By Brad Wilmouth | May 31, 2010 | 11:57 PM EDT

On Monday’s Special Report with Bret Baier on FNC, during the show’s regular "Fox All Stars" segment, columnist and FNC contributor Charles Krauthammer argued that the group of ships that were raided by Israeli troops were intentionally trying to provoke an incident and weaken Israel’s blockade of Gaza, as he related that Israel not only already allows plenty of aid shipments into Gaza, but had even offered to deliver the aid on the ships so long as the military was allowed to screen the contents to make sure no weapons were being smuggled.

After complaining about the word "humanitarian" being applied to the ships, Krauthammer argued that there is no "humanitarian crisis" that was being addressed by the flotilla: "There's no one starving in Gaza. The Gazans have been supplied with food and social services, education, by the U.N., by UNRWA, for 60 years, in part with American tax money. Second, when there are humanitarian needs, the Israelis allow every day food and medicine overland into Gaza. The reason that it did not want to allow this flotilla is because, as the spokesman for the flotilla said herself, this was not about humanitarian relief, it was about breaking the blockade." He went on to recount that the blockade exists to prevent weapon shipments to the terrorist group Hamas which controls the government in Gaza.

Weekly Standard editor and FNC contributor Bill Kristol argued that the Israelis would have been willing to deliver legitimate aid from the ships: "As Charles said, they can get humanitarian aid into Gaza. If they want more humanitarian aid to Gaza, airlift in five million tons of nice goods, and the Israelis will just take a look and make sure they're not arms and let them go through the checkpoint. This checkpoint is open. Stuff goes through every day."

By Brad Wilmouth | May 4, 2010 | 6:13 AM EDT

During Fox News Sunday's "Roundtable" segment, regular panel member Brit Hume chided the news media for spreading misinformation about the new law in Arizona aimed at enforcing federal immigration laws, as he charged that "It's turned out that a lot of the news stories simply flat had it wrong, and a lot of the critics of the bill itself have also got it wrong."

After recounting that the law requires "that there be a legitimate law enforcement incident, a stop, a detention, or arrest," and "reasonable suspicion," he concluded that "all the hysteria about it is grossly overdone, in my judgment."

By Ken Shepherd | February 11, 2010 | 9:39 AM EST

Always beware when a liberal journalist praises a conservative. It's almost always for when said conservative (or in this case neoconservative Bill Kristol) says or does something that is or can be spun to be helpful to liberal Democrats.

Case in point, yesterday's The Gaggle blog post by Newsweek's Eleanor Clift, in which the liberal veteran journalist praised Bill Kristol for, you guessed it, saying something critical of House GOP leaders:

By Mark Finkelstein | January 3, 2010 | 10:18 AM EST

Bill Kristol has set forth a stinging indictment of the Obama admin's handling of the war on terror. His two-minute monologue on today's Fox News Sunday delineated a devastating bill of particulars:

  • It was a mistake to treat Abdul Mutallab as a criminal defendant rather than as an enemy combatant: "Mr. Brennan [Obama's top counter-terrorism adviser who appeared earlier] said to you that we're very worried that there're other Abdul Mutallabs out there. This Abdul Mutallab was there for four months.  He might know who the others are.  He might know their names. Will you let him lawyer up?"
  • As to Brennan's claim that there was no "smoking gun" regarding Abdul Mutallab: "He is the smoking gun," going on to detail all the red flags surrounding him. "Frankly, for Mr. Brennan to say, well, no smoking gun, that itself shows a kind of not-serious-about-the-war mentality."
The Weekly Standard editor wasn't through . . .
By Jeff Poor | December 15, 2009 | 2:24 AM EST

Perhaps there is something obstructing the view overlooking Rockefeller Plaza, where MSNBC broadcasts "Countdown" nightly because the show's host, Keith Olbermann fails to see the existence of a news media with a liberal bias.

On MSNBC's Dec. 14 broadcast of "Countdown," Olbermann came to the defense of NBC's "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" executive producer and noted left-winger Dick Wolf. The Dec. 9 episode of Wolf's program featured a killer who targeted the children of illegal immigrants and in that episode, one of the characters, played by John Larroquette, blamed conservatives "like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck" for inciting violence against immigrants. That prompted O'Reilly on Dec. 10, the next broadcast of the Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor," to fire back at Wolf.

And that led Olbermann to respond to O'Reilly, five days later, which deteriorated into Olbermann making the seemingly laughable assertion there is no such thing as the liberal media. Olbermann began his tirade by attacking Andrew Breitbart, who is launching a Web site called "Big Journalism," which will take on "the Democratic-media complex."

By Brad Wilmouth | November 17, 2009 | 12:54 PM EST

On Monday's Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, presumably picking up on a posting by the far left ThinkProgress.org -- one of his regular sources of information to attack conservatives -- made the arguably inaccurate claim that FNC political analyst Bill Kristol had on the Thursday, November 12, Special Report with Bret Baier on FNC, called for Fort Hood gunman Nidal Hasan to be convicted and executed without trial. After calling the FNC analyst's words "anti-American," and quoting a portion of Kristol's words, Olbermann lectured:

But seriously, the men and women that this man killed – however you define him – those men and women of the U.S. military, Mr. Kristol, were fighting for the right to trial, due process, justice. Thanks for spitting on the dead of Fort Hood, William Kristol, today’s “Worst Person in the World.”

By NB Staff | September 8, 2009 | 12:02 PM EDT

Just as soon as &quot;average Americans practice their First Amendment free speech rights to protest another outrageous liberal proposal,&quot; the liberal media &quot;immediately go into full-on attack mode - against the American people&quot; Media Research Center President Brent Bozell argued in a statement released this morning.<br /><p>&quot;Just as with the tea party protesters, and the socialized health care town hall protesters, the media are again attacking the American people for having the temerity to speak up,&quot; the NewsBusters publisher complained. </p><p>Mr. Bozell was addressing the vicious personal attacks members of the media have been making on parents objecting to the proposed Obama administration &quot;lesson plan,&quot; which was to accompany a speech President Obama is delivering today to American children. </p><p>President Obama is still addressing the children, but in response to public outrage has withdrawn the Department of Education &quot;lesson plan&quot; which recommended among other things that teachers have their students &quot;write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the President.&quot; As the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol has pointed out, it is against the law for the Department of Education to hand down any sort of teaching materials. But rather than report on this, the leftist media are attacking parents.  </p>

By Brent Baker | September 6, 2009 | 4:31 PM EDT

It took Van Jones' resignation, around midnight Saturday night on a holiday weekend, for ABC and NBC to mention him for the first time in Sunday morning news shows which broached, but failed to quote, the insidious “911truth” petition he signed, while ABC's George Stephanopoulos, seemingly trying to rationalize ABC's spiking of the subject, came aboard Good Morning America to dismiss the matter as “a summer squall.” Stephanopoulos was impressed by how the White House handled it: “The fact they got it out of the way before the end of the Labor Day weekend, before his spokespeople like Robert Gibbs, who's appearing on This Week come on this morning, I think will contain any kind of damage.”

That, and a compliant news media. As Bill Kristol observed on Fox News Sunday: “The mainstream media did not cover this story.”

Mike Viqueira reported on NBC's Today: “Van Jones, that's the President's 'green gobs' czar, has resigned overnight after it became known that before joining the administration he signed a petition put forward by those who believe that the government had a hand in 9/11.” Later, Viqueira relayed how “Jones says he is the victim of a 'vicious smear campaign' from the right, but he says he's resigning because he doesn't want to draw attention from the fights to come this fall over health care and energy and climate change legislation.”

By Noel Sheppard | July 27, 2009 | 10:18 AM EDT

"This president who travels the world apologizing for his country couldn't quite apologize for himself."

So said Brit Hume on the most recent installment of "Fox News Sunday" as the panel discussed Barack Obama's handling of the Henry Louis Gates affair.

Adding insult to injury, there was virtual unanimity that the President erred in this matter, and erred badly (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript):

By Ken Shepherd | July 5, 2009 | 11:40 PM EDT

MSNBC anchor and Keith Olbermann wannabe David Shuster is so beside himself with glee over Gov. Sarah Palin's resignation that he's eager to let the whole world -- or at least some 18,000+ followers on Twitter -- know about it 140 characters at a time. In the process Shuster spewed ad hominem attacks on Palin backers on Twitter and endorsed as a knee-slapper a July 3 slam of Palin penned by veteran Democratic hack Paul Begala.

Earlier Sunday evening the regular substitute host for "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" snickered over Palin's choice of legal counsel and his "intellectual vapidity." Those comments came on the heels of Shuster lambasting Palin's defenders, including columnist Bill Kristol, as intellectually immature juveniles (tweets are in reverse chronological order):

Still laughing over palin lawyer thomas von flein. Now I'm beginning to feel sorry for palin.

Speaking of intellectual vapidity, check out the 4 page letter from palin lawyer. Sheesh

[...]

@laurapocketdem. Good point. I I owe an apology to all middle schoolers. I'm sorry for comparing you to some palin defenders. :)

By Clay Waters | February 4, 2009 | 8:27 PM EST

New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller is participating in the paper's "Talk to the Newsroom" online chat this week, discussing, among other things, the potential for the Times to again start charging for online content, but also taking cheap shots at conservatives Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and even just-released columnist Bill Kristol in an ill-advised attempt at satire. Keller's running commentary also marks the third time in less than a week that a Times editor has gone after FOX News talk show host Bill O'Reilly. The first was this, from Sunday's lead editorial on racist Republicans opposed to immigration:

Google the words "Bill O'Reilly" and "white, Christian male power structure" for another YouTube taste of the Fox News host assailing the immigration views of "the far left" (including The Times) as racially traitorous.

The second attack on O'Reilly came via a post on the the paper's editorial board blog, "The Nativists Are Restless, Continued," after the Fox News host devoted the first half hour of the Monday night edition of "The O'Reilly Factor" taking on the Times for attacking him.

By Jacob S. Lybbert | January 29, 2009 | 3:15 PM EST

In what can only be interpreted as another blow to media balance & fairness, the New York Times has refused to guarantee that another conservative would replace fired columnist Bill Kristol.

On Monday, it was announced that Kristol's gig with the New York Times had come to an abrupt end. My colleague, Noel Sheppard, quoting a report in the Daily Beast, noted the conflicting and contradictory reports about the supposed reason for Kristol's firing. He quoted one source as saying “His conservative ideas were cutting edge and influential,” I was told. “But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.”

But, as Noel also pointed out in his column, the Times sure doesn't seem to have a problem with the sloppy writing and fact checking of other columnists, like Paul Krugman.