Apparently the UK Guardian has been attacking Pam Geller and have been featuring a Bikini shot of her in the stories. Pam answers them in this post:

Knowledgeable conservative readers will get a charge out of the Guardian’s story, which is a mixture of pure fiction and dangerous lies, all devoted to the marginalization of those who dare to expose the liberal media propaganda machine.

The anti-Semitism was open: “Geller,” claimed Chris McGreal, the author of the piece, “writes for an Israeli media network based in the occupied territories that is the voice of the Jewish settler movement.”

I do? They just make stuff up. I don’t even know what they are talking about, but if Chris McGreal is in touch with this “Israeli media network,” he should let them know that I would love to write for them — please point the way!

Pam being Pam hits them head on answering them at her site and Big Journalism:

What’s the point of this stupid hit piece? And yes, it is worse than that. At the moment when I am identified more than anyone else with the fight against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, they’re trying to make me radioactive, so that no one will dare to stand with me.

Anyone who has met Pam would be proud to stand with her, she is a woman of ethics, courage who has acted when others have shown fear. Anyone who thinks she had a bigoted bone in her body is drinking and smoking something stronger then I do.

As for the constant use of Bikini photos, well other than trying to be included in Rule 5 Sunday their use of them at the Guardian confirms one thing.

While they strategic, historical and sociological visions are faulty, their basic eyesight is apparently excellent.

I was speaking to a police officer a bit ago and he said something that frankly never occurred to me. When dealing with accused criminals and the like police officers remember that their convictions only reflect what they have been “caught” doing.

This is in fact what has happened with the media. It’s not that the media hasn’t played us for their own purposes in the past, it’s that now we know about it.

A mantra of the left is that in the 60’s our naivete concerning government was lifted from us, the truth is that naivete about the media is what the internet and the web and blogs has been destroyed forever.

How we use this knowledge is up to us. Hopefully we will use this perception better than the left perception did.

Update: I can’t help but visualizing the AP head editor asking the question: “Can we call it a Tallywacker?

All in the family was a staple in my house for many years when I was a kid. This week an episode called “The commercial” came to mind.

Edith is ambushed at the launderette by a man who tears Archie’s favorite shirt in half. It turns out he is from a detergent company filming with a hidden camera and they are shooting a commercial. They hire Edith to film the commercial but when the time comes to pick which half is brighter and cleaner she keeps picking the half washed in her brand. When told to pick “New Improved Sudi sudds” she just can’t bring herself to lie.

Archie, desperate to salvage payday and the residuals from the commercial tries to explain why she has to lie:

They gotta give the lie, equal time with the truth.

Apparently Archie was ahead of his time. Not only did he predict Reagan’s win in 1980 but he apparently saw this ruling coming down the pike from the 9th circuit:

A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with him in a 2-1 decision Tuesday, agreeing that the law was a violation of his free-speech rights. The majority said there’s no evidence that such lies harm anybody, and there’s no compelling reason for the government to ban such lies.

The dissenting justice insisted that the majority refused to follow clear Supreme Court precedent that false statements of fact are not entitled to First Amendment protection.

The act revised and toughened a law that forbids anyone to wear a military medal that wasn’t earned. The measure sailed through Congress in late 2006, receiving unanimous approval in the Senate.

What a boon for the cheating husband, he doesn’t have to rely on the “Oral Sex isn’t sex” defense he can BS his wife on first amendment grounds.

Two amazing things have taken place:

The Hospital internet is now working!

An Arab language newspaper has come out against the Mosque at Ground Zero:

“I can’t imagine that Muslims [actually] want a mosque at this particular location, because it will become an arena for the promoters of hatred, and a monument to those who committed the crime. Moreover, there are no practicing Muslims in the area who need a place to worship, because it is a commercial district. Is there anyone who is [really] eager [to build] this mosque?…

“Those pushing to build this mosque may be construction companies, architect firms, or political groups who want to exploit this issue. The individual who submitted the building application – I do not know whether he [really] wants [to build] a mosque that will promote reconciliation, or whether he is [just] an investor looking for quick profits. Because the idea of a mosque right next to a site of destruction is not at all an intelligent one. The last thing Muslims want today is to build a religious center that provokes others, or a symbolic mosque that people will visit as a [kind of] museum next to a cemetery.

“What the citizens of the U.S. fail to understand is that the battle against the 9/11 terrorists is not their battle. It is a Muslim battle – one whose flames are still raging in more than 20 Muslim countries… I do not think that the majority of Muslims want to build a monument or a place of worship that tomorrow may become a source of pride for the terrorists and their Muslim followers, nor do they want a mosque that will become a shrine for the haters of Islam… This has already started to happen: [the Islamophobes] are claiming that a mosque is being built over the corpses of 3,000 U.S. citizens who were buried alive by people chanting ‘Allah akbar’ – the same call that will be heard from the mosque…”

I take exception to the words “Islamophobes, but all in all a piece that acknowledges what MSNBC and CNN and the rest of the “Defend Obama” media can’t or won’t see. (Dana Milbank for example)

Bill Kristol thinks it will be over soon, I hope he’s right.

memeorandum thread here.

The biggest loser here won’t be the president (who was already sinking in the popularity ratings.) or Congressional democrats (who get a great chance to separate themselves from an unpopular president, or the republicans, (who get another talking point) or even the people trying to get the mosque built (who will get concessions for moving it and be celebrated as “tolerant” for doing so)

No the biggest loser is the media who fawned all over the president’s statement, called the American People ignorant bigots for disagreeing and then expect them to not only watch their programs but to take their word on issues.

Of course within their Niche market it might not hurt that much but their days of influencing the mass of Americans is rapidly and thankfully drawing to a close.

Update: Case in point

When did we stop praising politicians for doing what is right even when it’s not politically expedient?” she asked rhetorically. Suggesting that it was unjust for them to suffer political consequences since “the reason everybody is groaning all the time about our politicians is because they’re such hacks and nobody stands up for what’s right,” she concluded saying that “somebody has to say that we’re not going to act like the people who stole freedom from Americans, the people who attacked us”– suggesting that the people who oppose its construction are, to some extent, the moral equivalent to those who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. Her point seemed to have been that religious intolerance was behind both sentiments, but the issue is already heated enough without constructing this kind of analogy.

I wasn’t up early enough to see this on Morning Joe or I would have mentioned it.

In this post:

Imagine yourself on the evening of Sept. 11, 2001.

As you sat there in shock, what if someone had told you that in 10 years, the World Trade Center would still be a crater. However, just off of Ground Zero, a gigantic, 13-story mosque would be erected. A mosque endorsed by President Barack Hussein Obama.

You would have thought we had lost a war, wouldn’t you?

I don’t see how anyone can honestly disagree with that statement.

Memeorandum thread here.

After seeing this story and watching it in disbelief (forgetting the political implications) all I could say is this: I’ve not seen an action by this president that more confirms that The Post American Presidency is a perfect title for Pam Geller’s book on this administration.

She comments as follows:

Obama came out for the Islamic supremacist mosque at the hallowed ground of 911 attack. He has, in effect, sided with the Islamic jihadists and told the ummah (at an Iftar dinner on the third night of Ramadan, of course) that he believes in and supports a triumphal mosque on the cherished site of Islamic conquest.

If you had any doubt who Obama stood with on 911, there can be no doubt in our minds now.

I really Really REALLY don’t want to agree with that last statement. I will say is this, considering style, venue and the force of this declaration by the elected president of the United States 2012 can’t come fast enough for me.

I’ve always argued that a free society and free people have the right to be wrong, I just never thought we’d exercise our right to be this wrong!

Casey Fiano explains the facts of life to a generation of mothers who were so positive that they knew better than their parents they they retained that belief even after they left their teenage years:

One culprit for why girls are so hyper-sexualized these days can be traced right back to the extreme sex education being taught in our schools, with the charge being led by femisogynists to keep the sex ed coming. Girls have been taught by the adults in their lives to embrace their sexuality, have been lovingly encouraged to explore their sex lives in new and innovative ways. The feminist extremists gush about the brilliance of giving their daughters vibrators, they teach middle schoolers how to have good sex. Planned Parenthood distributes sexually explicit brochures to Girl Scouts and teach 10-year-olds about anal sex. Children are inundated about sex from extremely young ages about sex, something that the femisogynists encourage, and yet they can’t understand why teenage girls are sleeping around?

And mom’s if you were counting on us parents of boys to hold them back, you sure have high expectations. Those teenage boys and twenty something men are naturally hardwired toward the goal of scoring. Do you realize how hard it is for responsible parents to teach their sons to hold off be respectful when the message from the girls at school is “Get it Here!”?

You did this to yourselves. I have sympathy for your daughters but I have a very hard time having sympathy for you. You wanted to fight the culture wars to get rid of “puritanical” standards of your parents and church. Congratulations you won! Enjoy your prize!

I’ll include you and your children in my prayers.