Some claims are too petty even for Media Matters to make on the merits alone.  Unfortunately, that’s not to say they have the good sense to abandon such attacks—no, they just need a little extra padding, like dredging up old, unrelated controversies to make them seem more significant.

Such is the sorry state of their latest attack on Sean Hannity, who, in a discussion last night with Fox News’ John Gibson, observed:

Look at, for example, MoveOn.org. Look at how ugly this got. Here’s a guy that has dedicated his life — General [David] Petraeus — to saving his country: “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” […] Why do you think there wasn’t more outrage and why wasn’t there more media coverage — in the mainstream media — on this?

First, Media Matters runs down a long list of media outlets that did cover the General Betray-Us ad.  Unfortunately, they don’t describe or link to any of them, leaving the reader to guess just how accurate, biased, or “extensive” any of that coverage really was.  Are we talking full reports, or passing references in other discussions?  Substantive criticism and reporting on the ad’s offensive nature, or attempts to equivocate?

In any event, Media Matters seems to have caught Hannity speaking less precisely than he should have in an off-the-cuff reference to a two-year-old controversy.  Keep up the important work, guys!  Maybe you can follow-up with a special report exposing all the typos in Gibson’s new book!

Perhaps sensing that this observation might not be stunning enough to warrant a full post, Media Matters introduces a hypocrisy angle, claiming that many of the same outlets who pounced on the Betray-Us story ignored the faux controversy over Rush Limbaugh’s “phony soldiers” remarks.  Yes, because we all know the mainstream media’s real problem is its right-wing bias!

Unfortunately for Media Matters, a quick Google search reveals several media outlets did cover them—including the New York Times, CNN, USA Today, the Boston Herald, the Christian Science Monitor, the Huffington Post, and even “right-wing” Fox News.  At the time, NewsBusters pointed out that MSNBC covered the story obsessively, and speculated that the rest of the MSM might have ran away from it because it was so quickly shown to be bogus, they recognized “how hypocritical it would be to castigate Limbaugh for basically reiterating what ABC’s Brian Ross and Charles Gibson reported last Monday evening just two days before,” and/or they hoped to bury then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s embarrassing ties to the smear machine.

It never ceases to amaze what non-stories pass for scandal on the Left.  Media Matters’ strategy might be to overwhelm conservatives with the sheer number of their daily attacks, but their tactics only prove that quantity is no substitute for quality.

_____

Hailing from Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, Calvin Freiburger is a political science major at Hillsdale College.  He also blogs at the Hillsdale Forum and his personal website, Calvin Freiburger Online.

When MSNBC gave Ed Schultz a nightly segment entitled “Psycho Talk,” it was apparently in obedience to the truth in advertising laws. On Thursday night, the low-rated host of “The Ed Show” used that segment — which is supposed to highlight over-the-top rhetoric from conservatives — to call Rush Limbaugh “a racist, pill-poppin’ radio guy.”

Schultz was outraged that Rep. Steve King, R-IA, had asked NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to apologize to Rush Limbaugh for denying Rush partial ownership of the St. Louis Rams while allowing Jennifer Lopez and Fergie to become co-owners of the Miami Dolphins after worse (read: actual) offenses. Schultz assaulted King and the talk show titan:

Once again, we have the Righties playing the fringe in jumping to the Drugster’s defense, straying from a very serious topic in a serious hearing to defend a racist, pill-poppin’ radio guy.  That’s Psycho Talk.

Big Ed then insulted Media Research Center and Newbusters.org founder Brent Bozell, alleging that the media had nothing to apologize for in its reporting about Rush Limbaugh:

[F]ellow Psycho Talker “Bozo” Brent Bozell issued a statement today saying that the demand for an apology was quite “exactly what we have been calling on the media to do.” For what?

Schultz’s denial of reality and endless demonization of Bozell and Rush Limbaugh prove the depths of little Ed’s Genius Envy. Let’s examine….

Ed Schultz: biting wit, or wit that bites?

Bozell’s statement, which Ed quoted in part, states the apology “is exactly what we have been calling on the media to do since they first misrepresented the fictitious, racist quotes attributed to Rush Limbaugh.” It then links to MRC’s “Tell the Truth” page where Ed, and Goodell, could educate themselves about the media’s lies against Limbaugh. (Goodell responded to King by saying, “I’m not an expert on his, on all of his quotes.” To say the least.) Although the quotations that the “mainstream” media reported and that sank Rush’s NFL bid turned out to be phony, Ed had no problem repeating the charge they contained.

The object of Ed's "Genius Envy."

Ed and MSNBC do not bristle at phony reporting; they excel at it. MSNBC smeared Sarah Palin with the erroneous story that she did not know Africa was a continent. Schultz lied that 9/12 protesters carried signs calling for Obama’s death, and falsely accused the Physicians Council for Responsible Reform of shady behavior in its campaign against socialized medicine. MSNBC’s has produced erroneous transcripts of “The Ed Show,” as well.

Ed’s hatred of Rush Limbaugh knows no limits. Schultz has called Rush “an ally of bin Laden.” He has said, “Rush Limbaugh wants a race war.” In a two-minute rant alone, Schultz called the most successful man in Ed’s chosen profession a “drug-ridden loser,” a “fat pig,” a “scumbag,” and a “complete coward,” who should “[g]o see the doctor and get some hearing.” (He then called Brent Bozell a “nerd.”) Character assassination and lies are typically directed by inferior talent against those whose abilities they envy.

I’ve detailed some of Ed’s other insanity here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. As I noted, Schultz began his career with at least $800,000 from Senate Democrats, so evidently the filth that comes from Ed’s mouth suits them just fine. Ed is their idea of mainstream America.

Incidentally, Ed Schultz’s idea of a great Congressman is Alan Grayson, of “K Street Whore” fame, of whom Schultz said: “He’s a great presenter.  We need more of that guy on the floor.”

Ultimately, both reflect the unyielding hatred, personal spite, and — yes — envy of the Left.