Conservative Blogger
Saturday, August 29, 2015
Why Donald Trump’s Fox News War May Make Viewers Rage Against the Network
It’s Donald Trump’s world, and Roger Ailes is just living in it.
That’s the message Trump sent
the Fox chairman on Monday when he ended his ceasefire with the de facto
king of conservative media. Trump’s latest round of figurative shots fired at network star Megyn Kelly — and Roger Ailes’ bold, forceful response — sets up what TheWrap previously reported as the real 2016 campaign: Trump vs. Ailes.
“It’s always hard to get inside
the head of Donald Trump,” veteran reporter Mark Feldstein told TheWrap.
“The irony is he’s almost taking a page from the Murdoch-Ailes playbook
in his campaign in that Fox’s whole approach is ‘we’re the
grievance-filled underdog against the establishment and elites; Trump is
using Jiu-Jitsu to try and turn things against the very network that
invented it.”
Also Read: Donald Trump vs. Roger Ailes: How Fox News Chief Used Debate to Strike Against GOP Frontrunner
While the media and political
pundits collectively predict Trump’s war against Fox is suicidal for his
White House hopes, Feldstein said not so fast.
“He’s not doing this blindly; he
knows what he’s doing and there’s a calculus behind everything he’s
done and every time he says something that’s more and more wild,
everyone predicts that’s the end of him, but he only grows stronger. The
conventional wisdom is it’s suicidal, but everything Trump’s done that
conventional wisdom said was suicidal has only helped him.”
Feldstein, who teaches
journalism at University of Maryland, suggested the latest Trump-Fox
fight might be his big play for the angry, alienated white male vote.
“He’s sort of criticizing Fox for employing Megyn Kelly and letting her
get away with, as he put it, unfair treatment.”
Trump might be going after a
particular slice of the electorate, but going against the voice of the
GOP is much bigger than just angry, white men — it’s a shotgun pass for
the growing anti-establishment Republican voter, whom Trump is betting
big on by hoping they view Fox News as the personification of the
establishment.
And it might work.
The Trump supporter is the
Fox News viewer on steroids — fed up with the GOP congress and
not-conservative-enough Republican presidential contenders. And sensing
that Rupert Murdoch and Ailes have no interest in Trump’s candidacy
being anything more serious than a short-term ratings boon, Trump made
the calculated decision to fight the machine; a machine that aside from
its brief romance with the Tea Party, is the establishment.
Just look down Fox News’ roster and you’ll see figures who represent a cardboard cutout Republican: Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly,
former George W. Bush press secretary Dana Perino, former GOP campaign
aide Andrea Tantaros, Daily Caller editor-in-chief Tucker Carson,
Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, frequent guest and editor
of the Weekly Standard Bill Kristol. Oh, let’s not forget, GOP
presidential contenders Mike Huckabee and John Kasich used to host
programs at Fox News.
Hell, Fox News even dubbed Trump a one-man Tea Party machine (the network declined to comment for this story).
But Christopher Hahn, a radio host and former aide to Senator Chuck Schumer, believes Trump’s battle against Fox will backfire.
“Never pick a fight with someone
who buys ink by the barrel or pixels by the freight car load,” he told
TheWrap. “He’s picking a fight with a multimedia giant. You can never
win that fight.”
But Trump has won every fight so
far: against illegal immigrants, against war hero John McCain, against
Fox News after the first GOP debate, and of course, against Jeb Bush and
the rest of the Republican candidates who were supposed to be leading
the pack.
And in the full-on war between Trump and Fox News, the Donald’s success or failure rests with Ailes.
What happens when Trump stops
going on Fox News, like he did the last time around, and the ratings
take a dip while other networks hosting Trump soar? Will the legendary
ratings hound still stand with his star Kelly, or backpedal in order to
squeeze every last ounce out of the Donald orange?
“In a way you can ask the same
question about both Trump and Fox: Which really matters more, their
business interest or their political advancement?” Feldstein said,
concluding that the more Trump injects Fox into the 2016 arena, the more
it legitimizes Fox as a political player rather than just a “marginal
network of crazy ideologues.”
To find out which set of
ideologues wins the war, one figure remains out front as a media star
and the champion of fed-up voters.
Donald Trump.
Trashed: Study finds students toss veggies mandated by federal school lunch program
Public schools are continuing to serve the federally mandated fruits and vegetables, but a new study claims the fresh produce is going into trash cans more than tummies.
Since 2012, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has implemented a requirement – widely championed by First Lady Michelle Obama – that children must select either a fruit or vegetable for school lunches subsidized by the federal government. However, a new report published this week by researchers at the University of Vermont found that even though students did add more fruits and vegetables to their plates, as the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act” enforces, “children consumed fewer [fruits and vegetables] and wasted more during the school year immediately following implementation of the USDA rule.”
The report, entitled “Impact of the National School Lunch Program on Fruit and Vegetable Selection,” noted that average waste increased from a quarter cup to more than one-third of a cup per tray. Observing students at two northeastern elementary schools during more than 20 visits to each, researchers took photos of students’ trays after they chose their items, as they were exiting the lunch line and again as they went by the garbage cans.
“The architects of the Act want their children and schoolchildren across America to eat healthy, hearty meals," Joe Colangelo, director of the product testing and consumer advocacy organization Consumers’ Research, told FoxNews.com. "Unfortunately, our government does not have a perfect record of influencing the eating habits of American citizens.”
First Lady Michelle Obama eating fries and a hamburger.
“It's this kind of micro-management of our lives that conservatives always warn about and new media claim won't happen."The study's conclusions jibe with widespread complaints from school officials and parents that the program encourages food waste. It has also drawn criticism for cost, difficulty in implementing and lack of appeal for students.
- Dan Gainor, Media Research Center
Parents, not schools, should decide what their children eat, said Dan Gainor, of the Media Research Center
“Schools can't tell what eating disorders or personal preferences each student has,” Gainor remarked. “It's this kind of micro-management of our lives that conservatives always warn about and new media claim won't happen. Until it does.”
A spokesperson for the USDA emphasized that the observation that went into the Vermont study was conducted in 2013, only a year after the program was put into practice, and said several other studies since then have indicated that kids are indeed eating healthier as a result of updated nutrition standards for school meals. A 2014 study by Harvard University’s School of Public Health found that children actually consumed more fruits and vegetables in the wake of the government’s new guidelines.
“Ninety-five percent of schools are successfully serving healthier meals, and in 2014, schools saw a net nationwide increase in revenue from school lunches of approximately $450 million," the USDA spokesperson said in a statement to FoxNews.com. "For those schools still working to implement the standards, we’ve provided training, resources and flexibility."
While a large year-end spending bill passed by Congress last December didn’t pave the way for schools to completely withdraw from the USDA program, it did give them the green light to ease standards slated to take effect in 2017 regarding whole grains and salt intake. Congress is set to vote next month on whether to re-approve the school lunch initiative.
Despite the backlash, the school lunch regulations have supporters who applaud it as a step in the right direction.
“Without guidelines, we had vending machines with soda, chips and gummy bears and fast food restaurants serving lunch in elementary schools too,” said Stacey Antine, a registered dietician and founder of HealthBarn USA, a program that teaches children to grow their own produce and the importance of healthy eating. “We know that good nutrition is important for learning, good behavior and healthy habits for weight maintenance, so it is important that all children have access to healthy foods.”
Call me 'ze,' not 'he': University wants everyone to use 'gender inclusive' pronouns
UPDATE: Rickey Hall, the vice chancellor for diversity and inclusion at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, said their quest for gender neutral pronouns is not an official university policy.
“It’s not policy,” he said. “It’s about inclusive practice.”
Hall told me the gender neutral pronouns were a way of “exposing our students (to an) increasingly diverse and global world.”
He said gender neutral pronoun usage is not new – and that as things change – people always have questions. Nevertheless, he stressed this is not a mandated university policy.
For all you folks who went to school back when there were only him and her – here’s a primer: some of the new gender neutral pronouns are ze, hir, zir, xe, xem and xyr.“I reiterate, it’s not a mandate, it’s not an official policy, it’s not a policy from the board,” he told me. “It’s about education. We are (a) higher education institution and exposing our students to a lot of different things.”
“With the new semester beginning and an influx of new students on campus, it is important to participate in making our campus welcoming and inclusive for all,” wrote Donna Braquet in a posting on the university’s website. “One way to do that is to use a student’s chosen name and their correct pronouns.”
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch – a MUST READ for Conservatives!
Braquet, who is director of the university’s Pride Center, suggested using a variety of gender neutral pronouns instead of traditional pronouns.
Dumb Ass
“There are dozens of gender-neutral pronouns,” she declared.
For all you folks who went to school back when there were only him and her – here’s a primer: some of the new gender neutral pronouns are ze, hir, zir, xe, xem and xyr.
“These may sound a little funny at first, but only because they are new,” Braquet explained. “The ‘she’ and ‘he’ pronouns would sound strange too if we had been taught ‘ze’ when growing up.”
Somehow I sincerely doubt that, but whatever. Anything goes for the sake of inclusivity, right?
“Instead of calling roll, ask everyone to provide their name and pronouns,” she wrote. “This ensures you are not singling out transgender or non-binary students.”
For example, the birth certificate might say that Big Earl is a male. But what if Big Earl identifies as a lady who wants to be called Lawanda?
According to the procedures outlined by the folks at the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, the professor is obligated to call Big Earl – Lawanda – or whatever name makes Big Earl feel more included.
“We should not assume someone’s gender by their appearance, nor by what is listed on a roster or in student information systems,” Braquet wrote. “Transgender people and people who do not identify within the gender binary may use a different name than their legal name and pronouns of their gender identity, rather than the pronouns of the sex they were assigned at birth.”
It’s all so confusing, right? So thankfully, the Office for Diversity and Inclusion has devised a way to prevent students and professors from calling “sir” a “ma’am.”
“You can always politely ask,” she wrote. “’Oh, nice to meet you (insert name). What pronouns should I use?’ is a perfectly fine question to ask.”
Let’s just say that not everyone is on board with the new gender neutral pronouns. Lots of folks in Big Orange Country are turning blood red.
“It’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard,” Republican State Sen. Mae Beavers told me. “If you must interview a student before you greet the student, that’s not acceptance – that’s just absurd.”
Beavers represents a “very conservative” district and she said her constituents are enraged over how their tax money is being spent by the university.
“The idea a child would want to be called by a gender neutral term is absolutely ridiculous,” she said. “It’s getting so crazy in this country.”
Julie West has two children at the university – not to mention a family dog named after the Volunteer’s revered coach – General Neyland.
“This isn’t inclusion,” she said. “This is the radical transformation of our lives and language.”
I reached out to the vice chancellor for tolerance and diversity (yes they really do have such a thing) – but I’m still waiting for him or her or ze or xyr to call me back.
There you have it, folks. His and Hers is no longer good enough at the University of Tennessee – where they are willing to sacrifice anything for the sake of gender inclusivity – including common sense.
I wonder if they’ve got a gender neutral word for idiot?
Fact Check: Which Republican candidates actually cut spending?
Every Republican presidential candidate has promised to keep government spending in check -- but which ones actually have a track record of doing that?
All say they would cut. In the last debate, Jeb Bush said people in Florida called him "Veto-Corleone" because he vetoed so much spending. Mike Huckabee said the federal government "is not too big to shrink." Chris Christie says he "balanced budgets."
Is it true? There are an almost infinite number of ways that records can be spun. Some focus on cuts in one small program or on small tax cuts. But governors have actual records. So what do they show?
The "Stossel" show crunched the numbers on that -- adjusting them for inflation and population growth. Here's what the data on governors and ex-governors show:
The chart above shows that Bush cut spending the most. Though he's criticized by conservatives as "too moderate," the former Florida governor cut spending by an average of 1.39 percent each year he was in office. Most cuts came from "public assistance," higher education, and state discretionary spending.
But the above chart isn't perfect for comparing candidates, because governors serve terms in very different time periods. Some served during recessions, when most states must cut spending.
We adjusted for that by doing another comparison -- how much each governor spent compared with other governors in office at that same time:
Related Image
This chart, at right, shows that Bush was indeed the biggest budget cutter. During his tenure, Florida's spending shrunk by 3.6 percentage points more than the average. He cut spending by 1.39 percent per year in his state, while other states increased theirs by 2.3 percent during that same period. Kasich was also conservative by this measure, cutting spending 1.76 percentage points more than other states did.
But both charts show spending grew by the most under New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee.
Asked for comment, a Huckabee spokeswoman said: "Having had to face the most Democrat legislature in the country, and a state controlled almost entirely by the Clinton Political Machine, Governor Huckabee is proud of his record of cutting taxes almost 100 times and leaving Arkansas with an almost $1 billion surplus."
Still, if a tax cut isn't accompanied by a fall in government spending, then taxes may have to go up in the future to pay for that.
Christie's spokesman said the growth of the budget under the Garden State governor is mostly driven by state entitlements, which the governor has little control over, and that he has cut the "discretionary" parts of the budget:
"When you scratch below the surface, the governor's fiscal discipline over the budget is more dramatic, with discretionary spending cut to $2.3 billion below where it was in 2008 [a 9 percent cut.] Non-discretionary spending in public employee entitlements and debt service have driven spending and we continue working to reform these programs and control those costs."
Christie's spokesman also notes, "Governor Christie has done this with a legislature controlled overwhelmingly by Democrats."
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's spokesman also said that entitlement spending made up most of the budget increases under Walker.
But Florida's entitlement spending also increased. Yet Bush made cuts in other areas deep enough to overtake that.
Kasich's spokesman said the chart shows the governor's good record.
"The governor has worked hard to manage the state efficiently, to rein in costs and to cut taxes, and as a result, the state workforce is the lowest it's been in 30 years," Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols said.
The senators running for president have no precise budget track record to nail down, but there are ratings that indicate whether they were fiscally conservative or reckless. The National Taxpayers' Union gives Texas Sen. Ted Cruz a 95 percent rating, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul 94 percent, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio 87 percent. Citizens Against Government Waste gives them all 100's -- putting them among the top 9 out of 100 senators when it comes to spending less.
DATA SOURCE: Raw spending data is from the National Association of State Budget Officers and includes all forms of state government spending, excluding federal grants and bond purchases. The data go through FY2014. The spending data were adjusted for inflation and population using BLS and Census data.
Emails show Bill Clinton asked State Dept. for OK on N. Korea, Congo invites
WASHINGTON – Newly surfaced emails show the Clinton Foundation asked the State Department about proceeding with two presumably paid speeches for former President Bill Clinton in North Korea and the Republic of the Congo, despite each engagement’s ties to repressive regimes.
The emails, obtained by FoxNews.com, surfaced as part of a records request by the group Citizens United.
In both sets of 2012 emails between the foundation led by Bill Clinton and the department led by wife Hillary Clinton, the former president’s team acknowledged the invitations could raise concerns. But they asked the State Department, which screened all such speeches by the ex-president, anyway.
In one May 14, 2012 email, Clinton Foundation staffer Amitabh Desai forwarded an email with the subject line “North Korea invitation” to Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s then-chief of staff at the State Department.
“Dear Cheryl, we’d welcome your feedback on the attached invitation – would USG have concerns?” Desai wrote.
Four days later, Desai sent Mills another email. “Is it safe to assume USG would have concerns about WJC accepting the attached invitation related to North Korea? Thanks, Ami.”
ABC News first reported on the emails.
Hillary Clinton, on the sidelines of the Democratic National Committee meeting in Minneapolis Friday, defended the process for vetting these requests.
Clinton admitted receiving “some unusual requests” but said “they all went through the process” and, ultimately, the invitations in question were declined.
Though in a curious aside, the 2016 Democratic presidential frontrunner noted her husband went to North Korea in 2009 to rescue reporters.
“You might not recall but [President] Obama sent Bill to North Korea to rescue journalists who were captured,” Clinton told reporters. “Every offer we made was rebuffed and we offered many people to go and finally North Koreans said if Bill comes, we will give him two journalists.”
Clinton left the podium before any follow-ups could be asked.
In the case of the North Korea invite, while the foundation acknowledged potential concerns, the official followed up in early June after Mills said to decline it. Desai said the matter came from Tony Rodham, Hillary Clinton’s brother, and they would like to relay “any specific concerns” as Rodham was about to meet with Bill Clinton.
Mills responded on June 9, 2012: “If he needs more let him know his wife knows and I am happy to call him secure when he is near a secure line.”
The email exchange does not include much detail on the invitation, in contrast with the messages on the Congo request.
They show the speaking engagement in Brazzaville came with a hefty $650,000 speaking fee – one of numerous such engagements through which the former president has made millions since leaving office.
The catch: the event included the leaders of not only the Republic of the Congo but Democratic Republic of the Congo, Joseph Kabila – whose government has an abysmal human rights record. And Clinton, under the terms of the invite, would have to stay after the speech to greet Kabila and other dignitaries.
The Harry Walker Agency, which worked with the Clinton Foundation on coordinating speeches, recommended in a June 6, 2012 email declining the invitation.
“I anticipate the location for the event and the parties involved might give you pause,” Don Walker, the agency’s president, wrote in an email to the foundation.
“We have gently asked if the venue must be in the Congo, and if the Head of State involvement is necessary,” Walker wrote in the email. “They tell us that both are mandatory. For that reason we anticipate you will want us to quickly decline.”
From there, Desai forwarded the email to Mills, Clinton aide Huma Abedin and other State Department officials saying despite the issues, “WJC wants to know what state thinks of it if he took it 100% for the foundation. We’d welcome your thoughts.”
Ultimately, the engagement did not go forward.
“The emails speak volumes to the ongoing undercurrent that Bill Clinton would take money from anyone,” David Bossie, president of Citizens United, told FoxNews.com on Friday. He disputed Hillary Clinton’s claims that the State Department vetted every request the foundation made and argued the emails show “a pattern.”
Bossie said that while some Clinton supporters might use the emails to show the system set up by the State Department and the Clinton Foundation worked, the emails speak to a seedier side of the Clinton Foundation.
“If this was a one-and-done issue, I’d be like, it’s only once and they handled it correctly,” Bossie said, adding, “If their pushback is that the speeches didn’t happen and that it’s a great example of them doing a good job, I’d say, it doesn’t mean that they didn’t try.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
