Powered By Christian Gifts

Showing posts with label Lame Stream Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lame Stream Media. Show all posts

Monday, April 13, 2009

Officials spread lies for Obama about Captain Phillips rescue

H/T Bluegrass Pundit.

To hear White Offiicials and the lame stream media spin this you would believe that barak obama saved Captain Phillips directly. The reality, of course, is different.
Yes obama should be given credit for authorizing the U.S. Navy to be on scene and standing by, that's his job. The fact is obama was still negotiating with these Somali thugs when, the actual "green light" to take them out came from a U.S. Navy officer on scene acting within his orders and ROE.


The Associated press reported that President Obama gave the order to use military force to rescue the hostage. That is misleading at best. There were standing orders to take action if Captain Phillips life was in danger, but Obama did not authorize a rescue operation. This success is the result of the Navel Officer on the scene taking action within his orders. The AP should print a retraction.

Here is the AP story:
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama twice authorized the military to rescue a U.S. captain held by Somali pirates and whose life appeared to be at risk.

Officials say Obama gave the OK on Friday and Saturday to rescue Capt. Richard Phillips from a lifeboat off the Somali coast. Officials say both times the Pentagon believed Phillips' life was at risk.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. 
Here is what the Wall Street Journal reported:
Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, commander of all naval forces in the Middle East, told a Pentagon news conference that the USS Bainbridge had been towing the lifeboat holding the pirates and Capt. Phillips into calmer waters when Navy Seal sharpshooters, positioned at the tail of the ship, saw the head and shoulders of the three remaining pirates, with one of them pointing an AK-47 machine gun at the head of Capt. Phillips.

Adm. Gortney said the Navy officer in charge of the operation ordered the pirates to be fired upon.

Before the incident, Adm. Gortney said U.S. officials had hoped to resolve the standoff peacefully.
Obama did not order an operation, but instead was still seeking a negotiated solution. Most of the Main Stream Media will print and believe anything that makes Obama look good.

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Groundhog Day for the Fifth Column of Malice

By Melanie Phillips

So there is indeed now a war. In Gaza. Actually, there are two wars going on: one involving rockets and warplanes, and the other involving the media, as Barry Rubin notes:

Nothing is clearer than Hamas’s strategy. It gives Israel the choice between rockets and media, and Hamas thinks it is a situation of, ‘We win or you lose.’...The smug smiles are wiped off the faces of Hamas leaders. Yet they have one more weapon, their reserves, they call up the media. Those arrogant, heroic, macho victors of yesterday – literally yesterday as the process takes only a few hours – are transformed into pitiful victims. Casualty figures are announced by Hamas, and accepted by reporters who are not on the spot. Everyone hit is, of course, a civilian. No soldiers here. And the casualties are disproportionate: Hamas has arranged it that way. If necessary, sympathetic photographers take pictures of children who pretend to be injured, and once they are published in Western newspapers these claims become fact.
All too predictable – and going to plan, with assistance from the Club of Terror UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who condemned “excessive use of force leading to the killing and injuring of civilians,” and Navi Pillay, the ludicrous UN High Commissioner for “Human Rights,” who “strongly condemned Israel’s disproportionate use of force.” Of course, the Club of Terror UN has been silent about the actual violations of international law by the Palestinians, as pointed out here by Justus Reid Weiner and Avi Bell:
The Palestinian attacks violate one of the most basic rules of international humanitarian law: the rule of distinction, which requires combatants to aim all their attacks at legitimate targets - enemy combatants or objects that contribute to enemy military actions. Violations of the rule of distinction - attacks deliberately aimed at civilians or protected objects as such – are war crimes.
Furthermore, say Weiner and Bell, Israel actually has a legal duty to take action against Hamas under the Genocide Convention:
In carrying out their attacks on Israeli Jews as part of a larger aim to kill Jews, as demonstrated by the Hamas Covenant, many of the Palestinian terrorists are also violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. Under Article 1 of the Genocide Convention, Israel and other signatories are required to ‘prevent and punish’ not only persons who carry out such genocidal acts, but those who conspire with them, incite them to kill and are complicit with their actions. The Convention thus requires Israel to prevent and punish the terrorists themselves, as well as leading figures that have publicly supported the Palestinian attacks. Article 2 of the Convention defines any killing with intent ‘to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such’ as an act of genocide.
If anything has been “disproportionate,” it’s been Israel’s refusal to take such action during the years when its southern citizens have been terrorized by rockets and other missiles raining down on them from Gaza. No other country in the world would have sat on its hands for so long in such circumstances. But whenever Israel defends itself militarily, its response is said to be “disproportionate.” The malice, ignorance and sheer idiocy of this claim is refuted here comprehensively by Dore Gold, who points out that Israel’s actions in Gaza are wholly in accordance with international law. This permits Israel to launch such an operation to prevent itself from being further attacked. Moreover, it defines ‘disproportionate’ force as when force becomes excessive if it is employed for another purpose, like causing unnecessary harm to civilians.

But Israel has demonstrably not been targeting civilians but Hamas terrorists. Despite the wicked impression given by the media, most of the casualties in this operation have been Hamas operatives. Even Hamas itself has admitted that the vast majority of sites Israel has hit were part of their military infrastructure. UNRWA officials in the Gaza Strip have put the number of deaths at 310, of whom 51 were civilians. The rest were Hamas terrorists.

Certainly, some civilian casualties are regrettably inevitable in any such situation – but particularly so in Gaza, since Hamas has deliberately sited its terrorist infrastructure amongst the civilian population.

Those who scream ‘disproportionate’ think – grotesquely -- that not enough Israelis have been killed. But that’s in part because Israel cares enough about human life to construct air raid shelters where its beleaguered civilians take cover; Hamas deliberately stores its rockets and other apparatus of mass murder below apartment blocks and in centers of population in order to get as many of its own people killed as possible as a propaganda weapon. Hamas is thus guilty of war crimes not just against Israelis but against the Palestinian people. Yet on this there is – fantastically, surreally – almost total silence in the west, which blames Israel instead. Historical resonances, anyone?

In any event, if by ‘disproportionate’ is meant merely an imbalance in the numbers who are killed on either side, this is actually inescapable if the infrastructure of aggression is to be defeated. Many more died in Afghanistan than in the 9/11 attacks; yet that war was necessary to destroy the Taliban. Many more died in Nazi Germany or Japan than in Britain or America during World War Two. Yet the scale of the Allied offensive was necessary to defeat Nazism and prevent yet more carnage amongst its designated victims.

The disgusting fifth column in the Gaza conflict, however, is – as ever – the western media. It was telling to witness the sight of British TV camera crews heading out to Israel on Saturday night. The point was that they weren’t already there – because their editors had not thought it necessary to send them to cover the resumed rocket attacks on southern Israel. Indeed, hardly anyone in Britain is aware that Israel is only now finally responding to some 6,000 rocket attacks since 2001, with a 50% increase after Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. British journalists were only dispatched to the battle zone when Israel finally retaliated – because, appallingly, it is only Jewish violence that is ever the story.

As a result, Israel is painted – wholly unjustly and untruthfully -- as the aggressor. The ineffable BBC reported in radio bulletins on Saturday that Israel’s attack had “put back the chance of peace in the region.” Most sane people would think that the reason peace in the region had been put back was that Hamas was continuing to wage aggressive war. And indeed, even now it is still firing rockets at Israel, including Katyushas and Iranian Grads which are reaching as far as Ashkelon and Ashdod. Today they killed another Israeli in Ashkelon and injured many more – including several Israeli Arabs.

If the media have mentioned the attacks on Israel at all, they have done so as an afterthought. The main story is “disproportionate” Israeli violence. As far as I can see, there has been no mention of the extraordinary fact that on the day prior to the start of the Israeli operation, a Palestinian from the Gaza Strip was admitted to hospital in Israel for medical treatment for a severe wound -- inflicted upon him by a stray Hamas rocket which had been fired at Israel.

What other country would treat its enemies in its own hospitals – which Israel does routinely with Palestinians from Gaza -- even when they are wounded as a direct consequence of their own side trying to murder yet more Israelis? What other country would provide or enable the supply of electricity, gas and other essentials to people who use such facilities to continue trying to murder as many of its citizens as possible? On Sunday, for instance, as Ha’aretz reported, the Kerem Shalom crossing was opened to let through 26 trucks carrying food and medical equipment. Today it was opened again and about 40 trucks had entered with food and medical supplies by midday. Yet organizations such as Amnesty International have condemned Israel's imposition of all “blockades” on the Gaza Strip as “collective punishment,” and Jeremy Hobbs, Director of Oxfam International, has called on Israel “immediately [to] lift its inhumane and illegal siege.”

Yet it is Hamas that is refusing wounded Gazans access into Egypt for treatment – and indeed the Egyptians even opened fire on them. So where are the screams about Egyptian and Hamas brutality? Where are Amnesty and Oxfam’s condemnation of Hamas and Egypt? And might all those from the Foreign Secretary down screaming about a “humanitarian disaster” in Gaza pause for one second and look at the well-fed, healthy Gazans parading across their TV screens? If that’s a “humanitarian disaster” – with supplies constantly pouring through the illegal tunnels from Egypt, along with billions of dollars-worth of missiles with which to commit mass murder – what do they call what’s happening in Zimbabwe, which for some unaccountable reason inspires among the high-minded merely indifference?

Such bigotry and malice are not confined to British media and NGOs. On Salon, Glenn Greenwald whines about
America’s one-sided support for whatever Israel does from our political class, and one-sided condemnation of Israel's enemies (who are, ipso facto, American enemies) -- all of it, as usual, sharply divergent from the consensus in much of the rest of the world.
Oh really? Well, Hamas has been blamed for this war by Mahmoud Abbas, who said Hamas could have avoided this attack if it had prolonged its “cease-fire.” It has been blamed for this war by Egypt; and Arab states which are terrified of Islamism in general and Iran in particular are privately rooting for Israel to wipe Hamas out. Even the Israeli left is supporting this operation. The only people taking the side of the genocidal terrorists of Hamas are the western media, parroting their propaganda and thus inciting yet more to join the murderous rampage against Israel as well as ratcheting up the pressure on world leaders to force Israel to stop before Hamas is destroyed.

Isn’t there a case for legal action against these media outlets on account of their blood libels, for indirectly aiding the perpetrators of attempted genocide?

Note: Emphasis added is mine.

Friday, November 21, 2008

Media Malpractice, continued

A recent left wing troll comment pointed out that 67,000,000 people voted for obama up from the 63,400,000 reported shortly after November 4th. Apparently another 3,600,000 votes were found and counted. Isn't that special?

Using the 67 million number and based upon Zogby's recent poll of obama voters, the following numbers can be expanded.

97.1% High School Graduate or higher or 65,057,000; 55% College Graduates or 38,781,350.

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing) 38,458,000 got this wrong. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and John Murtha are actually Democrats you idiots.

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing) 54,806,000 got this wrong. Duh, what's plagiarism?

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing) 55,342,000 got it wrong.

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing) 59,228,000 got it wrong. How many of those actually work in the coal industry?

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing). 37,587,000 got it wrong.

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes.Only 9,179,000 got this wrong.

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter. Only 4,154,000 got this wrong.

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!! This one made me laugh, 58,223,000 got this wrong.

Apparently these people watch way too much television, in particular the Lame Stream Media. Tina Fey is NOT Sarah Palin and Saturday Night Live is a comedy show last time I checked you morons. LOL. Oh. But wait. Doesn't Tina Fey actually work for one of the major news outlets? Is SNL like CNN? How stupid are you clowns?

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. 1,608,000 got at least 11 of the 12 questions correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey). 335,000 got all 12 questions correct. What does this tell you about the 97.1% number above? And the questions were all multiple choice.

I don't follow polls but many on the left do as evidenced by all the poll numbers thrown around by them prior to the election. Of the 67,000,000 who voted for obama, I wonder how many of those were people thought to be dead who miraculously came back to life to vote or have a park bench as an address or are in reality dogs and cats registered to vote? Perhaps only your local ACORN voter fraud center or the DNC can answer to those.

Simply amazing to me that 67 million could have elected a total unknown. This admitted to by the Lame Stream Media and a high percentage of those who voted for nobama, apparently, if you follow polls that is. Of course any good leftist will dispute the polls when they don't go their way.

The total population of the United States passed the 300 million mark in 2006. So nearly 24% of the population voted for obama. Astonishing. Just imagine what the number would be if Roe vs Wade had not become law and nearly 50 million babies had not been murdered by your stinking abortion clinics.

I have my own list of questions for readers of this blog. There are 17 total. Thanks Norm.

Without looking the answers up on the net or from some other source, how many can you answer correctly? No cheating.
___________________________________________________________________________
History Test

1. What Party was founded as the anti-slavery Party and fought to free blacks from slavery?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

2. What was the Party of Abraham Lincoln who signed the emancipation proclamation that resulted in the Juneteenth celebrations that occur in black communities today?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

3. What Party passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting blacks freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

4. What Party passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 granting blacks protection from the Black Codes and prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations, and was the Party of most blacks prior to the 1960’s, including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Booker T. Washington, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

5. What was the Party of the founding fathers of the NAACP who were themselves white?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

6. What was the Party of President Dwight Eisenhower who sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

7. What Party, by the greatest percentage, passed the1957 Civil Rights Act and the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960’s?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

8. What was the Party of President Richard Nixon who instituted the first Affirmative Action program in 1969 with the Philadelphia Plan that established goals and timetables?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

9. What is the Party of President George W. Bush who supports the U.S. Supreme Court’s University of Michigan Affirmative Action decision, and is spending over $200 billion to fight AIDS in Africa and on programs to help black Americans prosper, including school vouchers, the faith-based initiative, home ownership, and small business ownership?

[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party

___________________________________________________________________

10. What Party fought to keep blacks in slavery and was the Party of the Ku Klux Klan?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

11. What Party from 1870 to 1930 used fraud, whippings, lynching, murder, intimidation, and mutilation to get the black vote, and passed the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws which legalized racial discrimination and denied blacks their rights as citizens?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

12. What was the Party of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry Truman who rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

13. What was the Party of President John F. Kennedy who voted against the 1957 Civil Rights law as a Senator, then opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. after becoming president, and later had the FBI (supervised by his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy) investigate Dr. King on suspicion of being a communist?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

14. What is the Party of current Senator Robert Byrd who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Senator Fritz Hollings who hoisted the Confederate flag over the state capitol in South Carolina when he was the governor, and Senator Ted Kennedy who recently insulted black judicial nominees by calling them “Neanderthals” while blocking their appointments?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

15. What was the Party of President Bill Clinton who failed to fight the terrorists after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, sent troops to war in Bosnia and Kosovo without Congressional approval, vetoed the Welfare Reform law twice before signing it, and refused to comply with a court order to have shipping companies develop an Affirmative Action Plan?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

16. What is the Party of Vice President Al Gore whose father voted against the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960’s, and who lost the 2000 election as confirmed by a second recount of Florida votes by the “Miami Herald” and a consortium of major news organizations and the ruling by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that blacks were not denied the right to vote?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

17. What Party is against the faith-based initiative, against school vouchers, against school prayers, and takes the black vote for granted without ever acknowledging their racist past or apologizing for trying to expand slavery, lynching blacks and passing the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that caused great harm to blacks?

[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party

___________________________________________________________________

An estimated 97% of black voters voted for obama and yet we are told that a vote for anybody other than obama is considered racist. Oh really? So I'm a racist....a bigot because I didn't vote for your blaspheming messiah. Will we be made to wear 6 pointed stars on our shirts with "bigot" in the center?

Good luck with your new president elect. Somehow I can't help but shudder at the prospect of 4 years of lies, deception, indoctrination, and intimidation ahead of us aided and abetted by your Lame Stream Media malpractitioners...is that a word?..heh. We've already had 2 years of a Democrat majority in CONgress. Just imagine if they have a filibuster proof majority. God help us.

When your president elect gets done with his "experimentation" perhaps the adults can take over and actually fix the problems plaguing this country. Until then I can only pray your elected Democrats don't screw things up too bad so it doesn't take us decades to correct the inane stupidity of their policies.

And just so you socialist clowns know, the problem with socialism is that you will eventually run out of other peoples money.

Who ya gonna tax when you can't tax anyone anymore? When you have ruined capitalism and run small business owners out of business, where is the money going to come from then? How many big businesses are you going to take over and allow your CONgress Clowns in Action, CCIA, to run into the ground? You already have nearly 50% of the population who don't work and rely on some form of government handout. What are you going to do when that number increases sharply? Slave labor? Concentration camps? Gulags? Reeducation Centers? Involuntary euthanasia for everyone over the age of 50? All of the above?

Good luck with that.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

'Media Malpractice'

Quote; "The media coverage of this campaign was so scandalous, so beyond bias into the realm of media malpractice."

This is how Obama was elected. If you can stand to watch another Obama...Obama chant watch the videos below;

On November 4th, 2008 millions of Americans were shocked that a man of Barack Obama's limited experience, extreme liberal positions and radical political alliances could be elected President of the United States. For many of these Americans, the explanation was rather simple... the news media, completely enamored with Obama, simply refused to do their job.

On Election day twelve Obama voters were interviewed extensively right after they voted to learn how the news media impacted their knowledge of what occurred during the campaign. These voters were chosen for their apparent intelligence/verbal abilities and willingness to express their opinions to a large audience. The rather shocking video below seeks to provide some insight into which information broke through the news media clutter and which did not.



Watch John Ziegler's appearance on Fox News, Hannity & Colmes show.



Because obviously interviewing a relative handful of Obama voters, while interesting, is hardly scientific proof of anything, we also commissioned a Zogby telephone poll which asked the very same questions (as well as a few others) with similarly amazing results.

Zogby Poll: Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test


Survey finds most Obama voters remembered negative coverage of McCain/Palin statements but struggled to correctly answer questions about coverage associated with Obama/Biden.

Zogby Poll


512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
Read the story here.
Get the full poll results here.

Watch the documentary here.

News Not Found in The Lame Stream Media (I)

Radical homosexuals plan day of 'intolerance'

Activist homosexual leaders are planning a day of protest this Saturday over losing the traditional marriage battles in three states.

The homosexual movement for special rights has become louder, and in some cases violent, in the aftermath of losses at the ballot box in Florida, Arizona, and California. Florida Family Association notes the increased intensity in rhetoric from the self-proclaimed "champions of tolerance" and diversity. The National Day of Protest's logo is a clenched fighting fist and features phrases such as "Fight the H8" (Fight the Hate) and "Ready to Rumble."

Florida Family Association notes the irony in that the homosexual movement that formerly preached diversity and tolerance has now become increasingly disorderly and aggressive, even intolerant, of supporters of traditional marriage by vandalizing property and staging protests at and inside churches. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel says the demonstrations ought to be taken seriously, especially this Saturday.

"There have been threats of church burnings. There have been threats of violence, even murder against Christians," he explains. "There has been vandalism already of a number of churches."

According to an alert issued by the Florida Family Association, the "radical gay leaders" have two goals in mind through the upcoming protest: one being to normalize homosexuality in all areas of American society, and the second being to "silence everyone who disagrees with them." The notice adds that the homosexual activists are refusing to accept the final vote as an expression of the will of America's people.

"It really amounts to homo-fascism, and so what we're seeing [is] they don't want to let the democratic process play out," Barber adds. "These people are anti-democracy, clearly."

Florida Family Association also believes the radical homosexual agenda is "unapologetically 'me' centered" and does not feature discussions about what is best for families, children, or the common good of society. Barber points out the Bible's contrasting view. "Scripture says specifically, of people who are trapped in the homosexual lifestyle, ...that they are given over to a reprobate mind," he concludes. (See Romans 1:27-29)

For those living in a bubble or expecting your network news to report these stories, don't hold your breath waiting. Below are related stories you likely won't see from our "Pravda" like news outlets;

Elderly Prop. 8 supporter roughed up, filing charges

Homosexual activists accused of 'domestic terrorism'

Fort Worth Episcopals vote to leave liberal denomination

Is this what we can expect more of under an Obama administration?

The tolerance from the left is unbearable. They have become emboldened by the euphoria of a leftist dream of utopia and they know exactly how to get it, apparently. Get ready for "The Change We Can Believe In."

Sarcastic? You betcha!

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Who are left-wing haters to point fingers at John McCain?

Tuesday, October 21st 2008

In his endorsement of Barack Obama last week, former Bush administration Secretary of State Colin Powell said that "I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, 'He's a Muslim and he might be associated [with] terrorists.' "

This is a serious accusation to level, and Powell ought to have had the courage to name names.

Nonetheless, the notion that the McCain campaign, and conservatives more broadly, have stooped to an unprecedented level of "sleaziness" with negative, nasty and mendacious campaign tactics has become the accepted media narrative over the past several weeks. "Smear" is the word you most often hear nowadays next to "Republican." But while it may be true that some in the conservative fever swamps have resorted to ugly tactics, they don't hold a candle to the left's rhetoric over the past eight years.

Liberal pundits are attempting to outdo one another in describing just how unscrupulous conservatives have become. In The New Yorker last week, Hendrik Hertzberg referred to McCain-Palin rallies as "blood-curdling hate-fests." Frank Rich went one step further in The New York Times, decrying the "Weimar-like rage" of the Republican Party base, evidenced by a few attendees at a Sarah Palin rally who shouted "terrorist" and "off with his head" when she mentioned Barack Obama. Rich's fellow Times columnist Paul Krugman remarked that attendees at GOP gatherings have been "gripped by insane rage" at the prospect of an Obama presidency. Ascribing the oafish behavior of a handful to an entire political party, The Nation magazine slams the "GOP's machinery of hate" in an editorial patronizingly entitled, "Waiting for the Barbarians."

If my inbox is to be believed, there are certainly people on the right who believe that Barack Obama is a secret Muslim lying in wait to foist jihad upon the United States. And there are people who oppose him because of his name or his race. But one has to have been asleep during the Bush years to think that nuttery is exclusively a conservative phenomenon.

What about the left's conspiracy theories? A not insignificant portion of liberals in this country believe that a small group of Jews, er, the "neocons," took control of the government following 9/11 to fight wars on behalf of Israel. Is not this slander as odious as the Internet rumors about Barack Obama?

Time columnist Joe Klein fits the profile of the liberal hypocrite beset with disappointment over McCain's alleged degradation. He recently apologized to readers for writing earlier that John McCain was "honorable." This from a man who just a few months ago alleged that "Jewish neoconservatives" were disloyal Americans because their "plump[ing]" for war in Iraq and now Iran "raised the question of divided loyalties: using U.S. military power, U.S. lives and money, to make the world safe for Israel."

Rich's use of the term "Weimar-like rage," ironically in a column decrying Republican scare tactics, is but one example of the left's careless usage of Nazi allegories to describe people and policies they don't like. Since 9/11, major anti-war rallies have included people holding signs and puppets comparing President Bush to Adolf Hitler. Leftist writer Naomi Wolf, who has expressed fears that the feds were monitoring her children's letters from summer camp, recently published a book titled, "The End of America," which likens the Bush administration to a fascist junta.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann spews over-the-top, hateful rhetoric in his "Special Comments" on a regular basis. He has said that the Bush administration threatens America with a "new type of fascism," referred to the GOP as the "leading terrorist group in this country" on the fifth anniversary of 9/11, and has said that Fox News is "worse than Al Qaeda" and "as dangerous as the Ku Klux Klan ever was."

Have the journalists now bemoaning the low tactics of the McCain campaign and its supporters never set eyes upon the wildly popular Huffington Post? That Web site hosts countless angry rants, many examples of which are too vulgar to document in a family newspaper. In 2004, Nicholson Baker wrote a novel imagining the assassination of President Bush. Last week, Fox's "Family Guy" depicted Nazis donning McCain-Palin buttons.

If these fringe (and most of them are hardly fringe) individuals don't speak for American liberalism writ large - as most "respectable" liberals will tell us when confronted by the examples enumerated above - then the stray hecklers at McCain-Palin rallies cannot represent American conservatism.

By imputing the crazy views of a few right-wing extremists to all conservatives, Obama supporters cut off legitimate concerns about their candidate's positions and qualifications for office. Anyone troubled by the Democratic presidential candidate's years-long association with unrepentant terrorist William Ayers and his dismissal of that individual as "a guy who lives in my neighborhood" becomes a right-wing lunatic. Anyone who raises the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is answered with an eye roll.

To be sure, the McCain campaign has made its fair share of exaggerations and distortions about its opponent's record. But nothing he or his surrogates have done is any more egregious than the lies, hysteria and ad hominem attacks that have poured from the mouths and keyboards of the left. So pardon me for being a little skeptical about the pundit class' selective indignation over gutter-ball campaign tactics. It would have been nice if they paid attention the last eight years.

Kirchick is an assistant editor at The New Republic.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Wake Up America, Before It's Too Late

I received this in an email from family and thought it impoirtant enough to share with you all.

Listening to the mainstream media these last few days I've learned a few things about the GOP's VP nominee but also had to learn a few things on my own.
To wit:

1. From the media I learned Sarah Palin's husband has a DUI conviction from 22 years ago.

*On my own I learned that Ted Kennedy (hero of last week's tribute at the DNC) was drunk while driving a car off a bridge in Chappaquiddick.
That same crash killed a young campaign volunteer with whom he was having an affair. Oh, and that woman was pregnant with his child.

* Mr. Palin's (who is not running for office) DUI came a mere 4 years after Barack Obama (who is running for president) stopped using cocaine and marijuana (by his own admission in his autobiography).

Shocking - it's OK for the presidential candidate to use drugs or the party patriarch to kill someone while driving drunk yet the husband of a VP candidate should be demonized for something done 22 years ago.

2. From the media I learned that Sarah Palin's daughter is pregnant.

* On my own I learned that Joe Biden's (the other VP candidate) son was paid a large amount of money as a consultant to credit card company MBNA. That same company had business before Senator Joe Biden concerning regulation of consumer credit practices. After the company paid a hefty sum to Mr. Biden's son, he voted in favor of legislation to help that company.

* That same son, Hunter, is also engaged in a legal investigation and suit for defrauding a former business partner.

Shocking - it's a crime for the republican VP candidate to have a child who's pregnant even though it's irrelevant to how she performs her job.
It's ok, however, for the democrat VP candidate while a senator to vote in favor of a company who paid his son over a quarter of a million dollars.

3. From the media I learned that Sarah Palin should be considered 'selfish' for agreeing to run for VP knowing about her daughter's condition. Knowing that her public role would bring extra scrutiny on the family is selfish and she should have declined to protect her child (actually heard this on ABC this weekend).

Strange - the same people who said Sarah is selfish for running for VP did not seem to care about any impact on Chelsea when Bill Clinton had his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. That was a private, personal matter you see.

4. From the media I have learned to be 'concerned' that Sarah Palin probably won't be able to manage her family and do an effective job of being VP at the same time.

Funny - I never heard anything about Hillary's ability to support Chelsea while re-doing healthcare or any of the other feminist icons who say you can balance work and family. They also never mention that Barack will have to balance time with his children while meeting with heads of rogue nations or how Joe Biden's kids don't even have a mom and will be fighting for his time while he hosts white house coffee fund raisers and sells nights in the Lincoln bedroom.

5. From the media I have learned that Sarah Palin is 'too inexperienced' to be a heartbeat-away from the presidency.

* Apparently taking on corruption in your own party and running a state that's the same size people-wise as Delaware (hint hint: that's where Joe Biden is from) is not really experience.

* However, time spent as a 'community organizer' and less than 180 days in the senate where you've authored no significant legislation is just the type of 'change' we're looking for from the top of the ticket.

Funny - inexperience at the top of the ticket is a mantra for 'change' and 'hope' while strong practical everyday experience as the #2 is cause for concern.

6. From the media I learned that Sarah Palin's husband once got a ticket for fishing without a license.

* I haven't heard much about the fact that if he were still a practicing attorney, the VP candidate Joe Biden would be dis-barred for plagiarism not once but multiple times.

It's ok to break the rules if you're a democrat candidate but not Ok if you are the spouse of a republican candidate.

7. From the media I learned that Sarah Palin doesn't know much about Iraq; in fact we wonder if she even knows where it is.

* Sarah's son volunteered into the US military and is now deployed in Iraq. I guess that doesn't count.

Sarah has spent more time with troops in Iraq (as commander of the Alaska National Guard she visited Iraq last year) than Obama has even while running for president. In fact, when Sarah went to Iraq she spent timewith the troops. When Obama went there, he skipped a base visit to instead go work out at the Ritz Carlton.

8. From the media I learned that Sarah Palin is a 'lightweight' and she better be a 'quick study' to keep up with this team.

Funny, nobody is talking about how, after Barack Obama had 'visited 57 states' according to him he only had '5 more to go' or endless other stupid gaffes that expose who he really is.

9. From the media I have learned that (gasp!), Sarah Palin's husband was once a registered member of a 3rd party that favored states' rights (man, this is really bad stuff).

* That same media has been silent to the story that when Barack Obama announced his first senate run, he did so in the home of William Ayers.

Mr. Ayers is an un-repentant terrorist convicted for bombing the pentagon.

This same Mr. Ayers said on 9/11 that he and his group did not do enough to harm our military and he wished he had done more. During the same time as that comment, he was serving on a board with Barack Obama. All notes and information about their serving together is now locked up by the corrupt Chicago machine and reporter access to those records are being blocked by the Obama campaign.

If we've had any doubts about the bias of the media, it's pretty clear now where they stand. Pass this on to some of your friends who are on the fence and who get all their information from Katie Couric, Wolf Blitzer, Tom Brokaw and the gang. This is egregious and corrupt. The only way to
stop it is to spread information using other outlets and make these guys irrelevant.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

'Fair' Warning to Palin

Received in email;

By Robert Knight, Director, Culture and Media Institute.
September 30, 2008 | Volume 2, Issue 39

Well, don't say she hasn't been warned.


Sarah Palin cannot make even one mistake in Thursday's debate or she
will be cooked.

George Stephanopoulos said so Monday on ABC's Good Morning America:
Picking up on what Kevin Madden said in David Wright's piece: Number one for Sarah Palin, she cannot make a mistake. A major mistake particularly on foreign policy would be absolutely fatal to her
candidacy.

Good Morning America, like NBC's Today Show and CBS' The Early Show, played clips of Tina Fey doing her mocking impersonation of Palin on Saturday Night Live. 

When did comic impersonations become news?

And what about Palin's opponent, Joe Biden
What if he makes a gaffe, as he is wont to do? Last week, Biden said in a speech that, "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television" to calm the nation. The stock market crashed in 1929, before TV and before Roosevelt was president.

No problem. The liberal media have Joe's back and won't make a big deal of it. Palin made no notable errors last week, yet she was still the one to be savaged. It's a pity Saturday Night Live can't remove their ideological blinders. What a great skit Biden might have inspired! Imagine Bill Murray coming back to portray Biden: "It's just like when George Washington climbed up on a tank to rally the troops at Gettysburg…"

Back to reality. During Thursday's debate, the press will be listening so hard for a Palin version of "macaca" that they probably won't even hear what Joe has to say.

"Macaca" was the word that helped sink the re-election campaign of Virginia Republican Sen. George Allen in 2006. He had used the word, which means "monkey" in some African nations, jokingly to describe a Democratic operative tracking his campaign events. Allen said his mother used to call him that when he messed up, the equivalent of "rascal."
No matter. The media decided that because the Democratic staffer was of Indian ancestry, macaca was an openly racist term, just the thing a sitting U.S. Senator would say in a racially diverse state like Virginia. The Washington Post in particular beat up Allen with macaca for the next month, using the term dozens of times. Allen never recovered and Jim Webb narrowly won his Senate seat.

Here's the rule of thumb: When a liberal misspeaks, it's a slip of the tongue. We all make mistakes. If you are a conservative, however, you commit an unforgivable sin that must be revisited a thousand times until you are out of Purgatory – or office, whichever comes first.

On Friday, Barack Obama made two mistakes that the media would have used to crucify McCain had he made similar errors.

First, Obama misstated that Henry Kissinger would support meeting enemies like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions. Even when McCain corrected him, Obama repeated the point. Immediately after the
debate, Kissinger issued a statement that rebutted Obama in no uncertain terms. Gotcha! The media's reaction? Snore. Bury that sucker in reams of copy.

Another suitable moment for carving into a media bat came after John McCain showed his metal bracelet worn in memory of Cpl. Matthew Stanley, who was killed in Iraq. Obama noted that he, too, wore a bracelet for a fallen soldier. Then he forgot the name of Sgt. Ryan David Jopek and had to look down and read it.

It's not awful, and could happen to anybody, but can anyone honestly imagine that the media would have ignored this had McCain been the forgetful one? Another wrinkle: Jopek's mother, an Obama supporter who
had given him the bracelet, had e-mailed the Obama campaign and asked Obama not to use her son's name in either speeches or debates. As Newsbusters' Warner Todd Huston reported, the AP said Sunday that she
had, indeed, asked him not to do this, but had been okay with how Obama presented it during the televised debate. Again, imagine what the media would have done had McCain been asked by a parent not to
invoke a deceased son's name and then done so?

CMI just released a new special report, 'Character' the Most Important Issue in the Presidential Primary Debates. One striking finding was that the media asked the Democrats nearly twice as many "softball"
questions as they asked Republicans. Republicans got 25 percent softballs, Democrats 48 percent.

Being a liberal in a political campaign is a bit like being a cornerback in a fixed football game. He can take cheap shots at receivers all day, knowing the referees will never call him on it. Or the favored quarterback can throw all the bombs he wants, knowing that if one is picked off, the refs will find a way to nullify the play.

Sarah Palin had better be on her game Thursday, because the scribes are sharpening their poison pens and polishing their gun sights, otherwise known as cameras. They'll be ready to draw more blood than a bite from an Alaskan mosquito.

As for Joe, he can take comfort in the knowledge that his next gaffe won't have a long shelf life, and that he can sit back, Biden his time.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The Man Who Never Was

By Tony Blankley
September 24, 2008

The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign.

While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda. (The American left-wing version of the Volkischer Beobachter cannot be far behind.)

And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly or even halfway honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs -- the press. The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. They consciously have ignored whole years of his life and have shown a lack of curiosity about such gaps, which bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.

Thus, the public image of Obama is of a "man who never was."

I take that phrase from a 1956 movie about a real-life World War II British intelligence operation to trick the Germans into thinking the Allies were going to invade Greece rather than Sicily in 1943. Operation Mincemeat involved the acquisition of a human corpse dressed as "Major William Martin, R.M.," which was put into the sea near Spain. Attached to the corpse was a briefcase containing fake letters suggesting that the Allied attack would be against Sardinia and Greece.

To make the operation credible, British intelligence concocted a fictional life for the corpse, creating a letter from a lover and tickets to a London theater -- all the details of a life, but not the actual life of the dead young man whose corpse was being used. So, too, the man the media have presented to the nation as Obama is not the real man.

The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeat any McCain gaffes while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little web sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventually clear sentence from Obama. You don't see Obama's ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the U.N. Nor his whining and puerile "come on" when he is being challenged. This is the kind of editing one would expect from Goebbels' disciples, not Cronkite's.

More appalling, a skit on NBC's "Saturday Night Live" last weekend suggested that Gov. Palin's husband had sex with his own daughters. That show was written with the assistance of Al Franken, Democratic Party candidate in Minnesota for the U.S. Senate. Talk about incest.

But worse than all the unfair and distorted reporting and image projecting are the shocking gaps in Obama's life that are not reported at all. The major media simply have not reported on Obama's two years at New York's Columbia University, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter-mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers. Later, they both ended up as neighbors and associates in Chicago. Obama denies more than a passing relationship with Ayers. Should the media be curious? In only two weeks, the media have focused on all the colleges Gov. Palin has attended, her husband's driving habits 20 years ago, and the close criticism of the political opponents Gov. Palin had when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. But in two years, they haven't bothered to see how close Obama was with the terrorist Ayers.

Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama's rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great -- and unflattering -- details on Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book on Obama, the mainstream media continue to ignore both the facts and the book. It took a British publication, The Economist, to give Freddoso's book a review with fair comment.

The public image of Obama as an idealistic, post-race, post-partisan, well-spoken and honest young man with the wisdom and courage befitting a great national leader is a confection spun by a willing conspiracy of Obama, his publicist (David Axelrod) and most of the senior editors, producers and reporters of the national media.

Perhaps that is why the National Journal's respected correspondent Stuart Taylor wrote, "The media can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and fair campaign reporting and analysis."

That conspiracy not only has Photoshopped out all of Obama's imperfections (and dirtied up his opponent McCain's image) but also has put most of his questionable history down the memory hole.

The public will be voting based on the idealized image of the man who never was. If he wins, however, we will be governed by the sunken, cynical man Obama really is. One can only hope that the senior journalists will be judged as harshly for their professional misconduct as Wall Street's leaders currently are for their failings.
---

Tony Blankley is executive vice president of Edelman public relations in Washington. E-mail him at TonyBlankley@gmail.com.

Emphasis mine.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Newsday Blames Rush for Church Shootings

This email came from Media Research Center. I was waiting to see how long this would take, and I even mentioned it to a friend of mine several days ago. Totally ridiculous!!

CP
David Martin
Executive Vice President
Media Research Center


Ed,

Yesterday, Newsday published a despicable column that directly linked Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and other conservative media to the hideous church shooting that took place last month in Tennessee.

The article -- entitled "Does Shock Jock Hate Speech Lead To Violence?" -- is so outrageous that MRC's President Brent Bozell just drafted a letter to Newsday demanding a retraction.

Go here to access the Newsday article as well as Brent's letter to Newsday:

http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10117&CID=513&RID=16303894

The Newsday column draws a direct connection between conservative talk radio hosts like Rush and Sean and the brutal murderer -- making them look complicit in those vile acts.

This is so reprehensible, we had to contact our fearless MRC Action Team right away, and give them an opportunity to take immediate action against Newsday.

+ + Action Item: Demand a Retraction From Newsday

We want to follow Brent's letter with thousands of emails fromMRC Action Team Members demanding an apology and retraction.

Please go here right now to send your emails to Publisher Tim Knight and others at Newsday demanding a full apology and retraction for this outrageous story.

http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10118&CID=513&RID=16303894

+ + The Left's campaign to discredit conservative media leaders

The fact is, the Left is in the midst of a hideous character assassination campaign against conservative media -- specifically leaders like Rush and Sean -- and they will stop at nothing.

Newsday is not alone. Liberal Jim Wallis' blog included an article on the Tennessee shootings that stated, "we can also connect these deaths to too much toxic talk radio."

That is why Nancy Pelosi and others in Congress want to impose the so-called Fairness Doctrine which would silence conservatives on the radio. That is why Newsday published this article.

If we do not stop Newsday right now, these unwarranted attacks against conservative free speech will only increase.

Newsday should be ashamed! But unless they get overwhelmed with comments from outraged citizens like you, they will continue to print articles like this.

Please send your emails to Newsday right now...

http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10119&CID=513&RID=16303894

..and thank you for taking a stand to stop attacks against
conservative leaders like Rush.


David Martin
Executive Vice President
Media Research Center


P.S. Once you have sent your emails, please also call Newsday Publisher Tim Knight at 631-843-3135 and tell him you want a full apology for and retraction of the story, "Does Shock Jock Speech Lead To Violence?"