dunce-capby baldilocks

When the time comes for choosing—and the time will come—most of the leftist, pseudo-conservative, and even some real conservative media will convert to Islam. And they will do it for this reason: ignorant pride, along with cowardice. How do I know this? Well, heck I’m just guessing, but I think that ignorance about the spiritual foundation of one’s own culture makes a person prone to accepting those of other cultures–especially when the option of continuing to breathe is on the line.

“What make you say that the leftist and pseudo-conservative media are ignorant about Judeo-Christianity,” I hear you ask.

There have been plenty of unironic examples of this type of ignorance on public display since Christmas. Mostly of it is the result of relying on one’s memory for the important, but not essential details surrounding the birth of Christ.

This doozy from Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Kathleen Parker—noted by Mollie Hemingway–is, however, not the misunderstanding of a minor detail.

One observation. I don’t know… this seems to have slipped through the cracks a little bit but Ted Cruz said something that I found rather astonishing. He said, you know, “It’s time for the body of Christ to rise up and support me.” I don’t know anyone who takes their religion seriously who would think that Jesus should rise from the grave and resurrect himself to serve Ted Cruz. I know so many people who were offended by that comment. And you know if you want to talk about grandiosity and messianic self-imagery I think he makes Ted Cruz makes Donald Trump look rather sort of like a gentle little lamb.

Parker thinks Jesus is dead and has no clue what the term ‘body of Christ’ means.

Ponder that for a bit.

I may be wrong, but I think that Parker is emblematic of those who the mainstream media entities employ and reward. And I think all her offended friends are emblematic of the rest of Organized Left. Conversion by the sword to Islam will not matter to those who don’t really know anything about the terms of their alleged salvation in the first place.

With their necks on the line, they’ll deny Christ and will not understanding the significance of that act of volition. After all, what’s the big deal about denying a dead guy?

I contend that there will be a lot of people in Hell who are too stupid to figure out how they ended up there.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel, tentatively titled, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects JOB: HER TRIP TO KENYA! Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>baldilocks

10th Doctor: Look, clean. Look, if we’d been touched, we’d be dead. So how’s it going up here? What’s the status?
Clovis: There’s nothing but silence from the other wards. I think we’re the only ones left. And I’ve been trying to override the quarantine. If I can trip a signal over to New New York, they can send a private executive squad.
10th Doctor: You can’t do that. If they forced entry, they’d break quarantine.
Clovis: I am not dying in here.
10th Doctor:  We can’t let a single particle of disease get out. There is ten million people in that city. They’d all be at risk. Now, turn that off!
Clovis:   Not if it gets me out.

Doctor Who, New Earth 2006

You can’t turn on a cable channel or a news network without finding someone talking about Ebola, a scare here, an exposure there, a bad joke etc etc etc.  It is the only topic in town.  This is because people are afraid and unlike the AIDS “epidemic” they have to some degree, cause to be.

One of the realities of AIDS in the west for a person to catch the disease, even during its hayday in the 80’s you had to be pretty much part of a specific group:

You had to be a heroin addict sharing needles or having sex with a heroin addict who was sharing needles 

You had to be promiscuous bi/gay man,  or having sex with a promiscuous bi/gay man (that’s what killed Gunsmoke actress Amanda Blake)

As the disease progressed sex with any promiscuous person involved risk but in the end if you weren’t sleeping around or shooting drugs barring carelessness in a hospital you had a better chance of winning a $10,000,000 lottery than catching AIDS and if you’re avoiding drugs and promiscuity that’s still very true.

Ebola is different its spread by common everyday behavior,  simple contact.  Also consider the symptoms direct from the CDC site:

Symptoms of Ebola include

  • Fever (greater than 38.6°C or 101.5°F)
  • Severe headache
  • Muscle pain
  • Weakness
  • Diarrhea
  • Vomiting
  • Abdominal (stomach) pain
  • Unexplained hemorrhage (bleeding or bruising)

Symptoms may appear anywhere from 2 to 21 days after exposure to Ebola, but the average is 8 to 10 days.

Now consider the symptoms for the flu from the same site:

The flu is different from a cold. The flu usually comes on suddenly. People who have the flu often feel some or all of these symptoms:

  • Fever* or feeling feverish/chills
  • Cough
  • Sore throat
  • Runny or stuffy nose
  • Muscle or body aches
  • Headaches
  • Fatigue (tiredness)
  • Some people may have vomiting and diarrhea, though this is more common in children than adults.

* It’s important to note that not everyone with flu will have a fever.

and this note concerning the common cold vs the flu:

it can be difficult (or even impossible) to tell the difference between them based on symptoms alone.

I’d be willing to bet that everybody reading this post has had contact with a person who has at least one of these symptoms over the last 2-3 weeks.

Given that fact one might consider all this coverage and all this panic over Ebola to be justifiable.

You’d be wrong

Consider:  Ebola has been around for 50 years. here is the CDC map of confirmed cases

Ebola

 

if you look at the facts it’s pretty clear. Before 2014 there were only 2365 confirmed cases of Ebola in all in Africa (population 1.1 billion) since 1076.  Even with the current “epidemic” there are only 4655 confirmed cases of the disease and of those a total of 3, count em 3 cases that have been reported outside of Africa that weren’t from lab accidents.   1 from the infected traveler who died in Texas and 2 from healthcare workers to treated Ebola patients 1 at the Texas Hospital where the late patient was treated & one in Madrid.

The problem is of course that like the AIDS epidemic before it the disease is already being used to further various agendas and arguments.

Moreover thanks a combination of government institutions used as political footballs and sheer incompetence,  the people who could get out the message that general panic isn’t warranted can’t do it.   The low info public aren’t getting the message and the informed intelligent public just doesn’t trust them anymore:  As Glenn Reynolds put it:

After so many lies and failures, we’d be fools to trust them.

The problem is, we’re heading into what looks like a dark period, one when trust in government will be very important to dealing successfully with the many challenges we face. But trust in government comes primarily from one thing: a government that is worthy of trust.

So given we’re working with:

  • A disease whose symptoms mimic those of common diseases
  • A government that’s incompetent
  • A sensationalistic agenda driven media
  • A narcissistic culture
  • And an uninformed public

It’s a wonder that we don’t already have panic in the streets.

Final thought we could, in fact,  easily stop the threat of Ebola in America by the following steps

1.  Quarantining the one person in the US with the disease 

2.  Quarantining the people in the US who have had contact or potential contact with infected people for three weeks to see if they develop the disease and further quarantining any of said people who do 

Combine this with restricting travel from infected nations and/or aggressively screening travelers from or in areas of known infection and viola the risk of a US Ebola outbreak goes practically to nil

Any reasonably competent government could implement these steps and calm the fears an informed educated public.

Isn’t it a shame we don’t have either?

Update:  The count goes to 4:

 

 

******************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

This blog exists as a full-time endeavor thanks to your support. The only check I draw to pay for this coverage and all that is done is what you choose to provide.

If you think this coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting Datipjar below and help keep the bills paid.

Consider Subscribing to support our lineup , in addition to my own work seven days a week you get John Ruberry (Marathon Pundit)  on Sunday Pat Austin (And so it goes in Shreveport)  on Monday  Tim Imholt on Tuesday,  AP Dillon (Lady Liberty1885) Thursdays, Pastor George Kelly Fridays,   Steve Eggleston on Saturdays with  Baldilocks (Tue & Sat)  and   Fausta  (Wed & Fri) of (Fausta Blog) twice a week.

 

By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT — Sarah Palin is an eternal optimist.

In her most recent Facebook post, she challenges The Washington Post (and the mainstream media) to “get back to work.”

Looking back to the days of Watergate and true investigative journalism, Governor Palin writes:

Today, you’ve fallen like a lead balloon. Whereas you once doggedly covered the 18.5 minute gap in Nixon’s White House communications, you’ve virtually ignored the Obama Administration’s 1.2 million minutes of deleted communications by just one of the agencies under Obama’s executive branch. I’m speaking of the Lois Lerner IRS harassment-of-conservatives scandal wherein Lerner “lost” pertinent email communications. You’ve allowed Obama to skate with his proclamation that absolutely no wrongdoing occurred at the IRS, “not even a smidgen.”

The list of Obama abuses and impeachable offenses is long. I challenge you to lift a finger and help protect democracy, allow justice for all, and ensure domestic tranquility by doing your job reporting current corrupt events fairly. If not, you prove yourselves incompetent and in bed with Obama, not caring one iota about media integrity.

Well of course they don’t care about “media integrity.”  And by “they” I am referring to legacy media in general.  They proved long ago that there would be no investigation or challenging of Obama.  This president has never produced the most basic documents pertaining to his background to include his education papers and records which one would think would be pretty good considering he is supposed to be the smartest president evah.

I think this beating of the “impeachment” drum is pointless.  Of course the man is incompetent and of course he should have been impeached long ago, but I don’t see any future in such an action at this time.  It won’t get him out of office.

What we, as conservatives, need to focus on is taking the Senate and holding on to the House.  We need to concentrate on stopping the damage.  Cauterize the wound.

You can be sure the media will cover the vacation to Martha’s Vineyard and the parties with celebrities even if they could care less when it comes to finding answers about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the VA scandal, and the IRS/Lois Lerner mess.   Michelle’s most recent magnificent dress must be covered.  Fashion icon!  Trust the legacy media to focus on what’s important….no?

Governor Palin’s optimism that the Post will rise to her challenge is admirable, but probably ill-fated.  Small bloggers have been working to expose this man for the feckless incompetent dimwit that he is since 2008; it would be truly refreshing, albeit shocking, if the legacy media did the same.  I’m not holding my breath.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport

By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT — I have no delusions about the 2016 presidential election.  We, as a nation, are in serious, serious trouble.  This trouble is the result of myriad reasons however complicit in this downward spiral we now find ourselves in is without a doubt the mainstream, legacy media.

That, and the uniformed voter.

Consider the review in the New York Times of Hillary Clinton’s book, Hard Choices.

I’m not the least bit interested in reading this book, however the review sucked me in with the comment that the book “provides a portrait of the former secretary of state and former first lady as a heavy-duty policy wonk.”

What, what?!

“A heavy-duty policy wonk”?

That never crossed my mind.  Ever.

The review goes on to laud Mrs. Clinton and to praise the book as a “statesmanlike document intended to attest Mrs. Clinton’s wide-ranging experience on national security and foreign policy.”

Oh, please.  It’s too much.

Can we talk about Benghazi?

Can we talk about Fast and Furious?

Statesmanlike?

I don’t think so.  Not one bit.

Okay, so the review goes on in this vein and you can read it yourself if you must, but trust me, it’s all the same whitewash driveling sap that we got about Obama.  And we all know that the legacy media is going to continue to prop up these incompetent fools while our country spins around the bowl, but surely, surely people are smarter than that now, right?  Haven’t we learned something over the past tenure of Obama?

I am reassured to see that most of the comments attached to this article question Mrs. Clinton’s ability to lead the country and question her leadership on issues like Benghazi and Fast and Furious.

There are, of course, a few Hillary supporters who commented:

One woman says she will certainly vote for Clinton because “we are contemporaries (I am exactly the same age as Clinton)…”.  Well, that’s a good reason to vote for a president, eh?  To be fair, this woman goes on to say that she admires Mrs. Clinton’s “tenacity and ability to accept challenges”  which is a good quality however I don’t think that it actually applies to Mrs. Clinton.  How did she accept the challenge of Benghazi, again?

Have we caught those who murdered Chris Stevens yet?

What about Fast and Furious?  How did she accept that challenge?

Let’s just hit the reset button on all that, shall we?  No.  She must answer for all of that.

Clearly there will be those voters who will just vote for Hillary because she’s a woman, because she’s a contemporary, or for whatever nonsense, but by the tone of the comments maybe, just maybe, people are not going to be snowed by The New York Times this time.  Maybe people are ready for a true leader who will put the country back on the track to prosperity.

One can dream.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

Beekeeper:

 ♪ Here’s to the ladies, I love’em all !
Here’s to the ones I recall !
Here’s to the ladies, married or free
They all look pretty good to me…. ♪

The Alamo  1060

Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshal Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy Hun weasels fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And, fortunately, one of *our* spies–
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes, risking life and limb for Blighty!

Black Adder goes forth General Hospital 1989

Yesterday we talked about MSNBC willingness to point the finger at Catholic judges on the Supreme Court saying that can’t couldn’t be trusted to rule fairly on the Hobby Lobby

However when I got home from a badly needed absence from my PC I found this Time Magazine article leading Drudge on the ladies of the court with the headline:

Supreme Court Women Raise Questions on Contraception Coverage

Hmmm an interesting title choice for Time magazine choice of title for time and the bolding of the next paragraph in the original was telling.

Justices Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsburg aggressively questioned the corporate challengers who want exemptions from providing contraception under Obamacare at Tuesday’s oral arguments. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties say the measure violates their religious freedoms

Hmmm again.

So the three woman on the Supreme Court made it a point to actively go after the company trying to assert its religious freedom when the question is contraception coverage.

Now Time is a publication that leans so far left it’s a wonder it doesn’t fall over on the newsstand so perhaps, Ms. Alter the author of the piece, doesn’t see it but imagine that same piece written for the National Review or done as a story on Fox with the conclusion concluded that the female justices could not be trusted to judge the Hobby Lobby case fairly based on their sex.

The outrage would be never-ending.

Now it so happens that there is a grain of truth in the argument in the sense that there has never been any doubt what direction Justices Kagan, Ginsburg and Sotomayor will take on this issue both sides of the aisle would be shocked shocked if they were part of a majority upholding Hobby Lobby’s case.

This however has as little to do with their sex as the certainly in the minds of both sides that justices Scalia, Thomas & Alito will be voting with Hobby Lobby.

The truth is we all know the reason Kagan, Ginsburg and Sotomayor will almost certainly vote against Hobby Lobby, it’s the same reason why Justice Breyer likely will, because they are reliable liberal votes on the court. That is the very reason why liberal presidents nominated them for the court.

And on the other end of the spectrum that’s why Scalia, Thomas & Alito were nominated because they were considered reliable conservative votes by republican presidents.

Now that doesn’t mean any of them from Kagan to Alito come to their positions dishonestly, or with an intent to prejudge a case, what it means is they see the law a particular way and based on how they read and see it rule accordingly (It’s also why the wild cards on the court, Kennedy & Roberts drive people like me nuts. Kennedy because you never know where he will rule and Roberts due to evidence of a yellow stain).

So lets agree to stop pretending that the justices on the court are making decisions because of sexual or religious prejudices and bluntly say what we all know:  These justices believe what they believe and generally vote accordingly if they didn’t they would still be serving in academia or lower courts and you would likely never have heard their names.

***********************************************

Olimometer 2.52

Wednesday is here and and we remain $831 away from a paid mortgage with only six days to get it.

$139 a day six tip jar hitters a day at $23 will get us there. Unfortunately this business is as reliable as Justices Kennedy & Roberts you never know day to day what will come.

But you can make it happen if you hit DatipJar below

 

If 61 of you hit Subscribe at $20 a month subscribers this site will be able to cover its bills for a full year and things will be a lot more like Alito and Kagan around here than Kennedy & Roberts reliable..


 

Sen Joseph Payne: Thirty years ago, I had your ideals. I was you. I had to make the same decision you were asked to make today and I made it, I compromised. Yes. So that I could sit in that Senate and serve the people in a thousand honest ways. You’ve gotta face facts. I’ve served our state well, haven’t I? We have the lowest unemployment and the highest federal grants, but well I’ve had to compromise, I’ve had to play ball. You can’t count on people voting. Half the time they don’t vote. That’s how states and empires have been built since time began.

Mr Smith goes to Washington 1939

There was all kinds of coverage of Bill DiBlasso’s inauguration how he was absolutely determined to make sure that “income equality” becomes an issue. How he would be the great progressive hope escorting in the era in NYC where the wealth and power of the rich will no longer drive the decision of the City administration…

…unless you have to repay a political donor who just might want a piece of land where the Central Park stables are located of course:

 An anti-carriage pamphlet Nislick circulated in 2008 made this interesting observation: “Currently, the stables consist of 64,000 square feet of valuable real estate on lots that could accomodate up to 150,000 square feet of development. These lots could be sold for new development.” Gross asked the obvious question: “What are the odds that good neighbor Nislick, the out-of-state real estate developer, simply covets those valuable, underdeveloped New York lots — and has teamed up with ambitious pols to use the emotions of animal rights activists as fuel for their own agendas?”

By an odd coincidence Stacy McCain’s American Spectator Piece notes that Steve Nislick…

founded a 501(c)4 group called New Yorkers for Clean, Livable and Safe Streets (NYCLASS) that spent big money to elect de Blasio mayor

Amazing all of that evil big money to elect the great progressive hope isn’t it?

Strangely enough the media that has been celebrating the coming of the great liberal hope to NY has been oddly disinterested in the subject

Mayor de Blasio’s willingness to do the bidding of his anti-carriage backers has puzzled many observers, who can’t fathom why he would make the issue such a focus. “What makes him think this subject is important enough to occupy his first days in office?” asked New York Times editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal. Evidently, reporters at Rosenthal’s newspaper can’t be bothered to do the kind of “follow the money” investigative journalism that might provide an answer to that question.

I suspect that our progressive friends who have not been told this story of DiBlassio fighting against the middle class workers who drive those carriages on behalf of Steve Nislick & NYCLASS with PETA playing the Taylor machine doing their best to hijack the #SaveNYCHorseCarriages hashtag reading this will be having their Jimmy Stewart moment:

and wonder why the MSM isn’t even looking at this story?

Having been in this business for a few years now I suspect the liberal media is ignoring his story to maintain plausible deniability on their part.

The truth is they would be almost as shocked at the great progressive hope DiBlasso & PETA working at the behest of big money as they would be to discover there is gambling going on at Rick’s cafe in Casablanca.

And they can’t let the low information voters figure out uncomfortable truths such as this

Don’t let this “animal rights” talk deceive you. Starry-eyed idealist don’t have that kind of juice. The big money behind the anti-carriage effort is rumored to come from real-estate interests who covet the property currently occupied by carriage stables.

can they?

Update: Stacy McCain tweets that this isn’t new…

I’m no Bloomberg fan but there is one advantage to an insanely rich mayor, hard to buy him. Update 2: Not only has Stacy put up a follow up but the Lonely Conservative, Weasel Zippers, Dan Riehl, the Evil Blogger Lady & American Thinker have joined the fray. But the most interesting development as a tweet of mine produced a direct response from PETA

 

Can you say “over the target”.

Update: 3:  Interesting to note Buzzfeed took the time to mock several tweets defending the carriage owners but totally ducked the issue of the Mayor getting rid of the horses to reward a big money contributer.

I suspect that part of the story doesn’t serve a dishonest narrative.

*************************************************

Olimometer 2.52

It’s Monday of the first full week of the new year, the Feast of Epiphany the coming of the wise men and the day many cultures exchange gifts.

It’s also the 2nd day of my pay week and I find myself $27 on the way toward a $345 paycheck goal.

As always I’m grateful for any movement in the right direction but after failing to make the goal to start the year to be less that 10% of the way home to start the 2nd week is a tad worrysome.

But you can prove those worries to be unfounded by hitting DaTipJar below and moving the ball forward if 13 of you find $25 after looking at your Christmas Credit card bills that you can spare, this week will be all set and these requests will disappear till next Sunday.

Help me hit the ground running in an election year, hit DaTipJar below.

I won’t be so arrogant as to claim to be a “wise man” but if 58 1/4 of you kick in at $20 a month the greeting above can be reserved for special events and trips that have to be covered

In an election year that would seem a wise investment so consider subscribing.




Dr. Graves: My dear Doctors it is indeed a pleasure to welcome you here at the beginning of your practice.  This letter states that in this group that there are three of you who are not overly bright but were graduated because had been in the senior class, too many years. Your identity I will keep secret and will disclose to no one on one condition, that you try hard and forever devote your lives to the glorious cause of duty and Humanity!

Moe, Larry & Curley:
We Will!

The Three Stooges Men in Black 1934

One of the oldest jokes in the book goes like this:

What do you call the person who finishes last in his class in medical school?

Doctor!

That’s still true but if you are a dunce of a doctor today is a tough time for you.  With malpractice laws and insurance these days and the plethora of media not to mention a litigious society a doctor who is prone to making mistakes would seem to have dim prospects..

But if you are not inclined toward duty and humanity Robert Stacy McCain and Jeff Quinton report there IS an option for you:  Late Term Abortionist in Maryland!

Why, because if you accidentally kill somebody nobody will notice:

Dr. LeRoy Carhart is one of America’s most notorious abortionists. He specializes in late-term abortion and, unless you actually know what’s involved in it, you cannot possibly imagine what a gruesome atrocity the bland phrase “late-term abortion” describes. Now, according to a report by Operation Rescue, a 29-year-old woman has died after Carhart performed such an atrocity at a Maryland clinic:

Now you would think that a woman dead by one of the most notorious doctors in the country might be newsworthy.  Stacy McCain certainly thought so:

Carhart is a celebrity of the pro-abortion movement. Described as “one of the few doctors in the U.S. to openly perform late-term abortions,” Carhart was an associate of Dr. George Tiller, who was assassinated in 2009. Michael Martelli of the Maryland Coalition for Life notes that Carhart “was hailed as a ‘hero’ in the film ‘After Tiller’ at the recent Sundance Film Festival.” Now that a 29-year-old woman has reportedly died as a result of Carhart’s butchery, however, it seems that no major news organization considers him newsworthy.

Neither the Washington Post nor the Baltimore Sun has yet reported on this woman’s death in Maryland, despite the fact that there was an 11 a.m. press conference today in front of the Germantown clinic. The story is also being ignored by the Associated Press, USA Today, the New York Times, and television news networks. As of 1:30 p.m. Friday, the largest organizations reporting the story were WorldNetDaily and LifeNews.com.

However the rest of the media would seem to disagree.  That’s should be reassuring to every quack and slacker in the country.  Even better if anyone in the media does bother to catch up and do the story, it will be Saturday in the metro section on the day of the biggest blizzard in 30 years. McCain again:

OK, it’s only a 350-word item in the Metro section, but it’s something. Still nothing from the Baltimore Sun, the New York Times, USA Today or the Associated Press, but at least now one major news organization has grudgingly acknowledged that a 29-year-old woman has died after being treated at the clinic where “Doctor Death” was willing to perform an abortion in the 33rd week of pregnancy.

Yes, I said the 33rd week – eight months pregnant — which is actually legal in Maryland.

So if YOU are at the bottom of your medical class and worried that you can’t find any kind of practice, Maryland wants YOU to perform late-term abortions. And if you screw up, don’t worry, just think. if the MSM will bend over backwards to avoid reporting on the death of a 29-year-old woman from a botched abortion by a notorious physician, you should have no trouble covering up almost any mistake or injury you inflict on any woman.

One caveat, Doctors who have decided to devote their lives to the glorious cause of Duty & Humanity need not apply.

Your enemies always get strong on what you leave behind

Michael Corleone Godfather III 1990

Yesterday there was no story on the web bigger than that of the Image from Barack Obama’s Literary Agent.

As you doubtless already know by now from 1991 till just before he entered the presidential race the agency for Barack Obama’s book in their bio listed his place of birth as Kenya. The agent claims this was a simple oversight, however it would appear none of the other biographies on the site have such glaring errors. As Breitbart’s Big Government says:

The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate. Moreover, several contemporaneous accounts of Obama’s background describe Obama as having been born in Hawaii.

The biography does, however, fit a pattern in which Obama–or the people representing and supporting him–manipulate his public persona.

Left wing sites like Mediate are pooh poohing this:

Yes, this pamphlet to advertise a book that was never written, right alongside a New Kids On The Block book that was written, is obviously another piece in the Obama world-domination jigsaw puzzle. What better way to get your Obamaganda out there than a trade pamphlet that will be read by dozens?

Our friends on the left either don’t want to or don’t care to get the reason why this matters.

We are constantly dismissed as “just bloggers” yet with its “layers of fact checkers” and Corporate infrastructure behind it the MSM should have found and reported this 4 years ago but instead, a blog site with a staff the size of a baseball team did. That of course presumes the mainstream media did not find this and choose to ignore it.

Tim Stanley at the London Telegraph gets it both in terms of the agent’s story:

If we accept that Obama didn’t provide the biography, it would seem highly unlikely that he didn’t get a chance to vet it. Accepting that he didn’t do that either, it’s incredibly strange that the literary agent approached by Breitbart.com does not remember Obama calling the agency to register a complaint and make a correction. My mother spent a lot of her childhood in Grenada. If my literary agent told people I was born in the Caribbean, I’d at least pick up the phone to set the record straight.

and then about the media:

Look beyond the sordid details and the big story here is that this nugget wasn’t part of the wider discussion had back in 2008 about Obama’s background and credentials. And why not? The documents were easy to find – the one that showed that “born in Kenya” was still being used in 2007 was on the Internet.

Apparently not as easy to find as second-hand sources for quotes from dead people about Mitt Romney

Bottom line this “vetting series” isn’t about Obama being unfit or unqualified as president, (his record amply demonstrates this for him) it’s about the fitness of the media and left that spent a frantic weekend pouring over Sarah Palin’s e-mail that was, and still is more interested in electing (and re-electing) Obama than doing their jobs.

If the MSM actually acted like, you know reporters, and did the jobs they claim to do, than Rush, Fox News, Drudge, Breitbart and me wouldn’t have one.

That’s why it’s not surprising to see the left swinging at Breitbart, it beats acknowledging their own deliberate failures.

There are some pronouncement that are just so nonsensical that one can’t believe that they are being expressed by an intelligent person.

Today on Morning Joe they talked about Mitt Romney’s frosty relationship with the press. The panel noted that it’s a very bad idea for Romney to avoid cultivating the press.

Mitt Romney might have a lot of problems as a candidate, but he should cozy up to the media, ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

the media that wouldn’t vet Barack Obama?

the media that tried to blame Sarah Palin for the Gabby Giffords shooting?

the media that lionized the Occupy movement and refused to report on the crime, including rape within?

the media that still misrepresent Andrew Breitbart and the Shirley Sherrod business

and his $100,000 challenge

the media that ignored and/or celebrated the snuff stuff on George Bush

the media that STILL doesn’t report on Molly Norris for fear of offending islam

the media that has attacked Rush for a week but didn’t find new Afghan “guidelines” newsworthy

or the journo-list scandal

or fast and furious

or Pigford

the media that misrepresented the tea party at every chance they got

the media that ignored the global warming scandals

I could go on for a very long time.

Now I’ll make one caveat here. Joe Scarborough and Mika openly express their opinions, a person who talks to them knows where they are coming from so it changes the dynamic, but they are not the people following the candidates around.

There are only two types of republicans that the MSM approve of: those who will attack the GOP and those who are safely dead.

Romney may have a lot of faults, but to suggest that a bad relationship with the MSM is one of them is nonsense. He is smart enough to know that once the more conservatives candidates are finally eliminated anything resembling friendly or unbiased coverage will cease and the MSM will be full tilt for Barack Obama.

The sooner a GOP candidate acknowledges that reality the sooner they can adjust their campaign to deal with it.

Something hit me when I was thinking about the various stories of people distancing themselves from Wikileaks:

People are going to suffer because of this and Wikileaks knows it — as does NYT editor Bill Keller, who made sure to tell Reuters that he’s always held the group at “arm’s length” even as the paper was running massive splashy “new Wikileaks cables released!” features.

Did he, why yes he did:

“Our previous dealings with WikiLeaks were on the clear basis that we would only publish cables which had been subjected to a thorough editing and clearance process … Today’s decision to publish by Julian Assange was his, and his alone,” the Guardian, New York Times, Der Spiegel, El Pais and Le Monde said in a joint statement.

In an email to Reuters, New York Times executive editor Bill Keller said: “We’ve never kidded ourselves that we had any control over the behavior of WikiLeaks, and we have taken pains to keep the relationship arm’s-length.”

In fact not only did he but a bunch of papers who routinely publish stuff hitting the US government backed off big time over this. As did reporters without borders:

Reporters Without Borders announced late Thursday it was suspending a WikiLeaks “mirror site” because of concerns over potential risks to sources.

In an editorial, it wrote that on launching the mirror site late last year, Reporters Without Borders “said it defended ‘the free flow of information online and the principle of the protection of sources, without which investigative journalism cannot exist.’

Blogs like Harry’s place note the “disillusionment” of James Ball:

There was a striking piece in yesterday’s Guardian by James Ball, who spent some time as a staffer for Wikileaks. Although initially a supporter, he was quickly disillusioned.

Belmont club has a clue as to the oddity here:

The fact that the New York Times, the Guardian, El Pais, Der Spiegel, and Le Monde now condemn Wikileaks is tantamount to a confession the true character of their “partner”. Why did they believe Wikileaks was a crusading source if they do not believe it now? If in fact they believe the opposite now?

A cynical person might conclude they’ve issued a joint statement distancing themselves from Julian Assange, not from sudden qualms of conscience about revealing confidential intelligence sources and methods, exposing informers to enemy reprisal or ruining confidences, but because their lawyers have alerted them to the possibility of real financial and criminal liability.

Yeah financial liability is likely the big thing although they are painting it as if they are shocked SHOCKED that Wikileaks would be endangering lives….

…Which leads to my question:

How is it that dissidents are in danger if they being aided by the US? Hasn’t the left always told us that the US is always on the wrong side, constantly supporting oppressors instead of the peaceful and just. If that’s the case why is anyone worried? Obviously if these “dissidents” were operating in government unfriendly to the US then those governments must be peaceful and just and CERTAINLY not the types to slaughter them right?

Of course if we ARE in fact on the side of freedom, opposing repressive governments and dissidents are in danger due to leaks; then the left is backing off because they’ve actually always known that we’ve been on the side on the angels, always understood their pronouncements of imperialism and colonialism have been self-serving BS and simply want to decrease the amount of blood on their hands.

Kinda makes you think doesn’t it?

Yesterday the AP reported on the existence of a group that has kept NY City safe since 9/11

Working with the CIA, the New York Police Department maintained a list of “ancestries of interest” and dispatched undercover officers to monitor Muslim businesses and social groups, according to new documents that offer a rare glimpse inside an intelligence program the NYPD insists doesn’t exist.

This is the type of thing of course that one would hope a sane government would do. The writer’s opinion on the subject however comes out in the next sentence:

The documents add new details to an Associated Press investigation that explained how undercover NYPD officers singled out Muslim communities for surveillance and infiltration.

Singled out! That’s like writing that Donnie Brasco singled out Italians for surveillance and infiltration of organized crime.

Jay Nordlinger starts out his impromptus column today commenting on this saying:

Here is a headline from yesterday: “Inside the spy unit that NYPD says doesn’t exist.” Well, I wish it were still under wraps.

He then says something that I think perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with liberalism in general and the western press in particular:

At some point in the mid-2000s, I was at Davos, making some comments on the War on Terror. I said that I was not a “neutralist” in this matter — that I was on a “side”: the side of the United States and civilization against barbarism. I also said that I was a citizen before I was a journalist.

The gasps in the room were audible, as were the groans. As was the scorn. I think one or two people may have had heart attacks. I had simply scandalized the room — which seemed so weird.

Long ago, I read something somewhere — don’t know whether it’s true. I read that Edward R. Murrow had a sign in his London office, saying, “It is more important to win the war than to report on it.”

Until the elites figure that out, they will be nothing more than useful idiots.

It is important to realize that this is not a new attitude, it was the thought process of the MSM long before there was an internet and Fox to push back at it. Remember the Ethics in America series on PBS and the famous exchange between Peter Jennings, Mike Wallace

This was recorded in 1989. How many times in the decades before and after this before there was the counterweight of the new media and Fox did this attitude shape the coverage of the United States, its military and their approach toward the cold war. How much history did it mold? I’ll tell you this, it is likely responsible for what Noah Pollak described in this piece concerning Liberal Jews on Israel:

No, what is interesting about the collective opinion of the Juicebox Mafia is the proposed rule of just war: Whoever kills more is the guilty party. This amounts to a total rejection of the distinction between aggression and self-defense and indeed the entire concept of deterrence. Taken to its logical conclusion, moral victory becomes impossible, because the moment one side has dispatched with a greater number of enemy than casualties have been suffered, justice has been forfeited. The only means of ethical conduct is pure immolation — which is indeed the prescription for Israel, which is expected to behave as the only true Christian nation on earth, responding to attacks by endlessly turning the other cheek.

There is something else about the Juicebox Mafia that is grating beyond its simple inanity: The only time its members write about Israel is when they can condemn it. The truth of the matter is that they have nothing invested in Israel other than their American liberalism and their Jewish surnames. Being a Jewish critic of Israel is ever so much more compelling and melodramatic than being just another leftist critic of Israel: Instead of trafficking in banalities, one can claim disillusionment, embarrassment, and betrayal. Pardon me if I call this out for what it is — moral preening and pure cynicism.

(Ht Josh Trevino on Twitter)

There is no right or wrong, there is only Journalism! If you want to see a perfect example of the Two cultures of America, this is it.

Update: Missed a link, fixed.

Update 2: Instalance, thanks Glenn, but isn’t it a sad commentary on the west that such a post even has to be written?

And don’t miss DaTechGuy on DaRadio this Saturday and every Saturday at 10 a.m. EST on WCRN AM 830 Worcester streaming at wcrnradio.com

Dial 508-438-0965 or 1-888-9-FEDORA

Reading this story via Glenn I have one thing to say to our press corps:

If you treat someone as your feudal Lord then you have no business complaining if you are treated like a petitioning serf.

And amazingly, you know who agrees with me on this? None other than Ted Rall:

The Nation and Mother Jones and Harper’s, liberal magazines that gave me freelance work under Clinton and Bush, now ignore my queries. Even when I offered them first-person, unembedded war reporting from Afghanistan. Hey, maybe they’re too busy to answer email or voicemail. You never know.

Well that’s not an explicit rejection based on content, but this is:

Now there’ s a new cause for refusal: Too tough on the president.

I’ve heard that from enough “liberal” websites and print publications to consider it a significant trend.

A sample of recent rejections, each from editors at different left-of-center media outlets:

· “I am familiar with and enjoy your cartoons. However the readers of our site would not be comfortable with your (admittedly on point) criticism of Obama.”

· “Don’t be such a hater on O and we could use your stuff. Can’t you focus more on the GOP?”

· “Our first African-American president deserves a chance to clean up Bush’s mess without being attacked by us.”

I have many more like that.

Since he considers Bill Maher a man of the right you can imagine what it takes for him to call a mag “left of center”

He is a perfect example of the meme I’ve stated over and over: The easiest way to get the average American to reject the left is to show them as they actually are. Rall’s fall from grace coincides with the internet era that enables the ordinary American to easily respond both to publishers and their advertisers when someone crosses the line.

Those of us in the mainstream of American values had already rejected him, those magazines on the left who depend on the members of the Obamacult for their revenue now have too.

Ted Rall has a right to his interesting opinions. If he thinks there is a segment of the public willing to pay for his work then he can look for supporters to finance it. I’m sure Iran or Venezuela will be happy to kick in a few bucks for attacks on America. Until then, welcome to the free market Ted, had a feeling you wouldn’t like it.

Have no fear, once the president is defeated in 2012 I’m sure Mother Jones and the Nation will be happy to have you back as long as your target is the GOP.

Update: Bad Link Fixed

Can someone tell me where this move to the center is?

Since the election every network (except Fox of course) has one word for the president: “centrist”, “centrist” “centrist”. Son of Journolist lives!

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the President made one deal to avoid an embarrassing defeat concerning taxes. That’s it.

If the White House didn’t make that deal, democrats would have gotten all the blame for a tax debacle while letting Republicans get the credit for it for the solution.

Where is the move to the center? Where is this BS coming from? Are people uninformed enough to believe it?

It’s clear that this is the template that the White House/Democratic Party/MSM has embraced to prepare the ground for 2012 but in a world where social networks allow us to bypass these sources, can they convince the public to buy it?

If we do, or if we don’t, we will get the government we deserve.

…don’t worry Susanna Fleetwood has the one stop post on the subject titled 4 Reasons Why the MSM Botched the Tucson Massacre, and Why they Owe the Victims and Sarah Palin an Apology.

You see, a lot of liberals have good intentions. They think that if they ban Happy Meals, then there won’t be anymore obese children. However, what they don’t realize (and what I learned on my pediatrics rotation in medical school) is that most obese children have obese parents, and consume the majority of their fatty foods at home.

Liberals also think that if they ban guns, then crime will automatically go down. However, what they don’t realize is that criminals still will find a way to get guns, and then 76 year old men will become defenseless prey to street gangs.

So therefore, it’s only natural for liberals to also think that if they can control what people, say, watch or listen to, then that will somehow stop paranoid schizophrenics from going on murder sprees.

That’s from reason #2 on the botched coverage but check out the entire essay and particularly the clip from the daily show about Happy Meals in San Francisco.

She also echos Micky Kaus’ statement concerning “meanness”.

I think that this has hurt the media and the far left long term. I also think that the left and the media deep down believes that Sarah Palin DOES have a chance to either become president or to influence the direction of the country for years. This, more than anything else is why the attacks never cease.

Update: Of course we could be all wrong and (via Glenn) it could have happened like this.

As my own opening day on the air approaches we discover that Keith Olberman is off. Robert Stacy McCain points out the nonsense that is this business:

Being strictly a neutral, objective journalist myself — “Ethics, shmethics!” — I don’t think Olbermann should be fired from NBC, which is as about as neutral and objective as Pravda or the Daily Worker. There is already a serious unemployment crisis looming among Democrats:

William Kristol: cries Keep Keith and makes valid points. Here is #2:

Second, he’s not a reporter. It’s an opinion show. If Olbermann wants to put his money where his mouth is, more power to him.

Personally I think Kristol is being smart. He along with the rest of the right knows that Keith Olberman has the same chance of persuading any non moonbat to vote Democrat as I have of not only Scoring with Linda Carter but living to tell the tale after my wife found out. Once he is replaced then MSNBC has a slight chance to actually find someone who might be effective.

All those points are valid, I think it is a bit of holier than thou, but I also think the problem is not the donations, but the non-disclosure. If there was full disclosure it wouldn’t be an issue but he had some of those people on. It should have been disclosed in fact he could have said, I gave the max and you should too.

I’m with Goldberg, the rule should be lifted but until it is MSNBC is within their rights and without the disclosure he should at the very least be suspended.

Full disclosure Andrea Shea King once lent me $20 for a Taxi and refused to be repaid, so I kicked in $20 for Gas to the tea party express in Worcester. I guess I won’t be replacing Olby.

Update: There is a serious outbreak of Snarkenfeude on the right side of the ‘sphere.

The Park service estimated 250,000 at the Beck event so naturally CBS news needs a different figure:

An estimated 87,000 people attended a rally organized by talk-radio host and Fox News commentator Glenn Beck Saturday in Washington, according to a crowd estimate commissioned by CBS News.

CBS specifically commissioned a group for an estimate, that’s interesting. I wonder if they generated an estimate for Sharpton’s march?

memorandum thread here.

If you want to know why the major networks are hemorrhaging viewers, you now know.

And you also know why Charles Johnson is also hemorrhaging page views

Update:
NBC via the NYT of all places does better:

Officials do not make crowd estimates because they are unreliable and can be controversial, but event organizers put the number of attendees at 500,000; NBC News said it was closer to 300,000, but by any measure it was a large turnout. The crowd stretched from the Lincoln Memorial to the Washington Monument.

So NBC’s estimate is more than triple CBS. No more morning joe for Charles and company. And what about Sharpton:

Across town, several hundred people packed a football field at Paul Laurence Dunbar High School to stage a rally commemorating Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.

In fairness to Sharpton on CSPAN it looked like they easily made 1000 to me so that number sounds kinda low.

Bob Herbert finds it outrageous that Beck’s restore honor march is on the same day as that other famous supporter of Republicans Martin Luther King’s was:

America is better than Glenn Beck. For all of his celebrity, Mr. Beck is an ignorant, divisive, pathetic figure. On the anniversary of the great 1963 March on Washington he will stand in the shadows of giants — Abraham Lincoln and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Who do you think is more representative of this nation?

Interestingly he finds Beck’s criticism of the president racist but his own critiques of the administration not. I wonder if he is working under the Bo Snerdley certification rules concerning Obama criticism?

Maybe he doesn’t know that Alveda King is speaking at Beck’s rally. And they are playing Lift every voice and sing there as I watch it live at noon, but then again he gets his news from the NYT, so how can he expect to be informed?

Jonah Goldberg writes a column in the LA times the once and for all proves that there are lies, damn lies and statistics:

According to the FBI, hate crimes against Muslims increased by a staggering 1,600% in 2001. That sounds serious! But wait, the increase is a math mirage. There were 28 anti-Islamic incidents in 2000. That number climbed to 481 the year a bunch of Muslim terrorists murdered 3,000 Americans in the name of Islam on Sept. 11.

Now, that was a hate crime.

Roll that number around your head. There are 300+ Million people in the US and 50 states in the country and in 2001 “hate crimes” a population out for revenge doesn’t even hit one a month per state?

Regardless, 2001 was the zenith or, looked at through the prism of our national shame, the nadir of the much-discussed anti-Muslim backlash in the United States. The following year, the number of anti-Islamic hate-crime incidents (overwhelmingly, nonviolent vandalism and nasty words) dropped to 155. In 2003, there were 149 such incidents. And the number has hovered around the mid-100s or lower ever since.

Sure, even one hate crime is too many. But does that sound like a anti-Muslim backlash to you?

So we are talking vandalism and nasty words? Lets look at the post 2002 numbers for a sec, The fabulously intolerant Americans that Andrea Mitchell is lecturing concerning sensitivity managed less than one “incident” per season per state since 9/11? And these “incidents” are apparently vandalism and nasty words? This again in a population of 300+ million?

Read the whole thing including that the number of anti Jewish incidents are 6 times higher and anti-islamic ones in the US over the same period.

Maybe if the MSM wants to find bigotry it should look in the mirror and ask themselves why they think the American people are a bunch of hate mongers. Then perhaps their ratings wouldn’t be in the toilet

And finally lets drop this whole “hate” crimes nonsense anyway. It criminalizes thought. Prosecute a rock through a window because it’s a rock through somebody’s window. Justice and law should be color blind.

memeorandum thread here

Update: I would have given a parody example of the MSM’s way of thinking but I couldn’t do better than Alex Pareene’s actual column for salon today. It is almost impossible to parody the left wing media.

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.

He may be on the wrong side of the Mosque issue as far as the American People are concerned, but he is certainly on the side of the angels according to Hamas:

A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero — insisting Muslims “have to build” it there.

“We have to build everywhere,” said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization’s chief on the Gaza Strip.

“In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer,” he said on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on WABC.

It brings to mind a poem:

One night in late October,
When I was far from sober,
Returning with my load with manly pride,
My poor feet began to stutter,
So I lay down in the gutter,
And a pig came near and lay down by my side;
Then we sang “It’s all fair weather when good fellows get together”,

Till a lady passing by was heard to say:
“You can tell a man who boozes,
By the company he chooses”,
And the pig got up and slowly walked away.

Much better to like down with Hamas than those bigoted Americans, right Mr. Halperin?

Memeorandum thread here

Update: Another example of those unenlightened ignorant Americans that the president’s friends of Hamas would not approve of:

I was asked to say a few words, which were these: this was a quintessential American wedding. A handsome Marine marries a beautiful Iraqi woman who is led down the aisle by two old Jewish guys.

Don’t you think?

Bigots.

Via Glenn who says Only in America

One of the first principles of when you have something to hide is that sunlight tends to cause annoyance.

Nick Green is seriously annoyed:

Some believe you have a particular bias or agenda if you refuse to cover a story. Some people believe the fact that you decide to cover a story means you have some sort of bias.

In short, you can’t win either way.

So imagine my surprise today to find I’m the victim of an Andrew Beitbart wannabe, a blogger with a clear agenda of his own who has decided in his hypocrisy I have one of my own.

I had intended to leave comment there but as the page keeps erroring out I will post here something here instead.

Nick, you are a reporter who is paid to do this for a living, so perhaps you might be unaware of a few things, so allow me a mere blogger to educate you on a few things:

Robert Stacy McCain is a reporter who also blogs, he has been a reporter for a very long time. If you were familiar with his work you would know this. I on the other hand am a blogger who writes a few articles on occasion. If you want to call anyone an “Andrew Breitbart wannabe” it would be me not him. Oh an although he is a big boy Robert Stacy is a personal friend of mine so I take it ill if you wish to disparage him for telling the truth.

Oh and BTW “Andrew Breitbart Wanabee” is not a pejorative outside of your circle. He is successful, runs several sites with many writers working under him and manages to do that in the teeth of a media that hates him. Yeah I’d be Andrew Breitbart like a shot.

“Blogger” is not a pejorative term either, no matter how much you want it to be. Bloggers have been breaking stories that the Mainstream Media (that would be you) have ignored for the last decade. One prominent Example, John Edwards Story by Mickey Kaus, he was on it for a year when the rest of the media couldn’t care less. Bloggers with video camera have been covering stories that the MainStream media have ignored or spun for years. Another story that you guys never bothered to cover. The interesting procedures for verifying credit card donations by the Obama camp during the 2008 election.

What? You never heard of it? Neither did your readers because the MSM (that would be you) choose not to cover the story. The lawyers/bloggers did instead.

Yes Robert Stacy McCain is a conservative, I am a conservative, in fact I am a registered (gasp) republican! There is a long tradition of “partisian” journalism that has existed since day one of newspapers. Perhaps you missed that day in school or attended public schools. Either way I don’t keep my biases secret. People can choose to talk to me or not on that basis, and can judge my coverage of events such as the MayDay march in Boston accordingly, vs reporters who hold off the record lunches with the White house they are supposed to cover.

Now as to the e-mails, as Robert Stacy said there are occasions when people e-mail in anger but you must get a whole lot more e-mail than me. If I get an e-mail I don’t want I delete it. It’s real simple. I don’t have your experience but people you burn tend to no longer talk to you. When your primary job is to get people to talk to you, even if they don’t want to that would be “bad”.

Finally I actually should be grateful to you, thanks to your e-mail and torrid schedule I was not only able to get an excellent and popular post. But was able to score an interview with the candidate that you had no time for from 3000 miles away, get a second post and a column in the examiner out of it. Now I don’t know you as a person, you might be a nice guy and a hard worker, but if you want to keep dropping the ball on the Mattie Fein campaign, I’ll do what I can by phone to pick it up from the bay state.

I was part of a spirited exchange on twitter last night with Dan Riehl and Josh Trevino I argued that we are obliged to act honorably saying:

Being right isn’t always in our control but acting honorable is.

So in that spirit lets take a long look at what happened here and who acted honorably and who did not. Continue reading “Who acted dishonorable and who did not in the Sherrod case?”

After seeing the morning coverage and following all this stuff, it’s clear that the left which thought just last night it has control of the Shirley Sherrot story has not only lost it, but lost it totally.

The left wants a story about how evil Fox news is and how bad Andrew Breitbart is, the story however is that:

  • The White house is so weak that it fired one of their own supporters out of fear of Glenn Beck.
  • The NAACP backed the White House before reviewing the full tape which they had
  • The White House standing behind the firing, then at 2 a.m. backing off of it.

And even when the MSM gets Andrew Breitbart on TV figuring they can stick it to him what happens?

On CNN he stresses the double standard, and brings up Journolist

Well GMA is going to do better, after all they have Eric Boehlert on with him and George double teaming him so what will happen?

  • Breitbart makes it about the false NAACP tea party charges
  • Brings up 100k challenge, that I don’t remember ABC ever reporting on
  • Brings up 4 videos and Boehlert says he will take John Lewis over 4 videos
  • George asks Boehlert if it’s ok to show the videos and he says yes

Forget the White House not only does GMA fail to lay a glove on  Breitbart but he manage to advance his NAACP argument, the tea party double standard.  George’s last question is asking Boehlert if he should show Breitbart’s 4 Washington videos?  Tell me how long has ABC been asking Media Matters impramarter to report news?  Have they always done it or is this just the first time its been done on air?

How many people will they have to put up against Breitbart to have a shot?

And the news cycle will be about the White House until Sherrod is offered her job back, and now they have to worry:  “What if she doesn’t take it?”  Two days ago she was an obscure member of the government, now she is in the catbird seat and can get what she wants from the Administration, and the NAACP.  Will she make them pay for having her pull to the side of the road?  She controls the news cycle and every day the White House doesn’t pay her price is a day they lose on TV.

And this is the left’s victory?  It’s Bunker Hill without the red coats.  It’s the type of “victory” that breaks an army.

After Bunker Hill Gen Howe never tried another frontal assault again.  How gun-shy will the left and the media be about taking on Breitbart after this?

For the third time in a month a member of the MSM has lost a job for saying what they actually think:

CNN on Wednesday removed its senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs, Octavia Nasr, from her job after she published a Twitter message saying that she respected the Shiite cleric the Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, who died on Sunday.

Ms. Nasr left her CNN office in Atlanta on Wednesday. Parisa Khosravi, the senior vice president for CNN International Newsgathering, said in an internal memorandum that she “had a conversation” with Ms. Nasr on Wednesday morning and that “we have decided that she will be leaving the company.”

Ms. Nasr, a 20-year veteran of CNN, wrote on Twitter after the cleric died on Sunday, “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah … One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.”

Ayatollah Fadlallah routinely denounced Israel and the United States, and supported suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. Ayatollah Fadlallah’s writings and preachings inspired the Dawa Party of Iraq and a generation of militants, including the founders of Hezbollah, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

It’s the lead on memeorandum at the moment, and the ‘sphere is reacting…

Hotair:

Nasr had a role that helped shape CNN’s overall news coverage of the Middle East. As a senior editor that apparently reported to a senior VP, Nasr presumably had a hand in story selection, assignment, and editing and shaping the final product from her reporters.

Neither Thomas nor Weigel had anywhere near that kind of influence over news reporting at their respective outlets, which makes the credibility issue much more serious than in the previous two scandals.

That CNN is worried about credibility is amazing.

Ed Driscoll wonders why this is a problem at CNN:

She’s merely toeing the party line at CNN, which, from Saddam Hussein to Yasir Arafat to Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, has never met a terrorist or dictator the network didn’t admire and wish to prop up.

I think it will be very interesting to see the reaction worldwide to this.
Tim Blair highlights some tweets on the subject:

Various instant reactions, one of them brilliant:

• Damn! 20 years in, but 140 characters and your fired!

• Shocking, Outrageous! Zionists succeed in getting @OctaviaNasrCNN fired for Fadlallah tweet

• 20 years and fired over a tweet??

• Is she joining NASA?

I’m going out on a limb to say that he likes the last one.
Don Surber gives Kudos:

Congratulations CNN for doing the right thing.

That one goes on the good side of his count.

Big Journalism gets to the heart of the matter:

As if further proof were needed that a sizable segment of the Fourth Estate is now effectively the Fifth Column, this one is right up there. Apparently it’s no longer enough that reporters and correspondents pretend to be neutral, even about the good guys — now, they’re not only not neutral, they publicly express their admiration for sheer, malevolent evil — a man who, according to the obits, was “known for his staunch anti-American stance.”

Good Lord, is this what American journalism has come to?

No this is where American journalism already was.

Pam Geller is brief:

Today the Nazi lover resigned. In a word, GOOD!

Well Pam wait till you see what the left says:

Crooks and liars plays the moral equivalence card

Evidently, if you’re CNN, it’s perfectly fine to hire commentators who refer to a US Supreme Court justice as a “goat f@$king child molester”, but God forbid an emotional, somewhat easily misinterpreted tweet should be granted similar mercy.

Apparently the difference between senior editor and a commentator is lost, but the most fun actually comes from two other sites:

Balloon Juice
:

I have no idea whether Nasr was any good, but it’s pretty harsh to fire someone over one tweet without a second chance.

Talking Points Memo:

But a twenty year run down the tubes over 140 characters?

That just doesn’t seem right to me.

Oh so 140 characters aren’t enough to get someone fired? Ok lets try this…

“Barack Obama is actually a secret Muslim who was born in Kenya and supports terrorists”

That’s 76 characters. Now myself, if the senior white house editor at CNN expressed such an opinion I’d give them the boot, but according to Balloon Juice and TPM’s arguments they should not be fired.

The real problem for CNN is how significantly the loss of Octavia Nasr effects the Hotness Gap but to paraphrase Jon Sable:

I never did like the terrorist sympathizers, not even the pretty ones.

I’m sorry positive position on Honor Killings not withstanding if you back suicide bombing you are a terrorist and no amount of side stuff will change it.

…covering this politico story and discovers they are likely not quite on-board with the whole victory thing:

You can read the rest of that, but it’s a pretty simple story: All those Democrats who spent six years complaining that the Iraq war was a mistake because it distracted from fighting the real enemy in Afghanistan were . . . eh, lying.

Anti-war Democrats aren’t just against bad wars and, in truth, they’re not actually anti-war. They’re just anti-America.

This is not exactly news as I wrote before:

the concept that the replacement of McChrystal with Petraeus brought one line of argument, basically that it shouldn’t be used to try to win

Here is the big conundrum: Smart Pols understand that it is not a political winner to be identified with losing a war or being responsible for losing a war. Not for the president, not for themselves and if there is anything more sacred than the humbling of America to the left, it is retaining power.

The question becomes: What is more important to the left; retaining power they crave or losing the war and humbling the west? We will find out in 2 1/2 years.

My latest examiner column: There is no substitute for reality asks the following question:

How can an under 2 year old movement produce such results? How is it that the Democratic party in general and the White House in particular can’t seem to cope?

Hit the link for my answers and click here for my complete set of Examiner columns. Each hit puts nearly a penny in the DaTipJar without taking one out of your pocket.

why didn’t you bother to post about Mika’s big revelation?

Because as the Jamie wearing fool points out it isn’t a big revelation.

They have received e-mails and tweets from the White House on Air before as I recall. There is absolutely no secret about it but the fact that she is reading White House talking points (read liberal talking points) verbatim frankly is no different that what the MSM has been doing for years. When Democrats/Liberals have talking points the press has run with them for years. That is no more breaking news than the White House talking points were.

The idea that I’m going to be anymore outraged by it now, particularly since Mika does us the courtesy of not pretending otherwise is laughable.

Paul Walderman in his quest to find something positive for the left to write about; discovers what he thinks is a gem on Ann Coulter:

Remember Ann Coulter? Seems like just yesterday she was Queen of the Right, the whole political world hanging on her every bile-laced tirade. Yet she’s all but disappeared.

Not that she isn’t trying. She’s still got her weekly column over at Human Events (latest entry: “Alvin Greene: The Most Qualified Democrat I Have Ever Seen” – Har har!). She still makes regular appearances on Fox, showing up to gab with Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity. But she seems to have completely lost her ability to move from the right-wing outlets into the mainstream discussion.

This is an excellent example of what is called “projection”. For the left it is always about personal relevance. Am I on the front pages, do I get enough attention, can I get instalanched?

As Walderman notes, but dismisses, Ann is a regular columnist, and has regular TV appearances. He doesn’t mention that she also regularly makes the NYT best seller list whenever she writes a book and still packs anyplace where she speaks.

In other words she is doing just fine and doesn’t need the validation of a dying Mainstream Media to make herself important. She has a comfortable life and will continue to have one.

More importantly to her, her philosophy is winning in the arena of ideas these days. I suspect she will trade that for an extra appearance on the View or one more time a month on Joy Behar’s show any day.

Perhaps she is confusing Miss Coulter with another blondish lady who although holding titular power is striving to be relevant:

When you can’t find good news about your own side, I guess you have to take your crumbs where you can.

“The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim.” Ahmed Aboul Gheit Egyptian Foreign Minister Jan 2010

I actually take this story from Atlas with a grain of salt, not because I doubt the veracity of Atlas (I trust her implicitly) but because I don’t trust Ahmed Aboul Gheit to tell the truth. I expect them (the Egyptians) to say whatever is to their advantage. She does however raise a much more interesting point:

This is a devastating claim, and yet no media outlet is covering it.

Can someone explain to me how 5 months this was said on Television, not whispered, not a rumor, not in confidence or unattributed, that it takes a US blogger to introduce such a statement to US media? Even to just call it a joke?

If the old media doesn’t want to do it’s job it should get out of the way and let those willing to do the work do it.

A few days ago I noted that Andrew Sullivan was making Charles Johnson look like his old self, but now Johnson has managed to grab a little bit of his old mojo back:

The British-based Reuters news agency has been stung for the second time by charges that it edited politically sensitive photos in a way that casts Israel in a bad light. But this time Reuters claims it wasn’t at fault.

The news agency reacted to questions raised by an American blogger who showed that Reuters’ photo service edited out knives and blood traces from pictures taken aboard the activist ship Mavi Marmara during a clash with Israeli commandos last week. Nine people were killed and scores were injured in the clash.

I’m looking at the Memeorandum thread and noticed one common thing few if any mention Johnson.

This isn’t a surprise, I don’t care for Johnson, I don’t like the way he treated my friend Stacy, or Pam or Peg and he has run in my opinion run his site like a cheap dictator, but in the end his position on Israel and his willingness to expose Reuters shows he still has a trace of the old Johnson in him.

Christians in general and Catholics in particular are very much into redemption. I’ve still got a little Pollyanna in me so I’ll include him in my prayers this week. Who knows.

is the comments section of places like the Huffington Post and the fits it is giving people on the left. One example:

You go, Helen! Don’t back off. In fact, given Israel’s out of control aggression, I’ve been having fantasies that the Disney Company will build a giant water slide on the beach at Tel Aviv and hire a piccolo player in a red cape to play “In the Hall of the Mountain King.”

And when we don’t get that we get the moral equivalence card from places like the moderate voice and think progress who conveniently forget that when Israel was formed there was a Palestinian state created at the same time. It’s called “Jordan”. It wasn’t until Israel won the 1967 war that the cause for yet another Arab state in the region took place. Hitting back is cathartic but the most important function Thomas’ remarks have achieved is the identification of those who dreams are beyond just a Judenrein Middle east. As Captain Ed puts it:

Also, this episode should remind everyone that if it were up to Israel, there would be no war. If it was up to Hamas and Fatah, there would be no Israel. And that’s the main problem with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and one that is irreconcilable.

It’s beyond that. I think the goal isn’t no Israel, I think the goal is no Jews period.

Just got back from the Weekly Tysinger Breakfast and one thing in particular caught my eye.

There was a set of handouts of articles etc present Here is the photo, can you tell what’s wrong with this picture?

Tysinger Breakfast handouts

Continue reading “What’s wrong with this picture?”

Vinnie showed me around CNN after the Varsity a few nights ago, it’s actually incredible when you consider the volume of data that goes through there and the amount of effort it takes to make everything work. I met an awful lot of hard working people there and discovered the answer to a question that has baffled conservatives for years…

Good thing I didn’t visit MSNBC otherwise it might not have worn off, then again maybe the three ladies would have liked me better.

One of the problems I have with liberalism is the idea that I see over and over again the narrative trumps all, while I’ve been here there have been several stories that have pushed that point:

Item: A CNN reporter who happened to be the next door neighbor of a Banker whose house was swarmed by the SEIU is now being attacked for daring to report what she saw. Strangely enough like the Ken Gladney (the black man assaulted and called a nigger by white SEIU members in Missouri last year) “potential” bad behavior of some groups are worse than actual bad behavior of others and if you question said behavior you are a traitor!

Item Via Glenn the Volokh conspiracy reports on what might be considered good news and a sign of progress but somehow turns into bad news:

The percentage of blacks marrying whites has risen by 3 times since 1980. Asians are just as likely to marry whites as they were in 1980 (40%), even though there is a much larger Asian population to choose from, and Hispanics are significantly more likely to marry whites than in 1980 (38% compared to 30%), even though there is a much larger Hispanic population to choose from. The sheer number of interracial marriages has risen 20% since 2000.

This is good news, right? Not the way the Washington Post Associate Press spins it, complete with a commentary by Cornell Prof. Daniel Lichter that is completely at odds with the data, but supports left-wing shibboleths about 9/11 and the recent Arizona illegal immigrant law:

If your best weapon is to shout Racist then good news on relations can’t be allowed to stand.

Item: When I was in Mrs. Mahoney’s class in 7th grade we learned a poem by Countee Cullen that stuck with me. I’ll repeat it here:

Incident

Once riding in old Baltimore,
Heart-filled, head-filled with glee;
I saw a Baltimorean
Keep looking straight at me.

Now I was eight and very small,
And he was no whit bigger,
And so I smiled, but he poked out
His tongue, and called me, “Nigger.”

I saw the whole of Balimore
From May until December;
Of all the things that happened there
That’s all that I remember

For some reason that poem always stuck with me for 35 years and today I had the displeasure of living it.

I was at a local eatery this morning in my three piece suit having breakfast and talking to voters. The first people were very gregarious and I talked with a few and got some insights as I was eating. I stayed after I finished eating to try to talk to more folks as they came through. After a while a 60 something black woman with a cane came in with two other women say 3-5 years older than me. A few minutes later while doing her rounds a person who worked there said people were asking what I was doing there? I thought it an odd question since I had been approaching people right along so I turned to the ladies who just came in and said I was there to report on the Ga-4 district and the race. I was then asked by the ladies what party I was, I said I was a conservative, and was then asked if I was a tea party member and I said yes.

It was if a switch was suddenly turned on with ice in her voice I was told: “I have no comment”. For the rest of.

Warning! Dressed in the uniform of a dangerous tea party racist!
the time I was there I was stared at with contempt as if I was something lower than low. My race had not been an issue nor the Crucifix being Catholic in a very protestant state, but once it was known I supported the tea party it was as if I was wearing a Klan outfit. I heard the ladies talking among themselves saying you could tell I was a tea party man just by my appearance. When I left glares followed me out.

Once before in my life I had felt hatred from others so strong that I could physically feel it. It’s a horrible feeling that I would not wish on anyone else. This is the second time in my life I have had that experience. It was an example of sheer bigotry, but I don’t blame the ladies, I blame the media that has lied to them and played a narrative for their own ends to create that bigotry among people who believe them. The media and their narrative are responsible and if they aren’t ashamed they ought to be.

The sad thing about this is I’ve been treated so well by everyone I had met to this point, (including the people who had been in the restaurant prior to them) People who I disagreed with politically and I hit it off very well and I’ve really liked the people here. I will do my best to not emulate the protagonist in the poem above and forget it, but it would be a lie and deception not to note it.

As for the ladies, I’ll include them in my regular prayers and ask you to do so as well.

Update: Maybe this story put them in a bad mood

A spokeswoman for Gwinnett County schools told the AJC that Stephanie Hunte, an 8th-grade social studies teacher at Sweetwater Middle School in Lawrenceville, allowed her students to wear KKK robes as part of a re-enactment last Thursday. Another teacher saw the students preparing for the re-enactment and told an administrator.

Somebody buy these teachers a clue.
:

I’ve talked a bit about Rand Paul and the education he is getting now that he is the republican candidate for Senate instead of a Republican gadfly. It is an education that I was surprised he needed to get (although in fairness Mr. Dukakis Paul did make his own problems) but he is learning fast.

With the defeat of Bob Bennett we are now seeing the other side of the coin as the excellent Jay Nordlinger reminds us:

You know Sen. Bob Bennett, the Utah Republican who has been pushed aside by more sparky conservatives? You know all the good press — good liberal press — that Bennett is getting now? About how sensible and decent and patriotic he is? Such an admirable legislator? Do you remember Bennett’s ever getting such press, before he was upended by his fellow conservatives in Utah?

I don’t either.

Of course he doesn’t, as long as Bob Bennett allows the media to paint the tea parties and republicans as unreasonable ideologues he will be lionized by the press. If he had won the nomination he would just be another evil republican and worth ignoring.

Watch him become a regular commentator/guest any time the networks want to attack the tea parties.

I’m not going to go deeply into the the Hawaii special election since I have to catch my ride to the airport but I will leave you with this question:

In Pa-12 a republican loses a special election in a district where A republican hasn’t won since 1972, although it has gone back and forth in presidential elections over the last decade. The election takes place on the same day as he faces a contested primary. That is a sign the Republicans are in trouble.

In Hawaii a republican wins a special election in a district where a republican hasn’t won since 1990 in a place where Democrats have not lost on the presidential level since 1984 and the district where the president is born and took 70% of the vote, and it is due to democratic infighting.

Why is one due to infighting and the other not? Why is one a sign of Republican weakness and the other not a sign of democratic weakness?

President Obama when signing the freedom of the press act had an interesting omission, and I don’t mean the lack of questions being allowed. I’m talking about what Jennifer Rubin noted:

Has Obama done anything about the suppression of media critics in Egypt (other than prepare a lucrative financial package for the Egyptian government)? Has Obama made this a priority with any thugocracy? No. And when signing a bill in the name of someone who elevated and personified the freedom of expression, Obama at least could have departed from his campaign to delete the name of our enemies from the public lexicon.

It’s not that odd a lot of information get suppressed in the war on terror and the worldwide war against Jews. A few examples:

Item: The “right of return

Yet still the Palestinians fled their homes, and at an ever growing pace. By early April some 100,000 had gone, though the Jews were still on the defensive and in no position to evict them. (On March 23, fully four months after the outbreak of hostilities, ALA commander-in-chief Safwat noted with some astonishment that the Jews “have so far not attacked a single Arab village unless provoked by it.”) By the time of Israel’s declaration of independence on May 14, the numbers of Arab refugees had more than trebled. Even then, none of the 170,000-180,000 Arabs fleeing urban centers, and only a handful of the 130,000-160,000 villagers who left their homes, had been forced out by the Jews.

Well it’s not like Arabs were mistreating their own at this time, oh wait:

No wonder, then, that so few among the Palestinian refugees themselves blamed their collapse and dispersal on the Jews. During a fact-finding mission to Gaza in June 1949, Sir John Troutbeck, head of the British Middle East office in Cairo and no friend to Israel or the Jews, was surprised to discover that while the refugees

express no bitterness against the Jews (or for that matter against the Americans or ourselves) they speak with the utmost bitterness of the Egyptians and other Arab states. “We know who our enemies are,” they will say, and they are referring to their Arab brothers who, they declare, persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their homes. . . . I even heard it said that many of the refugees would give a welcome to the Israelis if they were to come in and take the district over.

Sixty years after their dispersion, the refugees of 1948 and their descendants remain in the squalid camps where they have been kept by their fellow Arabs for decades, nourished on hate and false hope. Meanwhile, their erstwhile leaders have squandered successive opportunities for statehood.

You don’t see much of this talked about in history but it was years ago. Hey it’s not like Arabs are still driving “Palestinians” out of their homes; oh wait:

Hamas police wielding clubs beat and pushed residents out of dozens of homes in the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Sunday before knocking the buildings down with bulldozers, residents said.

Gaza’s militant Hamas rulers said the homes were built illegally on government land. Newly homeless residents were furious over Palestinians on bulldozers razing Palestinian homes.

For years, Palestinians have criticized Israel for destroying houses, mostly because they were built without permits issued by the military. Now, Rafah residents complained, their own government, run by the Islamic militant Hamas that seized power in Gaza in July 2007, has done the same.

Funny how this doesn’t rate a big story in the papers. And that doesn’t even count the young Arab American who given the chance to denounce the idea of genocide of Jews in Israel declared herself “for it
Well even that isn’t the same as violence threatened in America; oh wait again:

With Draw Muhammad Day drawing closer, death threats have been leveled (warning, exceedingly bad language through link) against Dan McLeod, creator of the Facebook group that urges people to draw a picture of Islam’s prophet. The threats are made in one of the group’s discussion pages with the label “F*** that Person who Celebrate this Day” (edited for language and removed all-caps).

I’ve already declared that I will not be drawing Muhammad. I will not be buffaloed into doing what I wouldn’t normally do one way or the other. I will be doing my own protests in my own style on that day.

But I will publicly declare as a believing Roman Catholic that Muhammad is a false prophet and that Muslims are are wrong in declaring Christ a prophet he is the son of God and no amount of beheading or outrage will change that fact. The difference between us I am secure enough in my beliefs to make my points in argument and let God sort out who is right and wrong on this issue in the end. Our Islamic friends are so insecure in their beliefs that they hide their uncertainly behind the sword or their silence in the face of the sword. If their argument had weight then they wouldn’t be afraid of Christian Churches in their midst, they wouldn’t have a bounty on the head of a priest that they can’t out argue and they wouldn’t be burning the houses of cartoonists.

That is all.

…it’s a sign of weakness in a swing district. In this he is reporting and repeating DCCC spin:

Public Policy Polling, a North Carolina firm, released a survey Monday showing Republican candidate Tim Burns leading Democratic candidate Mark Critz by only one point, 48 to 47. I noticed some conservative blogs reporting that Burns had “moved into the lead,” but that result actually represented a six-point bump for Critz and only a four-point bump for Burns since the last poll.

Somehow the Susquehanna poll showing Critz with a 6 point lead last week doesn’t fit into the template here.

The plan seems to be that if Critz wins it becomes a bellwether of how the republicans can’t win the races this year. The hotly contested senate race of national importance is apparently no excuse.

This is called laying the groundwork. And Todd & the Post are not the only players:

They blame the establishment, the insiders, the Beltway types, the incumbents—the people who are in charge. They tend on the whole to direct their ire at Democrats, because right now Democrats tend to be in positions of power. But for the most part their dissatisfaction is not ideological. They want someone who can make things better. And someone different is a start.

No matter what happens in tomorrow’s primaries—no matter who wins or who loses—this will be the message that voters are sending. Seriously. It won’t be about the Tea Party, or a progressive resurgence, or some new level of partisan polarization. It’ll be about plain old change.

although he underplays the ire at Democrats Newsweek’s Romano makes a point, if anyone read Newsweek they might even agree.

And it isn’t just today it has been throughout the cycle:

By preferring someone else to him, Pennsylvania Republicans had “forced out” Sen. Specter, Mr. Milbank said. If he loses to Mr. Sestak on Tuesday, will Mr. Milbank say Mr. Specter was “forced out” by Pennsylvania Democrats?

Will Ms. Vieira wonder out loud if a Specter defeat indicates the Democratic party “doesn’t have room for moderate voices?”

Will Mr. Matthews declare that Mr. Specter was the victim of a “Stalinesque purge?”

Meanwhile Brinkley sees the Dems playing the expectations game and talks about some strong reinforcements:

Lee is a “Gold Star Mother” whose son, a Navy SEAL, was killed in a 2006 firefight in Iraq. She praised Burns as “a candidate who understands and will uphold the Constitution and who recognizes the sacrifices our troops make.”

In the battle for Pennsylvania’s 12th District, Lee is one member of a veritable of army of volunteers fighting to elect a Republican to the seat held for more than three decades by the late Democrat John Murtha. For weeks, volunteers have stuffed envelopes, manned phone banks and walked precincts, and today they’ll make the final push to get their voters to the polls in a special election that many observers are calling a crucial test of whether the GOP can win back the House of Representatives in November.

I’ve met Debbie Lee twice, she is a powerful advocate. The question is will she be enough?

not only because of GOP star of the year Scott Brown’s appearance on his behalf but because of a of a new twist.

Pittsburgh TV station WPGH has suspended the latest ad for Democrat Mark Critz for making false claims. The ad by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee falsely claimed that Republican Tim Burns supports a 23 percent national sales tax and wants to ship jobs overseas.

Dave Weigel notes that Democrats stand behind the claim and the ad remains up in other markets:

…they stand by the arguments in their ad, which are based on Burns’s support of the Fair Tax and his signing of Americans for Tax Reform’s taxpayer protection pledge. Democrats tell me the ad will remain on the air on other TV stations in Pittsburgh and Johnstown, which serve Pennsylvania’s 12th District

they are blaming this on the station’s conservative ownership. I wonder if they will claim factcheck.org is another bunch of biased conservatives too?

But this ad is quite misleading because it fails to mention that the FairTax proposal would also repeal the federal income tax entirely and do away with the Internal Revenue Service. It would also eliminate gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare and self-employment taxes. But anyone viewing the DCCC’s ad could easily conclude that Burns favored slapping a 23 percent sales tax on top of all existing taxes, which is not true.

Usually it would be an issue if factcheck disputed the ad but as Robert Stacy points out:

Well, of course, the Democrats aren’t backing down. They’ve got the MSM to cover their asses and pretend that the Fair Tax represents a “national sales tax” over and above current federal taxes. Of course, they don’t want to deal with the facts.

What is even more interesting and something I’ve touched on before is how a race that didn’t get much national attention when the newest polls showed Burns up by as much as 6 points last month in a heavily democratic district has suddenly become a “must win” for Republicans in a district they haven’t won in 38 years UPDATE: The previous sentence originally said 70+ years, that was misleading, the current 12th district is made up of two additional districts that haven’t elected a republican in 70+ years. In the 12th district that last republican to win was John Saylor in 1972, that’s my bad. when the latest poll give Critz an advantage As Sean Trende points out:

there are over sixty districts represented by Democrats with better Republican performances than PA-12. The Republicans’ path to 218 seats doesn’t necessarily run through this district – in fact, I don’t think their path to a 1994-esque 230 seats necessarily runs through this district.

This is basically extending the Morning Joe spin of yesterday to pretend if the democrats win that the tide of opinion has turned. We all know what the real question is: Can Burns manage to pull it off even without the presence of a Sicilian with a fedora?