Class Act: David Axelrod Goes On Fox News To Sell His Book, Then Goes On ABC To Bash Fox News


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

david the red axelrod


Hat/Tip to Newsmax and Politico.

Ah the impeccable scruples of the left…

Sure! I’d be glad to go onto YOUR network so that I could sell some of MY books!! Then, after you’ve treated me fairly, I’ll go on a “friendly” network and trash YOUR network so I don’t look so bad to all the other “scrupulous” lefties out there that are just like me.

Class act all the way, Axe.

/sarcasm off

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly called Democratic political adviser David Axelrod “two-faced” for using O’Reilly’s show to sell his new book, then insulting Fox News Channel soon afterward.

In O’Reilly’s opening segment on Monday’s “O’Reilly Factor,”  he took on politicians, pundits and left-of-center media who trash Fox News. He said the motivation is simple: Fox News is a threat because it has become the top-rated source of cable news and sets the political agenda.

Knowing that Fox will bring in the most viewers, Axelrod, who has worked for Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, asked O’Reilly to give him the first cable interview about his new book, “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics,” O’Reilly said.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

“I told him, sure. We would have a lively, respectful discussion, which we did on February 9th,” O’Reilly said. “Then, to show his gratitude, Axelrod begins trashing Fox News, saying we are not a real news organization.  That was a mistake.”

Seems good old Axe couldn’t help himself when he left Fox News’ HQ and went over to ABC’s Sunday morning talk show, “This Week.” He just HAD to bash Fox, I mean he’d went to the “enemy camp;” he’d crossed over to the other side; he had literally given credence to the enemy by his very presence on their Network, and he HAD to fix that.

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said Sunday that the Fox News Channel is “not really a news station” and that much of the programming is “not really news.”

“I’m not concerned,” Axelrod said on ABC’s “This Week” when George Stephanopoulos asked about the back-and-forth between the White House and Fox News.

“Mr. [Rupert] Murdoch has a talent for making money, and I understand that their programming is geared toward making money. The only argument [White House communications director] Anita [Dunn] was making is that they’re not really a news station if you watch even — it’s not just their commentators, but a lot of their news programming.

“It’s really not news — it’s pushing a point of view. And the bigger thing is that other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way, and we’re not going to treat them that way. We’re going to appear on their shows. We’re going to participate but understanding that they represent a point of view.” 

So “they” will appear on Fox News, on their shows; “they” are going to participate, and then run across town to the safe haven of a CNN or ABC or MSNBC and tell people how “bad” Fox News is.

I will be the first to say that Fox doesn’t always represent us out here in “fly-over” country, but they do, at least give a stage to opposing points of view and they don’t try and pretend that their evening shows are news, unlike MSNBC or CNN do.





Must See Video: Hidden Camera Shows True American Spirit


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo johnquinonesabcwhatwouldyoudo_zps2e48da46.jpg

Hat/Tip to John Quiñones, Host of ABC’s What Would You Do?

John Quiñones hosts a very interesting show on ABC. It is called “What Would You Do?” and it uses actors and hidden cameras to record unsuspecting Americans’ reactions to provocative situations.

One such episode concerns what patrons at a grocery store might do if a person using Food Stamps didn’t have enough to finish the purchase. Watch and see what I call the “True American Spirit” of helping others, even if they’re strangers.





ABC News: Obama Knew in Advance of Reporter’s Impending Death by ISIS

james foley beheaded by isis 002
Reporter James Foley shown here shortly before he was beheaded by ISIS

Hat/Tip to ABC News.

So the Obama administration knew in advance that James Foley was in danger of being murdered; much like they had Intel in advance on Benghazi.

In a stunning report by ABC News online, we learned that President Barack Obama and his White House knew that ISIS “recently threatened to kill U.S. journalist James Foley to avenge airstrikes the United States has conducted in Iraq.” A video surfaced on Tuesday showing what appears to be an ISIS terrorist beheading Foley with the stated reason of revenge on Obama, suggesting they will do it again.
President Obama recently downplayed the ability of ISIS to carry out significant damaging acts of violence, referring to the terrorists as the JV (Junior Varsity) team compared to Al Qaeda, in an interview with The New Yorker magazine’s David Remnick.

Much like the Obama Administration knew of the possibility and even the likelihood of the September 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, the advance information seemed to find the president flat-footed.  After the attack, the Obama Administration erroneously claimed a YouTube video prompted the attack.  However, while the left-wing media largely has protected the Obama White House from being fingered as deadly incompetent regarding Benghazi, will they change their tune now that one of their fellow journalists appears to have suffered a similar fate despite the president knowing of the coming danger?

President Obama was notified of Foley’s death while on board Air Force One on his way back to play more golf at Martha’s Vineyard. reported “President Obama was briefed on the video aboard Air Force One Tuesday night as he returned to Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, from Washington to resume his August vacation.”  The militants say they plan to also murder another missing (and presumed captured and kidnapped) American journalist, Steven Sotloff. (video of the statement of James Foley’s parents below)



If the Obama administration has any plans to address the large number of reporters that have disappeared in the Middle East, they aren’t being forthcoming with the details.

The White House has not articulated a plan to address the murder or prevent the murder of Sotloff.  In June, President Obama released five terrorists for the return of one U.S. soldier, Bowe Bergdahl, despite ample evidence he was a traitor and deserter.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) there are 39 missing journalists currently missing, with 20 of them having gone missing in Syria alone, with dozens more killed.

Liberals & Democrats, War on Terrorism, Iraq, Middle East, Syria, Barack Obama, James Foley, ABC, ABCNews


A Third Party Perspective


Often times we hear that we’re too close to something to be able to be objective enough to evaluate it rationally. Now before I go much further, lets make sure that we all know who I’m speaking of.

I’m not talking about our main stream media, MSNBC, CNN or the plethora of far left websites, such as DailyKOS, HuffPo, etc… No, I’m talking about those that are closer to the center of the political spectrum. The folks that possibly bought into Hope & Change in ’08 and maybe sat home in ’12.

Back in ’08, candidate Obama sounded pretty centrist. He certainly talked a good game, and sounded to the run of the mill voter, or as Rush says, the low information voter, like he was the breath of fresh air they were looking for. Somebody who was charismatic enough to get people together and smart enough to surround himself with good advisers.

Unfortunately, we all know that was just smoke and mirrors by a narcissitic, America-loathing, socialist (I’m being generous on that label, btw) intent on residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. However, there are still folks out there who just can’t see the real Obama.

Enter Sir Hew Strachan, a prominent war historian and his credentials are, to say the least, impressive.

He is Chichele Professor of the History of War at All Souls College, Oxford. He was Professor of Modern History at the University of Glasgow from 1992 to 2000. Additionally, he is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the Royal Historical Society. He holds an honorary D.Univ from the University of Paisley. He was appointed a deputy lieutenant of Tweeddale in 2006. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Panel of the Royal Air Force Centre for Air Power Studies. In addition, he is on the Chief of the Defence Staff’s strategic advisory panel, the UK Defence Academy Advisory Board, and is an advisory fellow of the Barsanti Military History Center at the University of North Texas. He was on the council of the National Army Museum and is currently a trustee of the Imperial War Museum. He is a visiting professor of the Royal Norwegian Air Force Academy in Trondheim and in 2009 was the Sir Howard Kippenberger Professor at Victoria University Wellington.


So to say that he knows military strategy is quite the understatement.
In an interview with The Daily Beast, he said that President Obama’s strategic failures in Afghanistan and Syria have crippled America’s position on the world stage.

Sir Hew Strachan, an advisor to the Chief of the Defense Staff, told The Daily Beast that the United States and Britain were guilty of total strategic failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama’s attempts to intervene on behalf of the Syrian rebels “has left them in a far worse position than they were before.”

The extraordinary critique by a leading advisor to the United States’ closest military ally comes days after Obama was undermined by the former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who questioned the President’s foreign policy decisions and claimed he was deeply suspicious of the military.

He went on to say that Obama is “chronically incapable” of military strategy and falls far short of George W. Bush in that area. Strachan also cited President Obama’s “crazy” handling (or bumbling) of the Syrian crisis as the most egregious example of a fundamental collapse in military strategy and planning since 9/11.

“If anything it’s gone backwards instead of forwards, Obama seems to be almost chronically incapable of doing this. Bush may have had totally fanciful political objectives in terms of trying to fight a global War on Terror, which was inherently astrategic, but at least he had a clear sense of what he wanted to do in the world. Obama has no sense of what he wants to do in the world,” he said.

Strachan also spoke of President Obama’s “dithering” over intervention against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, saying it has empowered the Syrian ruler and simultaneously undermined America’s military reputation while destabilizing the Middle East.

“What he’s done in talking about Red Lines in relation to Syria has actually devalued the deterrent effect of American military capability and it seems to me that creates an unstable situation, because if he were act it would surprise everybody,” he said. “I think the other issue is that in starting and stopping with Assad, he’s left those who might be his natural allies in Syria with nowhere to go. He’s increased the likelihood that if there is a change of regime in Syria that it will be an Islamic fundamentalist one.”

Sir Strachan has a book coming out next month which examines the failure of modern politicians to use strategy to determine the proper course of military action. He states that the lessons learned at the end of the 20th century hurt us going into the 21st century.

“Using war did deliver. The wars were pretty short, the Falklands, First Gulf War, Kosovo, so people lulled themselves into an expectation that war was simply a continuation of policy and that it was successful. But it hasn’t been since 9/11,” he said.

But Strachan says that a good start at fixing this problem would be to allow military leaders to speak their minds. He was critical of how General McChrystal was forced to resign after that Rolling Stone interview, which revealed his and his staff’s comments about the politicians who were their bosses.

“The concern about the military speaking out shows a lack of democratic and political maturity. We’re not facing the danger of a military coup. The professional experts, who deal with war all the time, should be able to express their views all the time, openly and coherently, just as you would expect a doctor or a teacher to express their views coherently about how you run medical policy or teaching policy,” he said.

In fact, he can point to precedent on this. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill held daily strategy meeting with his chairman of the Chiefs of Staff back in World War II.

“The Churchill-Allan Brooke relationship was fraught at times but it worked because both were pretty frank with each other,” Strachan said. “Soldiers have a duty here as well—if they just say, ‘yes Mr. Prime Minister or Mr. President, we can give you exactly what you want,’ then they’re probably not being very honest.”

Now I know this isn’t any groundbreaking news to those of us who have delved into Obama’s past and had him pegged for a radical since way back in 2007. But the fact remains that it is heartening to hear somebody on the world stage who is forthright enough to be honestly critical of our president.


Welcome to Amerika, 2014!


Note: As I’ve been paying attention the rhetoric of the left, particularly the content in Common Core, I am again reminded of the old ABC miniseries, Amerika. Here is a modified version of a post I wrote about it in March of 2010…

Every now and again, I refer to Obama’s version of our nation as “Amerika.” Given that the ObamaCare abomination has survived it’s first few hurdles, it might be a good time to revisit why I say that.

In 1987, ABC ran a 12 hour miniseries called, “AMERIKA,” chronicling life in an America that was taken over by the Soviet Union. Here is the trailer.

I started looking for clips from it. There aren’t all that many, but this one rings true for modern liberal thought.

All that’s missing is the “mmm, mmm, mmm.”  That, and it sounds to be straight out of Common Core.

I wonder what folks in the lefty media thought…

Well, that sounds like anyone on MSNBC referring to Conservatives.

Is it just me, or is truth imitating fiction here?

Note: This is the fourth time I’ve run this post since 2010.  Each time I’ve run it, I’ve had to find another version of the last video, which featured some heated exchanged among the media talking heads of the time.  Seems that many of the were thinking that the miniseries was too tough on the Soviets.  Perhaps that’s why news coverage of a TV miniseries from 1987 has to be censored, or put down the “memory hole,” so to speak!  Can’t have the fictitious Amerika interfering with the real Amerika, can we?


Welcome to Amerika!


Note:  This a post that was originally published in 2010.  It still fits, if you ask me. 

Every now and again, I refer to Obama’s version of our nation as “Amerika.” Given that the ObamaCare abomination has survived it’s first few hurdles, it might be a good time to revisit why I say that.

In 1987, ABC ran a 12 hour miniseries called, “AMERIKA,” chronicling life in an America that was taken over by the Soviet Union. Here is the trailer.

I started looking for clips from it. There aren’t all that many, but this one rings true for modern liberal thought.

All that’s missing is the “mmm, mmm, mmm.”

I wonder what folks in the lefty media thought…

(note the final video is different than the original version)

Well, that sounds like anyone on MSNBC referring to Conservatives.

Is it just me, or is truth imitating fiction here?


IRS Acting as if it were Behind the Iron Curtain: Armed Security Intimidates Staffers


In a scene taken from some old movie about life behind the Iron Curtain, ABC reporters were allegedly tailed by armed security in an apparent effort to dissuade IRS employeess from speaking out about what they know about the Tea Party scandal.  Dan Riehl has more…

Wow! This reads as though the IRS office in Cincinnati was moved somewhere behind the Iron Curtain when no one was looking!

Welcome to Cincinnati – Ground zero of the exploding IRS scandal.

Things started brewing earlier this month when Internal Revenue Service officials in Washington first admitted conservative groups were targeted for extra scrutiny by tax bureaucrats in Ohio’s Queen City.

One of them, who asked not be named, told ABC News that security guards did remind employees of the official policy not to talk with the press – a warning cemented by the punch line “or risk losing our jobs.”

Even leaders of the local union that represents the IRS workers under fire took the admonition to heart, hanging up on reporters who wanted to ask questions about the scandal. One longtime IRS worker and union member called the response by the National Treasury Employees Union “dazzling.”

As we traveled the public hallways of the building – watched over by security cameras – an armed uniformed police officer with the Federal Protective Service followed us. We were looking for a particular office—of someone who would not want to be seen talking to reporters–but chose to bypass it because of our official babysitter.

via IRS Scandal: Stonewalled in Cincinnati – ABC News.

So, is this an example of the most transparent administration ever?  Following reporters with armed security?  Threatening staffers with termination if they talk?  And talk about what, alleged crimes committed by the agency?

My friends, I fear we are living in a cliché.


Election Night Live Feeds Here! ABC, CBS, FOX: See Them all Here!


We’ve all been looking forward to this moment…the opportunity to see Barak Hussein Obama reduced to “Citizen Obama.”  For your viewing enjoyment, here are several live feeds for tonight’s election coverage…

Youtube is handling the ABC/Yahoo News Feed…

FOX News (via Hulu)…

CBS (Via Ustream)

Live stream videos at UstreamSadly, NBC appears to not have enabled something that could be embedded.

Thanks for stopping here for your election night live feed!


“Broke Party!” Black Activists Organize Protest Against Obama, ABC: Zero Media Coverage


A groups of black activists, under the banner of the “Broke Party,” organized a protest against Mayor Rahm Emanuel, President Obama, and even protested at the local ABC affiliate.  The result?  They were ignored.  Breitbart has the video…

So, these folks decide to get off the Democratic Plantation, and at least for now, they are being ignored.

Breitbart has more…

The protesters waved anti-union signs, anti-NAACP, anti-Rainbow Push, and signs reading “Rahm Hates Black People” in front of the studio as Kathy Brock and Alan Krashesky broadcasted the evening news. They demanded their voices be heard and criticized Emanuel for acting in cahoots with community-organizing front groups ACORN and ACTION Now to put properties in the community into the organizations’ hands. These actions by the Mayor and the corrupt “Chicago Machine” have ensured that construction work only goes to the unions, effectively keeping the residents of the community unemployed.

J.R. Fleming, another protester, declared that these community groups “do not represent the interests” of their communities or of black leaders in their communities. Fleming continued:

We want to work in our communities, we want to train the young boys and girls on the block… they need jobs and opportunity… we demand the mayor of the city of Chicago respect us, respect our community and allow us to work in our own neighborhoods… We are not asking for your money… It’s clear to us you ain’t gonna house us, it’s clear to us you ain’t gonna put us to work, so it’s clear to us that we must do this ourselves.

It seems to me that some folks are waking up!

UPDATE:  Instalanche courtesy of IOwnTheWorld.  Thanks, and an add to the blogroll is in order.


Media Bias: Administration Knew That Libya Attack Was Planned, Only ABC Covers it


Imagine, if you will, that our ambassador to Libya was killed.

Then, imagine that the administration blamed the attack on a “spontaneous protest” over a YouTube video that no one watched.

And, just to make it more interesting, let’s add that the Libyan government came out and said that it was a planned terrorist attack, and that they had warned the administration that it was coming…in advance of the attack.

Imagine that security, in Libya, or anywhere else, was not increased.

Imagine that the MSM played ball and used the death of our ambassador to Libya in order to attack Mitt Romney.

In the event that you thought it couldn’t get even more interesting, let’s tack on that American intelligence officials stated that they knew that it was a terrorist attack shortly thereafter, even while the administration continued to blame the aforementioned unpopular YouTube video.

Then, imagine that even when this information came out, the media, with the exception of Jake Tapper of ABC, refused to cover it?

ABC’s Jake Tapper’s Thursday report on World News stands alone as the only Big Three coverage so far of what The Daily Beast’s Eli Lake reported on Wednesday – that U.S. intelligence officials had “strong indications” within a day that Islamist terrorists were behind the September 11, 2012 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi – not a mob enraged at a controversial Internet video.

By contrast, former NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw tried to point the finger at Mitt Romney on Friday’s Today show for the media’s apparent lack of curiosity at the inconsistencies in the Obama administration’s narrative about the terrorist attack. Otherwise, NBC only aired two reports on the story since Wednesday – twice running the same Ann Curry interview of Libyan President Mohammed Magarief.

Tapper pointed out during his report that “the White House first suggested that the Benghazi attack was spontaneous, the result of that anti-Muslim video inciting mobs throughout the region.” He emphasized the administration’s talking point by playing a clip from September 14, 2012 press briefing, where White House Press Secretary Jay Carney underlined that “these protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.” When the ABC correspondent himself raised Benghazi, Carney continued by claiming that “we have no information to suggest that it was a pre-planned attack.”

The correspondent later added that “sources tell ABC News that intelligence officials on the ground immediately suspected the attack was not tied to the movie at all….Some administration sources tell ABC News they were concerned after the White House began pushing the line that they attack was spontaneous and not the work of terrorists.”

To me, it almost seems that this was a set up.  At there very least, the administration knew that this was a pre-planned terror attack within a day or two of the event, if not before.  But, they started a narrative, and the MSM dutifully went along, in spite of the mounting evidence to the contrary.  Then, even when half the planet knows that the administration lied, and is continuing to lie, the MSM still refuses to cover the cover-up.  Of course, the cause should be obvious, as they actively participated in the cover up.  In the end, this is what we have to expect from the MSM.  We should expect them to lie, and if they manage to ever engage in random acts of journalism, we should then be pleasantly surprised.

This story, more than others, alarms me.  Yes, the administration is knowingly telling lies about an event that cost the lives of several Americans, and the MSM is willingly helping them.  That leads me to question if there is a limit for how far the MSM will go?  If Americans were detained for no reason, would the MSM carry water for such a regime?  If a war was started, also without cause, would the MSM make the case that it was justified?  We already know, for example, that NBC isn’t above editing footage, or flat out making things up to deceive the sheeple, but is there a limit, or is this a leaderless propaganda machine that will lie for the bad guys, and smear the good guys?

Sadly, I think the answer is that there is no limit on what, or who, they will lie about.


Barack Obama, Agent Of Chaos


“Hodgkins, I want the officer responsible for internal security in here on the double.”
“You’re the internal security officer.”
“Fast work, Hodgkins.”
 — Don Adams as Maxwell Smart

“… this is a fairly volatile situation and it is in response not to United States policy, and not to, obviously, the administration, or the American people, but it is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be be reprehensible and disgusting.” — Jay Carney, Obama Press Secretary

No, the mayhem caused by the rampaging adherents of the perpetually outraged adherents of the ‘Religion of Peace’ can’t be the result of the policies of this administration.  After all, hasn’t Barack Obama bowed and scraped incessantly to the Muslims of the world since the day of his misbegotten inauguration?  Hasn’t he servilely tossed Israel under the bus and shipped billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars off to every radical Islamist standing on a fetid Middle Eastern corner with his dirty hand out?  Hasn’t he turned our space agency into a outreach center for pouting Mohammedans? Hasn’t he blithely declared the Fort Hood murders committed by Muslim terrorist Major Nidal Malik Hasan to be merely a ‘crime of the workplace’?  Hasn’t he sabotaged our combat troops in Afghanistan by devising the most restrictive Rules of Engagement ever imposed on a fighting force and then advertising their withdrawal date regardless of theater conditions? Hasn’t he facilitated the coming to power of the Muslim Brotherhood from the shores of Tripoli to the great pyramids of Egypt, even to the extent of unconstitutionally committing the United States military in support thereof? Hasn’t he said that the Muslim call to prayer is the ‘prettiest sound he ever heard’?

Meanwhile, with our embassies and consulates, not to mention a few hapless fast food restaurants, under siege by both frenzied jihadists and Michelle Obama, the craven fifth columnists of the U.S. media (Journalists For Obama) castigate not the ineptness or willful malfeasance of the Appeaser-In-Chief or the psychoses of the rabid followers of Mohammed, but the entirely appropriate criticisms of Mitt Romney. It’s a bit different elsewhere:

“One thing is clear: If jihadists believe they can attack American installations and kill an ambassador on the anniversary of Sept. 11, then America’s deterrent power has declined considerably. For a superpower, it is not enough just to want to be loved. You have to scare the bad guys to keep them in check (Die Welt)

Obama and his dissembling enablers would have us believe that the pillagers of Islam have been motivated solely by an obscure film that denigrates its founder.  However, the attacks in Cairo and Libya were timed to take place on the anniversary of 9/11.  To imagine that this was sheer coincidence is to strain credulity past the breaking point.  It’s to believe that the Holocaust never happened; that O.J. is still searching for the real killers; that Obama actually attends his intelligence briefings …

[…] What’s kept President Obama’s presidency intact for the past four years is the accomplices in the media. His every foible, mis-statement, radical policy, international blunder, executive order, and ties to Islamists either never appeared in print or were buried deep in the fold of page 59 of the New York Times.

Sound criticisms of the president were always declared to be “code words” for imbedded racism in the Republican Party.

There’s no place to hide today. There are more networks than ABC, CBS, and NBC. CNN is in the ratings tank. The internet minute-by-minute explodes with news information. Photos and videos make their way to our computer screens within minutes of the events happening. (It’s All Starting to Unravel for Obama)

A generation of official disregard for what by all evidence is the fundamental nature of Islam has not made a safer world; it’s created even more chaos. What America needs now is a president with a little less tolerance and a lot more artillery.

Related articles

Original Post:  Be Sure You’re RIGHT, Then go Ahead


“Justice for Trayvon?” Man Nearly Beaten to Death



Since race baiters, with the full support of the MSM, have convicted George Zimmerman of murder most foul, racial tensions have been elevated.  And, with self important men and the MSM (or do I repeat myself) continuing to fan the flames of hate and resentment, there has been a predictable escalation in violence.  For the latest, The Other McCain is on the case…

From the very start, I warned against trying this case in the media. Demagoguery and political grandstanding have predictably inflamed emotions, so that innocent people who never set foot in Sanford, Florida, are made to pay a dreadful price: First in Baltimore, then in Chicago, and now in Mobile, Alabama:

Police tell News 5 the suspects used chairs, pipes and paint cans to beat Owens.
Owens’ sister, Ashley Parker, saw the attack. “It was the scariest thing I have ever witnessed.” . . .
As the attackers walked away, leaving Owen bleeding on the ground, Parker says one of them said “Now thats justice for Trayvon.”

The victim is hospitalized in critical condition. Ace of Spades:

I repeat: No national coverage of this racial hate crime pattern in the media.
Apparently some victims are unworthy, and some hatred and violence is justified.
Is Obama going to say anything? Call at least one of the victims? Attempt to bring calm? Attempt a “Sister Souljah” moment (which could actually benefit him politically) and call out violent black racists?
Apparently not, and the media has decided that’s their preferred political strategy, too.

That the meaning of “civil rights” now evidently includes violent reprisals against innocent people — in a word, terrorism – is something else the national media can’t be bothered to notice.

As usual, Stacey McCain nails it.  It is terrorism.  When hacks like Sharpton and Jackson show up in a display of unwarranted self importance, and throw bucket after bucket of gasoline on the fire, these attacks are a predictable result.  When NBC decides to edit the 911 call to make it look like Zimmerman is a racist, this is the predictable result.  When Spike Lee tweets the purported address of the Zimmerman family, and it’s the wrong family, we see senseless acts of violence such as these.

If you all will recall, when a whacked out fan of Zeitgeist killed several people, and severely wounded then Representative Gabby Giffords, Sarah Palin was blamed for the act, with her lack of civil discourse id’d as the ultimate cause.  However, in this case, and the others linked by Stacey McCain, the people that actually called for violence are not similarly indicted.  In fact, not only have the instigators gone unnamed, but the crimes themselves have been completely ignored by the MSM.  Apparently, “civil discourse” has gone out the window, right along with journalistic integrity, and any semblance of truth.


Trayvon Martin Update: Call Didn’t Have Racial Slur After All? Zimmerman not a Racist?


The Martin case continues to evolve, much to the chagrin of the MSM.  The more that comes out, the more the opportunistic, and shall we say, creative, coverage is blowing up in the dinosaur media’s faces.  Some more came to light yesterday, so let’s take a look at the new details.

After NBC was castigated for selectively editing the 911 tape to make Zimmerman look like a racist.  Then, the ABC video that allegedly showed no injuries to Zimmerman actually did.  And now, it seems that the CNN audio “enhancement” that indicated that Zimmerman used a racial slur has been “re-enhanced,” with some different results…

So, another piece if the puzzle is in place, in spite of the MSM’s covereage.  At least I can say that CNN appeared to have  taken it seriously, and didn’t apparently create the alleged slur.  NBC, on the other hand, intentionally manipulated part of that same 911 call.

And, as for the calls for Zimmerman being a racist; Flopping Aces has the answer to that…

And this letter from the Zimmerman family to the NAACP should put an end to the “George Zimmerman is a racist” meme.

“Do you know the individual that stepped up when no one else in the black community would?” the family member wrote. “Do you know who spent tireless hours putting flyers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church?goers to get out of church so that he could hand them fliers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8th, 2011 at Sanford City Hall??”

“That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN. Ironic isn’t it?”

“The main point for this letter is to explain to you that the black community has labeled George a racist without any investigation at all,” the letter continued. “Regardless of the fact that George personally spoke to many of your constituents, not one has stepped forward and said, ‘Hey I know that face. That is the Hispanic guy that was standing up for Sherman Ware. That was the only non?black face in the meetings for justice in this case.’”

“You know as well as I do that there are many NAACP followers that recognize George from the Ware case as well as many other good things that he’s done for the black community.

So, once again, the narrative takes some serious  damage.  In a sense, the MSM damaged itself as well, since they went in the tank for a specific narrative, and were consequently caught either over-emphasizing bits of evidence over others, or outright fabricating it.

There needs to be an end to this that provides justice for all, and the truth is the key to that.  Unfortunately for Martin’s family, and Zimmerman himself, the MSM has taken it upon themselves to create a story, rather than cover one.

 Related Post:  The Daley Gator


Trayvon Martin Update: Leftist Twit Flips Out on CNN, More Information on the Police Video, and Voice Recognition


If you want a great example of a MSM talking head being prejudicial, and an overall twit?

This guy is blasting Piers Morgan for not following the same “Standards and Practices,” that NBC aspires to when NBC engaged in selective editing of the 9-11 call?

Well, are those the “standards and practices” that NBC claims?

And, MSNBC ran a text version, which they later changed without comment, or apology.

Since then, the news channel has changed that paragraph of the story on its website so it reads as follows:

This guy looks like he’s up to no good,” Zimmerman said in a 911 call. Asked by a dispatcher if he was white, Hispanic or black, he replied, “He looks black.” (Italics supplied)

However, no one from MSNBC or NBC News has issued an apology regarding the error.

Down the memory hole, right?

While NBC is promising an investigation, I’m not particularly trusting them to do it properly.  If I were to be sarcastic, I would suggest that their focus would be on finding out how they got caught.

Also, there have been some stills released from the ABC News Video of Zimmerman in police custody…

It has been reported that Zimmerman received some treatment by paramedics at the scene, prior to being taken to the police station.  If that is true, that would explain why he might have been “cleaned up.”  However, we need verification that it happened, and what the extent of that treatment might have been.  Also, any documentation as to any injuries would be great about now.

In another twist, The Orlando Sentinel is reporting that voice recognition software indicated that the person screaming in the 9-11 call was not Zimmerman.

As the Trayvon Martin controversy splinters into a debate about self-defense, a central question remains: Who was heard crying for help on a 911 call in the moments before the teen was shot?

A leading expert in the field of forensic voice identification sought to answer that question by analyzing the recordings for the Orlando Sentinel.

His result: It was not George Zimmerman who called for help.

Tom Owen, forensic consultant for Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, used voice identification software to rule out Zimmerman. Another expert contacted by the Sentinel, utilizing different techniques, came to the same conclusion.

Zimmerman claims self-defense in the shooting and told police he was the one screaming for help. But these experts say the evidence tells a different story.

I would recommend that you take the time to read the entire article.

So, there is more, but this is what I would like to have, in order to make an informed decision…

1.  Where did Martin die in relation to the location of Zimmerman’s car, and Martin’s likely path back home?

2.  Did Zimmerman’s gun fail to feed the next round?

3.  Was there any evidence on Martin’s hands or clothes that would indicate that he was grabbing the gun?

4.  Did the angle of the fatal wound indicate where Martin and Zimmerman might have been in relation to one another?

5.  What was the nature of the medical treatment that Zimmerman received at the scene, and was it all documented?

That’s all I can think of at the moment.  As usual, I’ll try to keep up with the story as it continues to unfold.

H/T: Riehl World View

Note:  Post was updated on 4-1-12 @ 5:06 PM to add a link regarding NBC’s internal investigation.


Classic Conservative Hideout: Welcome to Amerika


Note:  As I’ve been paying attention the rhetoric of the left, I am again reminded of the old ABC miniseries, Amerika.  Here is a post I wrote about it in March of 2010…

Every now and again, I refer to Obama’s version of our nation as “Amerika.” Given that the ObamaCare abomination has survived it’s first few hurdles, it might be a good time to revisit why I say that.

In 1987, ABC ran a 12 hour miniseries called, “AMERIKA,” chronicling life in an America that was taken over by the Soviet Union. Here is the trailer.

I started looking for clips from it. There aren’t all that many, but this one rings true for modern liberal thought.

All that’s missing is the “mmm, mmm, mmm.”

I wonder what folks in the lefty media thought…

Well, that sounds like anyone on MSNBC referring to Conservatives.

Is it just me, or is truth imitating fiction here?

Note: In the original post, the last video was a discussion on an ABC News program about the mini series.  It was banhammered from YouTube, and cannot be found.  I replaced it with another.


MSM Deathwatch: Slide Continues Even During Election Season


I have to admit it, I LOVE doing these posts.

The MSM continues to lie, omit, attack, and spin, and more and more people are turning away.  AND THEY SIMPLY DO NOT GET IT!

For more on the crash and burn of the MSM, kindly take a look at this from Newsbusters.

They’re out of excuses.

Summer’s over. It’s after Labor Day. The kids are back in school. People are back into their routines. The trouble for the Big 3 broadcast networks is that those routines don’t include watching their early-evening newscasts.

Beyond that, last week was a pivotal week in Campaign 2010, with key primaries in New York, Delaware, New Hampshire, and several other states. As far as I know, Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, and Katie Couric were firmly ensconced in their anchor chairs all week long.

With all that, the Big 3 Nets’ audience for the week was less than 20 million, almost 5% lower than the same week a year ago, when there were no key election races. The Big 3 are not recovering from what was an awful summer.

They can’t even use the summer as an excuse anymore.  The slide continues.

I have an idea.  Why don’t they run more stories about Christine O’Donnell being a witch?  That really pulled in the viewers!


MSM Deathwatch: Big Three Still Losing Viewers


I hate to gloat over the impending doom of the liberal MSM.  Well, then again, yes I do!  For the latest on the decline the MSM can’t hide, here’s this from News Busters.

But the Big Three networks won’t be able to avoid the fact that their ongoing decline reached a painful low last week of 18.82 million average viewers. Here is the graphic that appeared this morning at ABC’s lipstick-on-a-pig blog post:

I don’t know whether that’s an all-time low, but Kevin Allocca at Media Bistro, who hadn’t posted the full numbers as of the time of this post, has noted that one of those networks indeed scraped bottom last week:

Will they ever figure out that it’s their biased, poor, coverage that is killing them?  All indications point to, “not a chance.”


MSM Deathwatch: Nightly News Broadcasts Continue to Lose Viewers


I love doing these posts.  I know I shouldn’t, but I must admit that the failure of the MSM brings out the dark side in my sense of humor.  I guess you could call it the recognition of the irony that escapes the elites.  They apparently have no idea why they are tanking.  Frankly, I enjoy that considerably.

At any rate, that failure continues.  In fact, it is accelerating.  NewsBusters has the latest.

The big three nightly news broadcasts, NBC Nightly, CBS Evening and ABC World, lost a combined one million viewers in the second quarter of 2010, according to TVNewser.

These numbers are comparable to the first quarter, which saw Evening News and World News get their lowest average viewers ever, while NBC’s Winter Olympics coverage helped it get their highest average viewers since 2005. In the second quarter, NBC lost 440,000 viewers, ABC 260,000 and CBS 340,000. It was about this time last year that ABC and CBS’ news programs had their lowest ratings ever.

I wonder why they are losing all of their audience?

These numbers are not at all surprising in light of the public’s continued distrust of the old media. As Newsbusters’ Rich Noyes wrote of a Rasmussen poll released earlier this month, “Perhaps as a result, the poll finds an astonishing two-thirds of the public (66 percent) say they are angry with the media, ‘including 33 percent who are very angry’ with the press.”

This seems to be very consistent with the  previous polling that shows people believe that the MSM tried to get Obama elected, and that majorities do not trust them.

And why are they losing their audience?  It’s the bias!  It’s the persistent ignorance of stories critical of the administration.  It’s the refusal to cover any of Obama’s associations, or his background.  It’s ignoring critics of the administration, or flat out attacking them.  It’s the failure to report about illegal immigration, and that American citizens  are dying because of it.  It’s taking talking points directly from the White House, and openly admitting it.  It’s the political ideology of most of the talking heads; still claiming that global warming is happening, even though it’s been discredited.  It’s that most of the MSM are ideological “fellow travelers” with the left, and will view every story and event through that prism.  And, being “progressives,” they will mockingly sneer at anyone with an opposing viewpoint.

Media folks will write these losses off as, “the market is changing.”  That is at least partially true.  However, there are parts of the old media that are growing, or at least losing at a much smaller rate.  These sources are more conservative in their political tone.  This will lead most reasonable people to conclude that it’s the ideology that is causing their failure.

In the end, if someone can spend 15 seconds on Google and find out that the MSM is lying through their teeth, why should they watch?   Why watch, read, or listen to someone who is lying to you, and it can so easily be proven?  Why would they watch someone that insults them? So,for the MSM, keep on lying. Tell yourselves that it’s the market that is changing.  Hopefully, that will help you sleep at night, but it will NEVER cause people to watch.

Sorry to surprise the  MSM, but none of their current strategies constitutes a successful formula.  Contrary to what they  might think, people do not enjoy tuning in for lies and distortions.  They do not enjoy being insulted, and they do not agree with your ideology.  If that is consider when they make their decisions, and they might survive.  However, I don’t see them doing this.  After all, they are the really smart people that know better than you do.  They know that AGW is a fraud, but they’ll ignore that, and continue to preach the party line. They know that Cap and Trade will hurt you, but they think they know better.  They know that ObamaCare is a pig, but you’re too stupid to manage your health care.  They know that Obama is the chosen one, and you’re not quite smart enough to see it yourself.  So, they will help lead us into the new age, and, all the while, covering up how much misery it will cause.

I don’t think anyone can question why the government wants to control media.  In an environment where people can choose, their propaganda arm is failing.  The solution?  Shut down the competition!