Fact Check: Reich Claims Non-Existent Fox News Led Conservative Charge in 1994

[red states rule]

Since when have facts ever mattered to liberals?





Former Obama economic advisor, Clinton Secretary of Labor, and Berkely Prof. Robert Reich claimed yesterday in his column at Salon.com that Fox News played a role in the conservative resurgence of 1994:

In December 1994, Bill Clinton proposed a so-called middle-class bill of rights including more tax credits for families with children, expanded retirement accounts, and tax-deductible college tuition. Clinton had lost his battle for healthcare reform. Even worse, by that time the Dems had lost the House and Senate. Washington was riding a huge anti-incumbent wave. Right-wing populists were the ascendancy, with Newt Gingrich and Fox News leading the charge. Bill Clinton thought it desperately important to assure Americans he was on their side.

But Prof. Reich overlooked one minor detail: Fox News Channel’s first broadcast wasn’t until October 7, 1996.

http://bigjournalism.com/fross/2010/01/26/fact-check-reich-claims-non-existent-fox-news-led-conservative-charge-in-1994/

[CSM]

Since when have facts ever mattered to liberals?

Now there is an inconvenient truth!

[red states rule]

Now there is an inconvenient truth!

This is not shocking CSM. With liberals it is always about blaming someone else

Obama and the Dems have blamed Fox News, talk radio, racists, Nazi's, sexists, and bitter voters for their failures - not their failed policies

To be fair, there are a few Democrats out there who are fessing up the voters do not want the change Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are offering

And some of them are smart enough not to run again for office in 2010

[CSM]

This is not shocking CSM. With liberals it is always about blaming someone else

Obama and the Dems have blamed Fox News, talk radio, racists, Nazi's, sexists, and bitter voters for their failures - not their failed policies

To be fair, there are a few Democrats out there who are fessing up the voters do not want the change Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are offering

And some of them are smart enough not to run again for office in 2010

Ya know, it's really hard to figure out which neurons are firing and which are not in some liberals brain. The lack of common sense seems to be a systemic flaw along with failure to recognize consequences of ones actions and denial of responsibility. It's like the libs all have some kind of virus.

[red states rule]

Ya know, it's really hard to figure out which neurons are firing and which are not in some liberals brain. The lack of common sense seems to be a systemic flaw along with failure to recognize consequences of ones actions and denial of responsibility. It's like the libs all have some kind of virus.

It is not a lack of common sense CSM. I honestly believe your far left liberals actually know what they are doing

They want power and control. They will do anything to attain both

Meanwhile, they openly show they refuse to live by the same rules they demand others to live by, because they know what they are selling is pure BS

One example - They know that driving small golf carts with bucket seats will not change the climate - so why should drive/ride in them?

[CSM]

It is not a lack of common sense CSM. I honestly believe your far left liberals actually know what they are doing

They want power and control. They will do anything to attain both

Meanwhile, they openly show they refuse to live by the same rules they demand others to live by, because they know what they are selling is pure BS

One example - They know that driving small golf carts with bucket seats will not change the climate - so why should drive/ride in them?

I have no doubt that the liberal leadership is as you describe. The lil sheep that follow them, however, (IMO) are as I depict. They would have to be or they just wouldn't blithely follow along and embrace the kool aid.

[red states rule]

I have no doubt that the liberal leadership is as you describe. The lil sheep that follow them, however, (IMO) are as I depict. They would have to be or they just wouldn't blithely follow along and embrace the kool aid.

Based on my personal contact with liberals, for the most part liberals run on emotion

They claim to care about people despite the fact their polices harm the people they are intended to help. Their policies keep them dependent on government, and their list of entitlements continues to grow

They claim to have a big tent, support free speech, and welcome an open exchange of ideas and opinions - but anger takes over when you disagree with them

To be a good liberal, all you have to say is you care about a group of people, or a cause

You really don't have to help that group, or solve a problem - just express your desire to help and BOOM - you are held in high esteem within your liberal circle of friends

[HogTrash]

Since when have facts ever mattered to liberals?People like young Noir would have believed it.

"I can see Russia from my window".

Liberals are prone to believe "convenient truths".

[red states rule]

People like young Noir would have believed it.

"I can see Russia from my window".

Liberals are prone to believe "convenient truths".

That ranks up there with Obama blaming Pres Bush for the deficit while increasing spending

[stephanie]

I'm sure we will be told it was an HONEST mistake and he MISPOKE.

the Progressives are nothing but shameless liars and the sooner the people who think they belong to the Democrat party old is no more, the better.. This Democrat party today has been infiltrated by a bunch of Progressive commie rats.

wake up people

[Luna Tick]

Change two words and he's right on the money. Change "Fox News" to "right-wing radio" and he's exactly right. He got one fact wrong, but his general idea is dead on.

And it's hilarious that right wingers (who aren't conservative, btw.) accuse liberals of taking stances based on emotion. The right is almost 100 percent emotion and zero logic, and all either misinformation or half truths. That entire Republican revolution of '94 was 100 percent anger. In other words, it was all emotion. You could write an entire dissertation of facts Rush Limbaugh gets wrong and then glosses over with anger. Accusing liberals of emotionalism. That's funny.

[Little-Acorn]

Change two words and he's right on the money. Change "Fox News" to "right-wing radio" and he's exactly right. He got one fact wrong, but his general idea is dead on.


You mean, somebody telling the truth on the radio, influenced an election???

That's shocking! How could we possibly permit such a thing to happen?

Obama will fix it.

[82Marine89]

Ya know, it's really hard to figure out which neurons are firing and which are not in some liberals brain. The lack of common sense seems to be a systemic flaw along with failure to recognize consequences of ones actions and denial of responsibility. It's like the libs all have some kind of virus.

It's not a matter of which are firing and which are not Command Sergeant Major. It's a matter of how many have brain cells that fire in sequence.

[HogTrash]

Change two words and he's right on the money. Change "Fox News" to "right-wing radio" and he's exactly right. He got one fact wrong, but his general idea is dead on.

And it's hilarious that right wingers (who aren't conservative, btw.) accuse liberals of taking stances based on emotion. The right is almost 100 percent emotion and zero logic, and all either misinformation or half truths. That entire Republican revolution of '94 was 100 percent anger. In other words, it was all emotion. You could write an entire dissertation of facts Rush Limbaugh gets wrong and then glosses over with anger. Accusing liberals of emotionalism. That's funny.No doubt, AM radio is predominately right-wing big-time!...Fox News however is debatable...Please allow me to explain my reasoning.

I once thought Fox definately leaned to the right but as I began paying close attention they seem to be pretty close to what they claim...Fair and balanced.

My opinion is that we as Americans have become so accustomed to the biased left wing media and journalism that anyone who reported dirt on the left appeared to be right wing.

In other words we were simply so use to not hearing such honesty about liberals and democrats that it shocked us all regardless of our political leanings to hear it being reported.

My first reaction to Fox was "all right, finally a right wing news source to balance things out"...But after the innitial shock wore off and several years of viewing, I re-evaluated my beliefs.

Fox actually does report the dirt on everyone regardless of politics and always seems to have a balanced number of pundits from all political ideologies, especially the two major parties.

I would give them a 55% conservative/45% liberal balance reporting rating, which blows everything else away when you are looking for the fair and balanced facts.

[avatar4321]

You underestimate the power of Fox News. They are so powerful they got Reagan elected by a landslide too with their political machine of misinformation.

[Silver]

Change two words and he's right on the money. Change "Fox News" to "right-wing radio" and he's exactly right. He got one fact wrong, but his general idea is dead on.

And it's hilarious that right wingers (who aren't conservative, btw.) accuse liberals of taking stances based on emotion. The right is almost 100 percent emotion and zero logic, and all either misinformation or half truths. That entire Republican revolution of '94 was 100 percent anger. In other words, it was all emotion. You could write an entire dissertation of facts Rush Limbaugh gets wrong and then glosses over with anger. Accusing liberals of emotionalism. That's funny.

What a moron...
So if the man up instead of down, he'd be right...
If he said right instead of left, he'd be right...

The fact is, he said "Fox News", and HE's WRONG...period

[red states rule]

Change two words and he's right on the money. Change "Fox News" to "right-wing radio" and he's exactly right. He got one fact wrong, but his general idea is dead on.

And it's hilarious that right wingers (who aren't conservative, btw.) accuse liberals of taking stances based on emotion. The right is almost 100 percent emotion and zero logic, and all either misinformation or half truths. That entire Republican revolution of '94 was 100 percent anger. In other words, it was all emotion. You could write an entire dissertation of facts Rush Limbaugh gets wrong and then glosses over with anger. Accusing liberals of emotionalism. That's funny.

OK class, time for your history lesson

Which conservative talk show hosts were on the air in 1994?

Sean Hannity went on the air on 9/10/2001

Mark Levin went on the air in 2002

Laura Ingraham went on the air in April 2001

The only mainstream conservative radio talk show host was Rush Limbaugh

So, are you trying to say it was the power of Rush Limbuagh that caused the Dems to lose control of Congress in 1994?

Hardly

It was the power grabs by the Dems with Hillarycare, and gun control. Also the Dems Congressional bank scandal where Dems would bounce checks without fees, and taxpayer money was used to cover the checks

The rout of the Dems was so bad, House Speaker Tom Foley (D-Washington) was defeated for re-election in his district, becoming the first Speaker of the House to fail to win re-election since the era of the American Civil War

We can only hope 2010 will be even worse for the Dems