo followed, and the catcalls multiplied. Then a third slide appeared, with a telling twist. In place of the logo for Fox News was a beneficent visage: the face of the network’s founder. The man known to his fiercest loyalists simply as "the Chairman" – Roger Ailes."

You can read the rest here.

This article privides a little history on how our news culture has been dumbed downed.  It is a very interesting read.

Jose Guerena: A Story To Follow

"On May 5 at around 9:30 a.m., several teams of Pima County, Ariz., police officers from at least four different police agencies armed with SWAT gear and an armored personnel carrier raided at least four homes as part of what at the time was described as an investigation into alleged marijuana trafficking. One of those homes belonged to 26-year-old Jose Guerena and his wife, Vanessa Guerena. The couple's 4-year-old son was also in the house at the time. Their 6-year-old son was at school."

You can read the read of the story here.

Perhaps this was a series of wrong moves by everyone involved.  Perhaps not.  I wonder where this story will lead next.

CFPB Hearings

Seems that Elizabeth Warren attended a hearing on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that will start in a month or so.  During a hearing, where apparently a lot of people didn't do their homework on the agency, Rep. Patrick McHenry  (R-N.C.), basically calls Ms. Warren a liar.

So I wonder where this will lead.  Will McHenry apologize to Ms. Warren or will he just continue to accuse her of more things?  Well according to the Huffington Post he commented:

"I was shocked by Ms. Warren’s blatant sense of entitlement," he added. "She was apparently under the assumption that she could dictate a one-hour time limit for her testimony to Congress and that we were there at her behest instead of the other way around. This is just further example of her disregard for congressional oversight.”

He is at least consistent with his foolishness.  Personally it seems McHenry is a little scared of Ms. Warren. He must can't handle a strong, intelligent and powerful woman as he seemed surprised that she didn't stand down.

I know that these are just politicians so I shouldn't expect more but I had always heard that in this type of situation if you are asking a question you should at least know what the answer should be.  Asking the question is just a formality.  Whether the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is needed or not we may never gather from these hearings as the politicians can’t seem to get their personal agendas out of the process. 

It is a shame as this should be easier than this. 

Those Darn Democrats

So the President mentions a return to the 1967 borders (with line swaps) thing for Israel and as expected a certain party attacks him this particular stance.  No that it is true what they believed he said.  What is sort of unbelievable is the party that is doing it is his own party.

What the president stated is that any Israeli-Palestinian peace should be based of pre-1967 lines with line swaps not the incorrect assertion that the President wants Israel to go back to the borders of pre-1967.  This particular goal has always been there whether spoken or not.  It really is that simple.  Go research it yourself.  This is not a very bad thing to start with, but no one really wants to talk about it.  Go figure.

Heck I except the President to be attacked by the other party (or parties), that’s pare for the course but I really expect his own members to at least not participate in all the lies going about.

As one example of this sort of ignorance, Rep. Steve Rothman (D-N.J.) stated: 

"A two-state solution agreed upon by the Israelis and Palestinians should be negotiated through direct talks," Rothman said Friday in a statement, "but it is important to remember that a full return to the 1967 borders will be indefensible for Israel and that talking with terrorists who want to destroy Israel is a non-starter."

But the President never said to return to the 1967 borders.  Thanks for paying attention Rothman.  I wish President Obama would just backhand some of these people.  However, all of this nonsense caused the president to explain exactly what he wants the enemies to do (using small words for the uninformed) at his speech at AIPAC.  He said:

Let me reaffirm what “1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps” means. By definition, it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967.

Yes it is that easy. 

But let’s be real.  It seems to me that the involved parties only want to talk about peace.  They have a lot of trouble actually making it happen.  Fifty years from now the president at the time will still be sitting at the table trying to broker some sort of peace deal.

Hopefully his party will be behind him all the way.  It appears that will happen only if he is a republican.

Just saying.