His readers must be shocked. How could liberal pop-columnist and movie critic Richard Roeper call for the presidential pardon of Scooter Libby? It’s true, the Chicago Sun-Times, the newspaper for which Roeper writes, officially stated its position in an eye-opening column last Monday.
To be fair, it was actually conservative columnist Robert Novak who called for the pardon in his June 11th column, but doesn’t one person’s opinion on a topic become that company’s official position? It does according Roeper’s school of thought.
Over the last several years liberals have made it a sport to hysterically attack Fox News so they don’t have to explain why it’s the highest rated and most-watched cable news network. It’s just easier to denounce it as a propaganda outfit…a very, very successful propaganda outfit.
Faithfully doing his part, Roper titled his most recent column, “Fox’s slant on Moore enough to make you ill” but points to an entirely different culprit:
To the surprise of no one, Fox News has been attacking Moore’s latest (documentary).
Last Sunday night, Sean Hannity sounded as if he was ready to hand Moore a blindfold and a cigarette.
Is Roeper talking about Sean Hannity or Fox News here? I’m confused because I just read Fox’s review of the supposedly “brilliant and uplifting” documentary and I’m having trouble finding all the attacks. Nowhere in the review does it indicate that Fox movie-critic Roger Friedman is ready to give Moore “a blindfold and a cigarette.” If anything Friedman is looking to give Moore an Oscar statue.
By making Sean Hannity the official spokesperson for Fox News, Roeper made about as much sense as I did when I wrote that he was calling for the pardon of Scooter Libby based on a Robert Novak column.
So blinded and disgruntled liberals are by their hatred for a news network that is infinitely better and more popular than anything their media personalities have ever been able to create that they stubbornly refuse to accept Fox’s reaching hand.
I’m still amazed by how stupid the Democratic presidential hopefuls were when they refused to appear in a debate sponsored by Fox News and potentially tap into a voter pool that could easily determine the outcome of the next election.
Sure, they won’t get their ideas out to the independents who watch Fox News (or the part of its audience that justifies Roger Friedman’s paycheck), but at least they pleased the Keith Olbermann fan club and MoveOn.org nuts who were going to vote for them anyway and haven’t put a Democrat in the Whitehouse since they kept Bill Clinton in 1996 with less than 50% of the popular vote.
It was the last time a Democrat won, and right when Fox News was in its infancy. Is it powerful enough to shape elections? Who knows, but the Left is certainly doing themselves no favors by refusing to work with a machine that isn’t going away anytime soon, no matter how many Roeper columns are written to denounce it.