Time To Fit President Obama With A Crown?

It is a waste of time to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats now that “their man” Barrack is in charge. Nor will we find any solace within the Fourth Estate. The real issue is that many of the false allegations leveled at President Bush would be insignificant compared to what is actually emanating from the Obama Administration:

King Barack?

David Limbaugh

Oh, how quickly times have changed. Just a few short years ago, Democrats were up in arms over King George III's (President George W. Bush's) "unconstitutional" executive power grabs. Where are these people now?

I'll tell you where they are: right in the thick of it, enabling President Barack Obama to consolidate and exercise unprecedented power.

Remember when Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy complained that the constitutional "checks and balances that have served to constrain abuses of power for more than two centuries in this country" were at risk because Republicans controlled the executive and legislative branches? How about Sen. Russ Feingold, who was looking at impeachment as a remedy to keep the president in check and prevent him from acquiring power "like King George III"?

Today these same senators are not just passively mute about Obama's power grabs; they are co-conspirators.

You might think the repeated conservative complaint about Obama's egregious lack of transparency is, by now, a tired talking point. But we're not just referring to minor procedural matters that are substantively inconsequential.

He hasn't just breached his promise to make his legislation available for public preview. He and his congressional cohorts are burying very important matters in legislation.

The Waxman-Markey cap and tax debacle that just slipped through the House was bad enough, with its mandated broad-based assaults on America's taxpayers, energy and economy in exchange for no appreciable expected environmental benefits. But look at its stealth provision, reported by the Washington Examiner, creating a three-year package of unemployment benefits, a $1,500 job relocation allowance and a health insurance premium subsidy for workers unemployed as a result of this "jobs creation" bill. Unbelievable! How can any congressman who voted for this monstrosity possibly get re-elected?

This was nothing new, though, as you'll recall that Obama's non-stimulative stimulus bill increased unemployment benefits for those not magically benefited by that job creations bill.

Indeed, there are so many Obama abuses I can only chronicle a fraction of them in a short column. But just consider a few others, and ask yourself how long even rank-and-file Democrats can justify supporting such tyrannical madness by this arrogant chief executive, who truly is -- as distinguished from Bush -- engaged in a daily quest to "dictate" fundamental, structural changes to this nation:

--ABC News reported that a senior White House official said the urgency of extending the expiring U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty "might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate's constitutional role in ratifying treaties." Did you hear that, Sens. Leahy and Feingold?

--President Obama is appointing so many "czars" to help him run the government without the usual accountability of Cabinet-level positions that even Sen. Robert Byrd said this practice "can threaten the constitutional system of checks and balances." Byrd's worried, but what do Leahy and Feingold think of Obama's pay czar, who'll have broad discretion over executive pay?

--Obama has so insulated himself from ordinary press scrutiny that even liberal journalists Chip Reid and Helen Thomas grilled White House press secretary Robert Gibbs for Obama's "tightly controlled" town hall meeting on health care. During that forum, Obama "coincidentally" called on three people (out of 200) who work with groups trying to pass his health care proposal.

--Obama is so intent on bullying our ally Israel that he is breaching a previous Bush administration-negotiated agreement between Israel and the United States to allow some Israeli construction in West Bank settlements to allow for natural growth.

--The Obama-Holder Justice Department dismissed a strong case against New Black Panther Party members for billy club-style voter intimidation because the members were intimidating for Obama's election.

--Obama and Holder are going to vacate an order of prior Attorney General Michael Mukasey's stating that immigrants facing deportation do not have an automatic right to an effective lawyer.

--Obama and Holder are now mirandizing terrorists on the battlefield.

--Some have questioned whether Obama-Holder ordered the FBI to "back off" anti-terror investigations of radicalized Muslim converts, such as the one who police say shot two military recruiters in Little Rock, Ark.

--Obama's auto task force used "intimidation tactics" against Chrysler's senior bondholders and called their Democratic lawyer, Tom Lauria, a "terrorist" for refusing to accept its offer outright. Where, by the way, were Leahy and Feingold -- and all the liberal media -- when Obama's deal involved an executive-forced transfer of ownership from shareholders and creditors to Obama's favored unions? Were they also unbothered by claims of Chrysler dealers that they were threatened and lied to?

--Obama's thugs fired AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin and slandered him as virtually demented because he blew the whistle on the corrupt practices of Obama's buddies.

To say this is scratching the surface is a monumental exaggeration.

Only In Massachusetts: Guns Are Bad, Especially If They Are In The Possession Of The Police

Leave it to the extremely left leaning newspaper the Boston Globe to somehow see an issue with a well-armed police force:

Even small localities got big guns

This was a “none story,” and did not deserve front page coverage. But this story is a classic example of how clueless the liberal media is. 19 years after the program started, after no incidents whatsoever, with no-to-minimal cost to the taxpayers, suddenly the crackerjack team at the Globe are concerned that “some departments” got more guns than the program would seem to allow. Whew, for a minute there I was worried that the Globe was concerned that the police would be better armed than the criminals.

Cops + Guns = Good. Liberal Reporter + Computer = Idiocy

Dennis Prager vs. Perez Hilton: Newsflash - Hilton Is An Idiot

Polling Obama: Lies, Damn Lies and Washington Post Polls

When it comes to the Washington Post and their polling “techniques” (or for that matter, most major media outlets) the devil is in the details.

How you ask a question, whom you ask the question to, and when you ask the question matters:

WSJ: Those Pesky Polls

No surprises, but do the actions of media outlets like the Washington Post jeopardize legitimate polls by honest polling services?

Liberals Lie: I’m Shocked!

For those that have read my blog in the past, and for those that are new to it, you know that I have very little tolerance for the dishonesty displayed by many on the Left. There are two things that I have learned when dealing with Liberal lies:

1. It is important for conservatives to not only known the historical truth, but to know the truth as liberals see it. Many liberals believe what they believe because they are just repeating fallacies that have been offered to them. Nothing shuts a liberal up faster than the FACTS. Facts are to liberals as garlic is to vampires.

2. Never, ever let a liberal get away with a false statement. I do not care where you are, and who it is, letting Liberals get away with a false statement is like letting your puppy poop on the rug. If you don’t correct them, they will continue to defecate all over the place! Now I am not saying that you have to get into a heated exchange. It could be as simply as saying “that’s not true,” and point the misguided individual to the truth. Or better yet, challenge the person to “explain” their statement, example:

SLS (Stupid Liberal Statement): “If we had more regulations, we wouldn’t be in this financial mess! This is all President Bush’s fault.”

ICR (Intelligent Conservative Reply): “Really, what are the regulations now, and what regulations would you proposed that would have stopped this?” Were you aware that President Bush and now ex-Senator Sununu recommended changes that would have prevented much of what we are dealing with now? Have you ever heard of defeated Senate Bill S.190? No, maybe you should do your homework before you hurt yourself. Push for details.

You know you have won when the Liberal says one of the following: “bigot, fascist (or Nazi), neocon (which most Liberals are unable to provide a proper definition for), Bush lover (or fill in the conservative of choice),” or my all time favorite – “I really don’t want to get in an argument (liberal translation: I have no idea what I am talking about).”

Democrats count on the fact that liberals, like parrots, will just repeat what they are told. Liberals also believe that if enough people repeat the lie, then eventually it BECOMES the truth….AMAZING! Now don’t get me wrong, I am not saying all liberals lie; some actual believe what they are saying. I am also not saying liberals are stupid, but as Ronald Reagan once said (about liberals) – “They know so much that just isn’t so.”

The Top Seven Techniques Liberals Use to Lie About Conservatives

Obama and Acorn: “A Game Changer”

The Philadelphia Bulletin reported that the New York Times sat on a story about the ties between then Presidential candidate Obama and ACORN. The reason for not running the story….it would have been a “game changer”:

'New York Times' Spiked Obama Donor Story

With newspapers preparing to ask for their own bailout, and ACORN currently receiving millions from the US taxpayer (with more on the way), shouldn’t Americans expect some accountability for these extremely Left leaning entities? Are Congressional hearings overdue?

More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

On the same day that President-elect Obama announced key appoints to his energy team, including a newly created position to focus on addressing “man-made, climate change,” a new report was released disputing the cause.

Over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore, as documented in a new 231-page U.S. Senate Minority Report:

EPW Senate Report

Whether you agree or disagree with the cause of “global warming,” or for that matter if there is even a crisis to be concerned about, you would think that every media outlet would carry some kind of story about the report. You would be wrong.

Run a search for “Senate Minority Report dissent,” and you will find that not one major news outlet carried the story. The United States of America is about to enact laws that will cripple its economy (worst than it is now), and the only response we can get from the Fourth Estate is the sounds of crickets chirping.

Is it any wonder that the NY Times, NBC, and other media outlets are losing viewership and laying off employees?

The Obama Presidency: Camelot…Try Spamalot!

It did not take long for the media to jump on the “Camelot” bandwagon with the election of Barack Obama:

Camelot was a fairy tale, and so was the media created “virtue” of the Kennedy Administration (The Myth of Camelot). The media ignored many of the truths about Kennedy and his administration, and Hollywood helped to create the illusion of a “real life” fantasy. Sound familiar?

LA Times Suppresses Tape Of Obama Praising Terrorist Mouthpiece

Obama, Ayers, and PLO supporters toast Edward Said's successor, but the press doesn't think it's quite as newsworthy as Sarah Palin's wardrobe.


By Andrew C. McCarthy

Let's try a thought experiment. Say John McCain attended a party at which known racists and terror mongers were in attendance. Say testimonials were given, including a glowing one by McCain for the benefit of the guest of honor ... who happened to be a top apologist for terrorists. Say McCain not only gave a speech but stood by, in tacit approval and solidarity, while other racists and terror mongers gave speeches that reeked of hatred for an American ally and rationalizations of terror attacks.

Now let's say the Los Angeles Times obtained a videotape of the party.

Question: Is there any chance — any chance — the Times would not release the tape and publish front-page story after story about the gory details, with the usual accompanying chorus of sanctimony from the oped commentariat? Is there any chance, if the Times was the least bit reluctant about publishing (remember, we're pretending here), that the rest of the mainstream media (y'know, the guys who drove Trent Lott out of his leadership position over a birthday-party toast) would not be screaming for the release of the tape?

Do we really have to ask?

So now, let's leave thought experiments and return to reality: Why is the Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat?

At the time Khalidi, a PLO adviser turned University of Chicago professor, was headed east to Columbia. There he would take over the University's Middle East-studies program (which he has since maintained as a bubbling cauldron of anti-Semitism) and assume the professorship endowed in honor of Edward Sayyid, another notorious terror apologist.

The party featured encomiums by many of Khalidi's allies, colleagues, and friends, including Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, and Bill Ayers, the terrorist turned education professor. It was sponsored by the Arab American Action Network (AAAN), which had been founded by Khalidi and his wife, Mona, formerly a top English translator for Arafat's press agency.

Is there just a teeny-weenie chance that this was an evening of Israel-bashing Obama would find very difficult to explain? Could it be that the Times, a pillar of the Obamedia, is covering for its guy?

Gateway Pundit reports that the Times has the videotape but is suppressing it.

Back in April, the Times published a gentle story about the fete. Reporter Peter Wallsten avoided, for example, any mention of the inconvenient fact that the revelers included Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, Ayers's wife and fellow Weatherman terrorist. These self-professed revolutionary Leftists are friendly with both Obama and Khalidi — indeed, researcher Stanley Kurtz has noted that Ayers and Khalidi were "best friends." (And — small world! — it turns out that the Obamas are extremely close to the Khalidis, who have reportedly babysat the Obama children.)

Nor did the Times report the party was thrown by AAAN. Wallsten does tell us that the AAAN received grants from the Leftist Woods Fund when Obama was on its board — but, besides understating the amount (it was $75,000, not $40,000), the Times mentions neither that Ayers was also on the Woods board at the time nor that AAAN is rabidly anti-Israel. (Though the organization regards Israel as illegitimate and has sought to justify Palestinian terrorism, Wallsten describes the AAAN as "a social service group.")

Perhaps even more inconveniently, the Times also let slip that it had obtained a videotape of the party.

Wallsten's story is worth excerpting at length (italics are mine):

It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."...

[T]he warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Their belief is not drawn from Obama's speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.

At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."

One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."

Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than … his opponents for the White House....

At Khalidi's going-away party in 2003, the scholar lavished praise on Obama, telling the mostly Palestinian American crowd that the state senator deserved their help in winning a U.S. Senate seat. "You will not have a better senator under any circumstances," Khalidi said.

The event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The Times.


Though Khalidi has seen little of Sen. Obama in recent years, Michelle Obama attended a party several months ago celebrating the marriage of the Khalidis' daughter.

In interviews with The Times, Khalidi declined to discuss specifics of private talks over the years with Obama. He did not begrudge his friend for being out of touch, or for focusing more these days on his support for Israel — a stance that Khalidi calls a requirement to win a national election in the U.S., just as wooing Chicago's large Arab American community was important for winning local elections.

So why is the Times sitting on the videotape of the Khalidi festivities? Given Obama's (preposterous) claims that he didn't know Ayers that well and was unfamiliar with Ayers's views, why didn't the Times report that Ayers and Dohrn were at the bash? Was it not worth mentioning the remarkable coincidence that both Obama and Ayers — the "education reform" allies who barely know each other … except to the extent they together doled out tens of millions of dollars to Leftist agitators, attacked the criminal justice system, and raved about each others books — just happen to be intimate friends of the same anti-American Israel-basher? (Despite having watched the videotape, Wallsten told Gateway Pundit he "did not know" whether Ayers was there.)

Why won't the Times tell us what was said in the various Khalidi testimonials? On that score, Ayers and Dohrn have always had characteristically noxious views on the Israeli/Palestinian dispute. And, true to form, they have always been quite open about them. There is no reason to believe those views have ever changed. Here, for example, is what they had to say in Prairie Fire, the Weather Underground's 1974 Communist manifesto (emphasis in original):

Palestinian independence is opposed with reactionary schemes by Jordan, completely opposed with military terror by Israel, and manipulated by the U.S. The U.S.-sponsored notion of stability and status-quo in the Mideast is an attempt to preserve U.S. imperialist control of oil, using zionist power as the cat's paw. The Mideast has become a world focus of struggles over oil resources and control of strategic sea and air routes. Yet the Palestinian struggle is at the heart of other conflicts in the Mideast. Only the Palestinians can determine the solution which reflects the aspirations of the Palestinian people. No "settlements" in the Mideast which exclude the Palestinians will resolve the conflict. Palestinian liberation will not be suppressed.

The U.S. people have been seriously deceived about the Palestinians and Israel. This calls for a campaign to educate and focus attention on the true situation: teach-ins, debates, and open clear support for Palestinian liberation; reading about the Palestinian movement—The Disinherited by Fawaz Turki, Enemy of the Sun; opposing U.S. aid to Israel. Our silence or acceptance of pro-zionist policy is a form of complicity with U.S.-backed aggression and terror, and a betrayal of internationalism.

SELF-DETERMINATION FOR THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE!

U.S. OUT OF THE MIDEAST!

END AID TO ISRAEL!

Barack Obama wouldn't possibly let something like that pass without a spirited defense of the Israel he tells us he so staunchly supports … would he? I guess to answer that question, we'd have to know what was on the tape.

But who has time for such trifles? After all, isn't Diana Vreeland about to critique Sarah Palin's sartorial splendor?

What Does The Left Mean By Change

If you say "things" are bad long enough, and you have the assistance of a willing media, than people start to believe the lies. The Left has, and always will, distort their own records. The Left (Democrats) have tried to rewrite history to take credit for things they never did, to deny responsibly for their failures, and to falsely blame Conservatives and the Republicans for societal ills created by Democratic policies:

Dennis Prager: Why The Left Wants Change

The manipulation of the truth is the key to Left's power, knowing the real history is Conservatism's strength.

The Truth About Sarah Palin

What is behind the criticism of Governor Palin? Is the media going "out of its way" to destroy Palin, while ignoring (or under reporting) Obama and Biden? And if so, why? Is America getting a full picture of the real Sarah Palin?

Recently, a piece by Bryon York (a fantastic journalist who appears in National Review) was misquoted by CNN's Drew Griffen. Griffen not only misquoted the story during an interview with Governor Palin (that was seen by millions of people), Griffen admitted during the interview that he had not researched the story before "confronting Palin." If that is what passes for "investigative journalism" at CNN, they should have their legal department draft a standard "oops, we screwed up letter" that can be sent out in the future. CNN/Griffen later "recanted" the story, but the damage was done.

So if CNN was wrong, what is the real story from Byron York? Bryon York did real journalism, and provided a clear picture of the true leader that is Governor Sarah Palin:

NRO - Bryon York: How Palin Governed

From Bryon's piece:

" a look at Palin's 20 months in power, along with interviews with people who worked with her, shows her to be a serious executive, a governor who picked important things to do and got them done — and who didn't just stumble into an 80 percent job-approval rating."

"She had four principles she wanted to bring to the process," says Joe Balash, who served as Palin's special assistant for energy issues. "One, to have competition. Two, to have clear and objective measures of progress, because with a massive project like that it's going to be years before any dirt turns. Three, there had to be a commitment to expansion [the pipeline would have to be big enough to handle more gas in the future]. And four, it had to be done without surrendering the state's sovereignty."

"the Anchorage Daily News reported that the pipeline deal "sealed the popular Republican governor's second major victory in two years against not only her opponents in the Legislature but also major oil companies Palin sometimes has poked publicly." Her approval rating soared."

"she became convinced that fellow commissioner Randy Ruedrich, the head of the Alaska Republican party, was conducting party business on the commission's time. Palin filed an ethics complaint against Ruedrich, leading to a long and contentious investigation. In 2004, Ruedrich admitted guilt and agreed to pay a $12,000 fine, which was the largest such punishment ever in Alaska."

"Still, it's fair to say that overall, Palin's time in office, from her swearing-in until the moment John McCain picked her to be his running mate, has been a success. And from her handling of the issues she has tackled, it's possible to see a pattern in the way she approaches governing.

First, she hires well. "There was a pretty good team of people assembled right away to come in and start with her big-picture principles and develop a process and legislation to carry that out," says Joe Balash. "I would say that her management style is to give her staff, her cabinet, a pretty long leash, but with very high expectations — and she's not afraid to tell you that you didn't get it right."

Second, she is involved with details on some big things, but not on everything. "When it comes to issues that she cares about, that she knows the public cares about, she's got all kinds of time and prioritizes things in a big way," says one insider who has worked with her and asked not to be named. "For the mundane tasks of government . . . say, regulations for the Kenai River, she instead looks for recommendations from her cabinet and the regulatory agencies, but she's not going to get in and argue specific details."

Third, she is dead set on fulfilling campaign promises. "There was this absolute expectation that if it was an issue that had been talked about during the campaign and there was a particular commitment that she had made, then we had to live up to it, no matter how difficult," says Balash, "because her big thing was restoring the confidence of the public in state government."

The unfair reporting and mischaracterization of Governor Sarah Palin will go down as one of the darkest stains in American political history. The character assassination and deceitful attempts to diminish Governor Palin's many accomplishments is insulting and pathetic. Worst is how many Americans stood by and did nothing.

And what of these attacks on Palin based on her distorted "lack of experience" or the naive belief she was only selected because she was a female. The New York Times said it best:

"Where is it written that only senators are qualified to become President? Surely Ronald Reagan does not subscribe to that maxim. Or where is it written that mere representatives aren't qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens? Representative Morris Udall, who lost New Hampshire to Jimmy Carter by a hair in 1976, must surely disagree. So must a longtime Michigan Congressman named Gerald Ford. Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial? That didn't stop Richard Nixon from picking Spiro Agnew, a suburban politician who became Governor of Maryland. Remember the main foreign affairs credential of Georgia's Governor Carter: He was a member of the Trilateral Commission. Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy. One might even say demography is destiny: this candidate was chosen because he could deliver Texas, that one because he personified rectitude, that one because he appealed to the other wing of the party. On occasion, Americans find it necessary to rationalize this rough-and-ready process. What a splendid system, we say to ourselves, that takes little-known men, tests them in high office and permits them to grow into statesmen. This rationale may even be right, but then let it also be fair. Why shouldn't a little-known woman have the same opportunity to grow? We may even be gradually elevating our standards for choosing Vice Presidential candidates. But that should be done fairly, also. Meanwhile, the indispensable credential for a Woman Who is the same as for a Man Who - one who helps the ticket."

That was the New York Times position in 1984 regarding the pick of Geraldine Ferraro. Funny, I did not see the same support for Palin, or forceful condemnation against the false piety by those currently trashing Palin. Daniel Henninger said it best in is October 23, 2008 piece - “The stoning of Sarah Palin has exposed enough cultural fissures in American politics to occupy strategists full-time until 2012. We now see there is a left-to-right elite centered in New York, Washington, Hollywood and Silicon Valley who hand down judgments of the nation's mortals from their perch atop the Bell Curve.”

How Sarah Palin has been treated should be a wakeup call to everyone, but especially women. You are free to consider yourself a unique individual, deserving of equality and fair play, and worthy of being judged on the merits of your accomplishments, SO LONG as you fall inline with those on the Left (Democrats, NOW, NARAL, etc), and walk lock step with their ideals. Outside of that, you will be belittled, your family insulted, your accomplishments downplayed, and your success attributed to matters beyond your control.

Is The Media In Obama’s Camp: Not At All

Of course I was joking with my blog title. A recent PEW Institute survey indicates that 80% of Americans believe that the Left leaning media clearly wants Obama to win. But the media has also ignored the erratic behavior coming from Obama's running mate, Joe Biden:

Human Events: Camp Followers

The article did not emphasis enough the absolute loathing (unfairly, and frankly, sickening) directed at Governor Palin. Governor Palin is a threat to Liberalism and cronyism, that is why she is being attacked, and it is a sad state affairs when Americans stand by idly and let the media, the elitists, and Liberals destroy a person more qualified than either Biden or Obama to lead this country.

Babbling Biden: Say It Ain’t So Joe!

As the media continues its assault on Governor Palin (with feminist either remaining silent or actively participating) in an effort to diminish her accomplishments, people are starting to question the integrity of the “attackers.”

But it is also not the integrity of the attacks that is being called into question, but the lack of scrutiny directed at the living, breathing gaffe machine known as Joe Biden:

Michelle Malkin: The Increasingly Erratic Super Gaffetastic Joe Biden
NY POST: Bidens Bungles A Blatant Bias
Delaware Online: Hey Joe, Katie's Diner Closed 20 Years Ago
City Data Forum: Biden Is A Liar

The media lets Biden slink away while Obama makes a statement that Joe was just "florishing." Closed diners, factious conversations with imaginary gas pump attendants, spelling a “three letter” word with 4 letters, confusing Constitutional Articles and Presidential history……..sure, you just go on believing there is no media bias!!!???!!!

Obama and McCain: How The Media Ignored The Truth

What does integrity mean to you? Do you believe honesty is subjective, something that bends in many directions depending on a person's point of view? Or is honesty absolute, which becomes corrupted by ones own selfishness? Is the omission of facts the same as lying? Is ignoring accuracy to ensure your viewpoint triumphs nothing more than an act of deceit? The sad reality is that depending on the "content of your character," the answers may vary, and that is disturbing.

Journalist Orson Scott Card, a Democrat, is concerned for his colleagues in the Fourth Estate. He is troubled that they may be ignoring the many truths about John McCain, Barrack Obama, Democrats, and Republicans, and that the media may be willing accomplices in a fraud being perpetrated against the American people:

Orson Scott Card: Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

What about the American people who choose to ignore what is happening before their very eyes? What role did they have in the death of the truth? And if what appears in print must always be looked upon as suspect, then can we finally admitted, that except for a few outlets, that objective journalism is dead?

To think that many on the Left feared censorship from their own government, only to now realize that the attack on truth would come from within. Who would have thought that the demise of journalistic integrity would be self-inflicted?

The Liberal Media’s Number One Enemy: Joe the Plumber

As I mentioned in a previous story, it would only be a matter of time before Joe Wurzelbacher (aka: Joe the Plumber) felt the sting of Obama’s minions:

Michelle Malkin: Operation destroy Joe-the-plumber

How dare Mr. Wurzelbacher question the Messiah!

Shouts of “Kill Him” At A McCain Rally False

Some in the media, especially the dynamic duo over at MSNBC (Olbermann and Maddow), made it a point to over report on “alleged” hostile statements made at McCain and Palin rallies, in particular the claim that someone yelled “kill him”.

Never mind the fact that far worse is really happening at Obama – Biden rallies, but now we find that the “kill him” outburst did not happen:

Times Leader: Secret Service Says kill him allegation unfounded

I wanted to post the retraction or follow-up report by MSNBC, but I could not find either on their website. I guess they have too many other important things to do……..like “expose” that vile character Joe the Plumber.

I'm As Mad As Hell: Don’t Get In The Way Of A Passionate Conservative

Recently a man stood up at a McCain – Palin rally in Wisconsin and said what millions of Americans were thinking:

The chant reminded me of that famous scene from the movie Network, from the fictional newscaster Howard Beale:

Could the gentleman in Wisconsin have said it better? Sure. Will there be those on the Left who will pass him off (unfairly) as a crackpot? Yep. But is there something to be said about the “gut punch” that this gentleman delivered?

A Call To Stop The Palin Feeding Frenzy

Jack Jacoby, of the Boston Globe, has publicly chastised his fellow journalist concerning their overzealous "attack" reporting regarding Governor Palin:

Boston Globe: Stop The Palin Feeding Frenzy

The media has seen a backlash from the American public because of the guttural approach that they took against Palin, all under the "guise" of factual reporting. But moreover, many in the bloggershpere helped to erode the public confidence that the "new" media could be trusted.

The 1^st Amendment may grant the author the Freedom of Speech; but it hardly guarantees that the content will be well thought-out, and was written by someone of honor.

The pen is only mightier than the sword if it is dipped in the ink of integrity.

The Palin Non-Story: The Mainstream Media Exposed

Some in media are starting to “rethink” their unfair and frankly nasty attacks on Governor Sara Palin, thanks in large part to a public backlash. The bias (and hypocrisy) demonstrated by the media and Left-wing bloggers over the past few days has open the eyes of many Americans.

The Wall Street Journal did an excellent op-ed piece regarding the negativity perpetuated by the Beltway media:

Wall Street Journal Op-Ed: Palin Selection Shows A Double Standard

The Media Coverage Of Governor Palin: Shame In Black And White

There is no doubt that Sarah Palin and her family are strong enough to weather the media storm that they have sailed into. A person’s life is a reflection of their character, and by all accounts the Palin’s are a strong and devoted family. The media scrutiny will only serve to reaffirm that Governor Palin possess the moral fiber that is needed in Washington, DC, but only if the coverage is fair and truthful.

It is unfortunate that there are those in the media and the blogsphere thhat are either choosing to belittle Governor Palin’s accomplishments or personally attacking the Palin Family. Here are just a few examples:

First up is Margarat Carlson:

Ms. Carlson is a reporter for Time magazine, and can often be seen on television offering political commentary. Ms. Carlson recently wrote a piece for Bloomberg on-line:

Bloomberg: Governor "just" an honorary head of the National Guard

“Every governor is honorary head of their state's National Guard.” A State Governor is not like the Queen of England! Ms. Carlson needs to review the US Constitution and most State Constitutions. Each governor is the Civilian Commander-in- Chief of their reprehensive National Guard units, until either the President of the United States or the regional Commander activates such unit. A Governor can activate the National Guard to help in disaster relief or to provide security for the citizens of their State. Honorary……..hardly! Could it be that Ms. Carlson is trying to “downplay” Governor Palin’s experience?

Daily Kos:

Meanwhile, the fine folks over at the Daily Kos decided to just make up the news, allowing rumors and vicious postings on their “website.” There are a lot of disturbed people out there, and it would seem they all write for the Daily Kos. Is it any wonder hardly anybody wants to run for public office?

From the world of academia:

Next, NECN interviewed Law Professor Elizabeth Sherman George Washington University, regarding the impact of Bristol Palin’s “choice”:




“This reaffirms Roe Vs. Wade.” Huh? Bristol Palin gets pregnant. Bristol does the responsible thing and confers with her parents. The Palin’s do not look upon the baby as a “choice,” but commit to the safe delivery and loving upbringing of the baby. The Palin’s are forced to issue a press release on the matter (in large part due to the bloodthirsty mentality of the media), with those on the Left immediately attack them. This is what passes for “reaffirm” in the eyes of Professor Sherman.

In the real world of the Left, reaffirming Roe Vs. Wade would look like this:

Girl gets pregnant. She lies to her family and hides the pregnancy from her them. She sneaks off with her boyfriend to seek an abortion. With limited counseling, with no input from the girl’s physician, and without the knowledge of the parents, an abortion is performed. Baby is killed. The girl almost immediately starts to suffer from guilt and depression because the propaganda of abortion does not stand up to the reality of abortion. The girl starts to experience intimacy issues and contemplates suicide. The boyfriend abandons the girl (if he was still with her), further alienating her. That Ms. Sherman is what the reaffirming of Roe Vs. Wade looks like!

And as far as the NECN report, why were Ms. Sherman’s comments even considered relevant to the story, other than to provide the non-existent “Roe Vs. Wade” connection. NECN’s story was just another example of a detached media.

These are just a few “shining” examples of what is passing for educated thought and profound commentary. There are more examples of media bias, sexism, and hypocrisy on the two links below. The level to which some would stoop to in an effort to falsely smear an incredible person such as Governor Palin, is sickening.

Fight The Palin Smears
Palin Sexism Watch