Tag Archives: CNN

Nye/Ham debate Evolution Vs. Creation on CNN Feb 4

Bill Nye The Science Guy debates Ken Ham Feb. 4 on Evolution vs. Creation

Bill Nye The Science Guy debates Ken Ham Feb. 4 on Evolution vs. Creation

An epic debate on the worldviews of Evolution vs. Creation takes place Feb. 4 between popular TV star Bill Nye “The Science Guy” and Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis.

 

The debate is the result of an invitation on the part of Answers in Genesis CEO Ken Ham to Bill Nye “The Science Guy” and will take place Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY. The debate will begin at 7 p.m. ET and can be viewed on the web both during and after the debate on the website here. CNN’s Belief Blog will cover the debate and CNN’s Tom Forman will moderate.

 

Plenty of controversy swirls around this epic contest of worldviews as Nye has had to defend his reasoning for joining in the debate with Ham, warding off criticism from fellow Evolutionists. Ham’s own reasoning for the debate is published in an open letter on CNN’s Belief Blog here.

 

While the debate will probably not sway those entrenched in either worldview, it may bring more interest in the issues surrounding the controversy and some riding the fence may be influenced one way or the other depending on the success of either debater in delivering their points of view.

 

The idea for the debate came after Nye’s controversial appearance on TV with popular comedian and fellow atheist Bill Maher on his TV show Real Time. Watch a You Tube recap of that interview here.

 

In the interview Nye seems to imply that those with a religious worldview will somehow interject their religion in schools and thus slow down the education of science in the classroom. Following Nye’s television appearance, Ham appeared on You Tube to counter Nye’s claims. His comments can be viewed on you tube here. Ham states in his comments on CNN’s Belief Blog that his intent with the debate is to break down the barrier of censorship of the Biblical Worldview of Creation in public settings, including schools and to educate the public on what he perceive as errors in Evolutionary thinking. Says Ham,

 

So I look forward to a spirited yet cordial debate on Tuesday with Bill Nye, the “Science Guy” of television fame.

“I also look forward to the opportunity to help counter the general censorship against creationists’ view of origins. While we are not in favor of mandating that creation be taught in public school science classes, we believe that, at the very least, instructors should have the academic freedom to bring up the problems with evolution.”

I am looking forward to the debate as well and would love if you the reader could join in as well and make up your own mind on this fascinating and controversial topic. Remember you can view the debate love or see a podcast of it on You Tube when the debate is completed.

CNN having a really bad week

Tanjila Ahmed (CC)

Tanjila Ahmed (CC)

Tanjila Ahmed (CC)


CNN really isn’t having a very good week, thanks to the government shutdown and the opening of the ObamaCare insurance exchange websites. While the headlines have been full of unintended consequences of both of these events, from WWII veterans “storming” the monument to their service, to complaints about glitches on the ObamaCare websites, CNN has been forced into a corner over both of these stories.

Normally the network is extremely friendly to the Obama administration, so when the news is full of situations that are less-than-flattering for the president and Democrats, that spells trouble for CNN. Third quarter ratings put CNN between Fox News and MSNBC, but it’s not an enviable situation, given that MSNBC has been struggling to keep even a small share of viewers interested in viewing a 24/7 cable news source. Beyond the ratings issue, there is the news of the day dogging the network.

The Weekly Standard‘s Bill Kristol went after CNN’s Piers Morgan and Mark Lamont Hill over the government shutdown. Liberals have been trying to maintain that the shutdown is purely the fault of “Tea Party radicals” in the GOP, however those claims are going at least a little flat in the face of the fact that the GOP has been repeatedly making new offers and legislation to resolve the issues, and offering to sit down Democrats to negotiate a resolution. The primary bone of contention is ObamaCare, which the GOP is determined to halt, or at least slow down severely. And the ObamaCare system itself seems to be conspiring against liberal politicians and media like CNN in that battle. Attempts to access the ObamaCare website on-air at CNN and MSNBC failed, leaving anchors with no choice but to give up trying. But maybe those anchors should be happy they failed – McAfee, the internet security giant, issued a warning about potential phishing scams on the government websites. Their glitches make them a prime target for hackers, in the opinion of McAfee’s vice president, Gary Davis. All in all, it’s not a good week for CNN.

Obama playbook – when in doubt say it is all phony scandals

phonyscandals

As the old saying goes, “the truth will out,” and in the case of the multiple scandals that have been dogging the Obama Administration practically from the beginning, it appears those sage words are starting to blow up in the talking heads’ faces. Those voices include individuals in the media that have chosen to be little more than Obama’s private collection of sycophants, and of course, the members of the administration that have been tap-dancing furiously around the facts in front of Congress and the public. The latest issue has been the outrageous claim by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, that all the current “problems,” particularly Benghazi, are “phony scandals.” Of course that was met with severe push-back by conservative politicians and media, expressing severe disapproval of even the concept of relegating the deaths of four American embassy personnel to the realm of “phony” anything.

It is coming up on 11 months since the attack in Libya, and the hearings are still being convened to get to the bottom of the issue. There is still one survivor of the attack in the hospital, recovering from his injuries. The rumors about the administration forcing survivors in general to remain silent about what they witnessed that night have been running around the Hill and the nation for weeks. Because the truth has been denied, the inevitable result is that the truth is sneaking its way out. As for the Obama Administration, it can’t be pleasing to them that it has come from none other than CNN – which Fox News had no problem pointing out. As for the ones that remain loyal to the president, and keep pushing his propaganda? Well, look no further than Variety to see the fate for that tactic – even the experts in the entertainment industry are admitting that being the mouthpiece for the administration isn’t a good formula for a news station that would like to have even just decent ratings.

So, all this means is that it makes sense to keep pushing for the truth. If you’re looking for a quick way to point out to the masses that the scandals really aren’t phony – and at least enumerate them quickly with pretty pictures for those that are a bit dense – there’s a short video for that:

Syria: Where the war stands now

FreedomHouse (CC)

FreedomHouse (CC)

FreedomHouse (CC)

The Obama administration has stated that they will send weapons to the rebels in Syria at this point, regardless of what the citizens in the U.S. or Syria think. And there isn’t a great deal of support for this action, in fact, it appears that even the recipients of the assistance are not wanting it. According to CNN:

If the outside world was excited about a U.S. retaliatory plan for the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons against rebels, the families in the capital’s old Mezzah neighborhood struck a tone in utter contrast.

“America is inventing stories about chemical weapons,” one man told CNN’s Fred Pleitgen. “The Syrian government never used chemical weapons. The rebels have used them, not the government. So they are inventing stories because our army is winning.”

Another man, also shopping for household staples, said the U.S. action won’t make a difference. The government will prevail in the civil war, he asserted.

The intervention is in the wake of reports that the Assad regime is using chemical weapons against its own citizens. But, there remain reports that this simply isn’t the case on the ground. As Al Jazeera reports:

“The White House has issued a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, based on fabricated information,” a statement issued on Friday by the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.

“The United States is using cheap tactics to justify President Barack Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian opposition,” it said.

Russia, a staunch ally of the Syrian government, also disputed the US charge on Friday.

President Vladimir Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, told reporters that the information provided by US officials to Russia “didn’t look convincing”.

Russian officials are also not supporting U.S. plans for a no-fly zone over Syria.

“There have been leaks from Western media regarding the serious consideration to create a no-fly zone over Syria through the deployment of Patriot anti-aircraft missiles and F-16 jets in Jordan,” said Mr [Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei] Lavrov, speaking at a joint news conference in Moscow with his Italian counterpart.

“You don’t have to be a great expert to understand that this will violate international law,” he said.

Mr Lavrov also said evidence presented by the US of chemical weapons use in Syria apparently did not meet reliability criteria set out by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

The three-year-long conflict in Syria has been increasingly involving neighboring nations, and Hezbollah leaders have stated that they do not intend to back down in the conflict. This does not bode well for any plans that the U.S. could have for assisting the Syrian rebels – without taking into account arguments from within the U.S. that getting involved at this point would only be giving weapons to existing enemies of the U.S. There is no secret that Al Qaeda has been making in-roads in the Syrian resistance. Add to that it appears that even Israel does not foresee a stable nation in Syria with or without Assad, there seem to be very few, if any, redeeming factors to the U.S. stepping in any more than it has already.

CNN Contributor Arrested

Screen shot 2013-04-30 at 12.54.17 PMSelf-avowed communist revolutionary and former “Green Jobs Czar” turned CNN contributor Van Jones was arrested on Monday at a protest outside a federal courthouse in St. Louis. According to Jones’ Twitter posts, miners are being “ripped off by Big Coal,” so he volunteered to be arrested along with 16 others.

Jones said he was protesting not only for environmental reasons, but also because the miners are being cheated of their earned pensions. Ironically, Jones has spent considerable time, money, and effort to put coal miners out of work by way of demonizing fossil fuel energy production.

CNN hasn’t commented on the actions of Jones, nor is it clear whether the news organization paid for his travel expenses.

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

Jones is not alone.

Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) (and Van Jones BFF) got himself arrested on purpose a couple of years ago. The two are quite close, apparently. Read: The Company You Keep
****************************************************
Follow me on Twitter!

President Obama Press Conference – April 30th

Barack-Obama-portrait-PD

Barack-Obama-portrait-PD
As stated by the President, this press conference was in honor of outgoing White House Correspondents’ President Ed Henry, of Fox News. Accordingly, the first recognized was Henry, and he offered questions on Syria and Benghazi. On Syria, Henry asked what the next move is for this administration. It is not surprising that since chemical weapons are the bone of contention in Syria, that Obama went directly for what can only be considered a thinly-veiled statement referring to actions of the Bush Administration on Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq:

And what we now have is evidence that chemical weapons have been used inside of Syria, but we don’t know how they were used, when they were used, who used them; we don’t have chain of custody that establishes what exactly happened. And when I am making decisions about America’s national security and the potential for taking additional action in response to chemical weapon use, I’ve got to make sure I’ve got the facts.

That’s what the American people would expect. And if we end up rushing to judgment without hard, effective evidence, then we can find ourselves in the position where we can’t mobilize the international community to support what we do. There may be objections even among some people in the region who are sympathetic with the opposition if we take action. So, you know, it’s important for us to do this in a prudent way.

When pressed by Henry on the question of whether or not the U.S. would act militarily against the Assad regime in Syria, Obama came short of stating that would happen, opting to merely state that he has options outlined by the Pentagon. What those options are were not mentioned, for security reasons.

On Benghazi, the question was on members of the administration that have apparently been blocked from testifying about what they know about the attack that lead to the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens, and three members of the consulate staff.

Ed, I’m not familiar with this notion that anybody’s been blocked from testifying. So what I’ll do is I will find out what exactly you’re referring to. What I’ve been very clear about from the start is that our job with respect to Benghazi has been to find out exactly what happened, to make sure that U.S. embassies not just in the Middle East but around the world are safe and secure and to bring those who carried it out to justice.

It’s not surprising that Obama denied that anyone was being blocked from testifying, but it’s also unlikely that there will be any follow-up on the question as promised. Obama moved on to the next reporter after this.

Jessica Yellin of CNN offered the next question on whether or not we, as a nation, are moving backwards in national security and intelligence, citing Senator Lindsey Graham’s concerns on the matter. Note that the question focused on the failure in preventing the Boston bombing, not the subsequent reaction and investigation.

No. Mr. Graham is not right on this issue, although I’m sure it generated some headlines. I think that what we saw in Boston was state, local, federal officials, every agency, rallying around a city that had been attacked, identifying the perpetrators just hours after the scene had been examined. We now have one individual deceased, one in custody. Charges have been brought.

I think that all our law enforcement officials performed in an exemplary fashion after the bombing had taken place. And we should be very proud of their work, as obviously we’re proud of the people of Boston, all the first responders and the medical personnel that helped save lives.

What we also know is that the Russian intelligence services had alerted U.S. intelligence about the older brother as well as the mother, indicating that they might be sympathizers to extremists. The FBI investigated that older brother. It’s not as if the FBI did nothing. They not only investigated the older brother; they interviewed the older brother. They concluded that there were no signs that he was engaging in extremist activity. So that much we know.

Obama did go on to note that we need to be vigilant to prevent a future attack, stated that the Department of Homeland Security and FBI had done their jobs, and stated that we need to go on living our lives.

The next question was from Jonathan Karl at ABC, and bluntly asked if the President felt that he had the ability to pass his agenda, given the push back he has been getting from both sides of the aisle in Congress. Sequestration was also brought up in this segment, particularly the FAA.

Look, we — you know, we understand that we’re in divided government right now. Republicans control the House of Representatives. In the Senate, this habit of requiring 60 votes for even the most modest piece of legislation has gummed up the works there. And I think it’s — comes to no surprise, not even to the American people, but even to members of Congress themselves, that right now things are pretty dysfunctional up on Capitol Hill.

Despite that, I’m actually confident that there are a range of things that we’re going to be able to get done. I feel confident that the bipartisan work that’s been done on immigration reform will result in a bill that passes the Senate and passes the House and gets on my desk. And that’s going to be a historic achievement. And I’m — I’ve been very complimentary of the efforts of both Republicans and Democrats in those efforts.

And on the FAA, and Congress:

Well, hold on a second. The — so the alternative, of course, is either to go ahead and impose a whole bunch of delays on passengers now, which also does not fix the problem, or the third alternative is to actually fix the problem by coming up with a broader, larger deal.

But, you know, Jonathan, you seem to suggest that somehow, these folks over there have no responsibilities and that my job is to somehow get them to behave. That’s their job. They are elected, members of Congress are elected in order to do what’s right for their constituencies and for the American people. So if, in fact, they are seriously concerned about passenger convenience and safety, then they shouldn’t just be thinking about tomorrow or next week or the week after that; they should be thinking about what’s going to happen five years from now, 10 years from now or 15 years from now.

The only way to do that is for them to engage with me on coming up with a broader deal.

And that’s exactly what I’m trying to do is to continue to talk to them about are there ways for us to fix this. Frankly, I don’t think that if I were to veto, for example, this FAA bill, that that somehow would lead to the broader fix. It just means that there’d be pain now, which they would try to blame on me, as opposed to pain five years from now. But either way, the problem’s not getting fixed. The only way the problem does get fixed is if both parties sit down and they say, how are we going to make sure that we’re reducing our deficit sensibly; how are we making sure that we’ve investing in things like rebuilding our airports and our roads and our bridges and investing in early childhood education and all — basic research, all the things that are going to help us grow, and that’s what the American people want.

The last questions were offered by Bill Plante of CBS, Chuck Todd of NBC, and Antonieta Cadiz of the Chilean press, offering questions on Guantanamo Bay, ObamaCare, and Immigration respectively. Obama did make a parting statement on NBA player Jason Collins “coming out of the closet”. A full transcript of the press conference is available at the Washington Post website.

Obamacare Will Cost More. Surprised?

obamacare costs

obamacare costsThis week the Society of Actuaries released a study that demonstrates costs for health care will rise for many under Obamacare. In a study of individual policies it was found that states offering low cost insurance the prices could rise significantly with increases as high as 80% in Ohio and Wisconsin, and 60% in California, Idaho, Maryland and Indiana. It is expected that much of the increases would then be passed on to customers through higher premiums.

Criticized by the Obama administration as being biased the SoA states they were commissioned to do the evaluation by UnitedHealth Group but denies they skewed the information. Read the report here.

Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stated: “These folks will be moving into a really fully insured product for the first time, and so there may be a higher cost associated with getting into that market. “But we feel pretty strongly that with subsidies available to a lot of that population, that they are really going to see much better benefit for the money that they’re spending.”

It is worth noting that individual insurance policies currently make up only 6% of health coverage. The study did not evaluate employer insurance costs. It is also worth noting that Secretary Sebelius and Team Obama continue to promote taxpayer sponsored subsidies to reduce expenses to many recipients.

This sudden admission of increased cost as now being reported by many Obamacare proponents may be a signal of realization that the promised reduction in health care will not be as promised.

 

If the video does not work you can watch it on YouTube: CNN Reports.

CNN Touts Post Speech Poll…But Sample Includes Only 17% Republicans?

cnn

cnn pollGiving the president a big ‘thumbs up’ CNN headlines tout the State of the Union speech as having a 53% approval rate by watchers.

But read further in the article and one will learn that the poll data included 44% Democrats and a mere 17% Republicans. They say their sampling has a plus or minus error rate of only 5%.

And they wonder why they come in at the bottom of the pile for ratings.

Read the entire article here: CNN

Gargoyle Joe Is Your Debate Firewall?

Biden’s new debate coach is not an improvement over John Kerry.

Biden’s new debate coach is not an improvement over John Kerry.

What does it say about a campaign when its hope for putting a stop to a precipitous decline in the polls is Joe Biden? Last night fireman Joe was at his pompous, bloviating best in the Vice President Debate with Cong. Paul Ryan. The most memorable line in his paper thin, fact–free rebuttals came when Biden looked directly at the camera and asked viewers, “Who are you going to believe? Me, or your lying eyes?”

Earlier in the week Obama staffers were trying to pin the blame for the current President’s poor showing on John Kerry’s debate preparation, but I don’t think replacing Kerry with the Cheshire Cat was much of an improvement. In the split–screen shots Biden looked like a dirty old man staring at an elementary school swing set as he leered and grinned during Ryan’s answers.

When he wasn’t interrupting and talking over Ryan, Biden was muttering and chuckling to himself like Gollum in the underground lake. I suggest that whoever posts these clips on YouTube use Aqualung as the background music.

The only time I had any sympathy for “Good Old Joe” was when the camera showed a view of the back of his head and you could see where even his hair implants were thinning.

Believe it or not Biden took a full six days off the campaign trail just to prepare for the debate. To put this in perspective, Jesus didn’t require six days to prepare for the crucifixion.

Presumably the first three days of preparation were devoted to words Joe wasn’t supposed to say including but not limited to: gay, marriage, chains, crushed, taxes, jobs, 7/11, Slurpee, f–ing, deal, articulate, bright and clean. And the last three days to words he should say. In fact, according to a report in the Daily Mail, Joe was programmed with hand–me–down one–liners that Obama refused to use on Romney.

Fortunately, since the debate was held before a mixed audience, Biden did not have to adopt with the black dialect Obama affects when he’s speaking exclusively to minorities. Biden got to keep all his ‘g’s and was not be required to use “folks.”

The process wasn’t brainwashing per se, but it required at least a light rinse.

And somewhere during all this preparation Joe found time to rent a floor polisher so he could buff his teeth.

This focus on Biden brings back memories doesn’t it? Joe was added to the team for his “extensive foreign policy experience” and his “long term Washington expertise.” Yes, 69–year–old Joe was cashing a government paycheck and sticking his foot in his mouth at time when the 42–year­–old Ryan had to be content with his thumb.

This is why conservative columnists hav alwayse been grateful Biden is the white guy.

Last night while showing off his expertise, Biden claimed the US is Israel’s best friend and that Obama and Netanyahu have personally met 12 times. Both are lies: Obama pledged to create some distance from Israel and the two have met nine times.

“Foreign Policy” Joe stated emphatically that the consulate in Libya had not asked for additional security, intelligence experts did not warn of an attack and that he knows from security briefings that Iran is a long way from getting an atomic bomb.

Unfortunately Ryan failed to point out that Thursday’s Washington Post had printed the emails asking for additional security at the consulate and he failed to ask Biden if the “intelligence experts” who assured him Iran is a long way from the bomb are the same ones who promised him the Libyan consulate was in no danger.

After Romney won the first debate so decisively, one would have thought MSM coverage of the VP event would be reality–based. But that’s not so, the media remains an Obama co–conspirator. CNN reported its own poll of debate watchers “a draw.”

Yet the graph clearly shows Ryan won 48 percent to 44 percent. What’s more, 28 percent of viewers said the debate made them more likely to vote for Romney compared to the 21 percent who said they were more likely to vote for Obama. And Ryan was judged more likeable than both “Public Trough” Joe & Big Bird by 53 percent to 43 percent, both of the latter being outside the margin of error.

And a pathetic AP reporter by the name of Jocelyn Noveck claimed, “the vice president also came up with the two catchiest phrases of the night – “bunch of malarkey” and “bunch of stuff.” Both of which are trite and ancient.

Fortunately, participants in a Luntz debate focus group that — was not on the MSM or Obama campaign payroll — felt Biden was “arrogant.” Personally, I thought that if Joe had a few feathers he could play Foghorn Leghorn.

The best part about the debate was viewers now realize to their horror that a lying boastful buffoon is a heartbeat away from a President that is helpless without a teleprompter.

Or as Barbara Schribner wrote: Now we can put a set of teeth on the empty chair.

 

 

CNN poll shows Ryan slightly over Biden in debate – lefties go off in comments

CNN VP debate poll

The Vice Presidential Debate in Danville, Kentucky featured a calm, cool Paul Ryan facing off against a visibly irritated, impatient and unruly Vice President Joe Biden. CNN conducted a poll after the debate asking who readers thought won the debate and Ryan edged out the feisty VP by four points – the left became unhinged in the comments.

The poll had a 5% margin of error which means the results actually indicate that the candidates matched evenly within the margin.Only 381 people responded to the poll, which is a small sample by polling standards.

What’s more interesting is the reaction of CNN readers – off the hinges ..

Seriously? There was a sample of 381 people.. why go off on it? Never mind.

Why is the sample so small and was the poll taken as a phone survey, exit survey, web poll? No indication

Another important note is CNN admitting it’s normal polling bias. In special note #2 on the poll, CNN says that their poll shows a slight GOP lean which they argue is not indicative of the general public:

SPECIAL NOTE OF CAUTION #2: The sample of debate-watchers in this poll were 31% Democratic and 33% Republican. That indicates that the sample of debate watchers is about eight points more Republican than an average CNN poll of all Americans, so the respondents were more Republican than the general public.

Interesting that CNN feels that that a 25% Republican sample would have been better? Exactly how “Republican” is the general public? Then again, why does it matter? Many Conservatives are unaffiliated independents, so not seeing a full set of cross-tables could mean that independents were more the reason for the Ryan weighting. The special note is meant to make it seem as though a heavy GOP sample is to blame.

Like Polls? Answer our VP debate questions at the bottom of this page.

Obama and Benghazi-Gate

Secretary of Defense (CC)

It’s been 17 days since the attack on the Consulate at Benghazi, and Obama still hasn’t said publicly that it was a terrorist attack. He’s left that to his surrogates, including Press Secretary Jay Carney, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The bizarre situation that we’re left with is a dead-asleep press that is largely ignoring the entire situation, with few exceptions. While CNN has managed to get far more information on the ground in Libya than even our FBI has (since they have yet to make it to the scene, as of reports on the evening of September 27th), they are not really saying much of anything beyond the canned responses that have apparently been approved by the administration. And when CNN was reporting slightly on the contents of a journal owned by Ambassador Chris Stevens, the response from the administration was that it should have been given to the family without any reports on its contents hitting the airwaves. Everyone in the U.S. should have seen enough crime dramas over the years to know that is an extremely bizarre statement, presuming that the government ever had any intention of investigating the attack in the first place. Any normal person would think that knowing what Stevens was writing in the days before the attack might be relevant to the investigation, right?

Secretary of Defense (CC)

And now we’re down to trying to figure out who knew what, and when. For now, it’s become clear that the administration knew from day one that this was a terrorist attack. It had nothing to do with the video that slandered Islam. In the coming months, it wouldn’t be surprising to find out that none of the attacks on Western embassies in the Middle East and North Africa had anything to do with that film. But, beyond all of that, the fact that the administration has admitted fairly quickly that they knew from the beginning the true nature of the attack in Benghazi is unsettling. It was not a situation where the press was exerting any great pressure on them about the situation – they were taking the story they were being spoon fed with the noted exceptions of FoxNews, and a few foreign press agencies. While I’m not generally a conspiracy theorist, this definitely causes me to think there’s something more to this whole story.

While the administration has been very quick to point out what a great man Ambassador Stevens was – that’s to be expected – the fact that he was assigned to Libya is a little puzzling. It’s become clear over the past couple weeks that Libya was far less stable than the administration was leading people to believe – and they knew it. Stevens specialized in the Middle East and North Africa, and admittedly, there were other far more stable outposts in the region where he could have been assigned. I suggest this right now because of one glaring fact – Stevens was openly gay. Given the level of hatred and intolerance seen exerted against gays in Islamist nations, the last place any responsible member of the administration should want to place an openly gay diplomat is one where there is even a hint of radical Islamic activity. Either the administration is entirely incompetent, or someone really didn’t care about the safety of Stevens at all when choosing his assignment. Of course, these are issues that may or may not have been addressed in that journal the administration didn’t want CNN reporting about – and apparently didn’t want to read themselves.

There is no proof apparent of what I’ve suggested above. It is merely an observation, based on the few facts available right now – call it an exercise in basic logic. And perhaps it is a suggestion to the few people out there that are really interested in finding out the truth about this attack. Beyond searching for information on the radicals in Libya, another priority should be investigating what was really going on in the administration before the attack. Did Stevens have any enemies in the administration? Were there any under-the-table deals going on between the administration and Islamist organizations on the ground in Libya? Is there really a credible connection to al-Qaeda, or is it merely a matter of a single man with previous associations with that organization having a hand in the planning? And, like any other questionable situation in the Federal Government, how high does it really go? That last one is very important, primarily because Obama detractors have a horrible habit of giving him far too much credit when it comes to just about everything. Bluntly, he’s too much of an amateur in foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, to personally manage being puppetmaster on something like this. The Islam apologist policies he follows are really his undoing in the region – radical Muslims respect him less than the right-wing in the U.S. does because of it. The bottom line is that we are nowhere near the end of this one, if there is even one person determined to stay the course, and figure out exactly what happened. And it will be interesting to see what the truth really is.

BUSTED! Soledad O’Brien Caught Using Left-Wing Blog to Slam Ryan

Screen Shot 2012-08-14 at 12.54.26 AM

Excuse me, while I sift through this bulls**t

I had a REALLY bad episode of insomnia last night, therefore, I was unable to promptly respond to a tweet sent to me by Robert Stacy McCain concerning Ali Akbar exposing CNN’s Soledad O’Brien’s latest incident in liberal media bias.  Did she use Wikipedia again?

Noel Sheppard of NewsBusters said “bravo, Ali! bravo” and who can disagree with him.  Ali Akbar of Viral Read reported on August 13th that Soledad O’ Brien– while guest hosting for Anderson Cooper– used a Talking Points Memo post to slam Republican Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan in an exchange with Virginia House of Delegates member and Romney Senior Campaign Adviser Barbara Comstock:

She was reading The Myth of Paul Ryan The Bipartisan Leader. She never cited it, but used its contents. In fact, she claimed to be reading a direct statement from Senator Wyden’s (D-OR) office, but was in fact reading this excerpt from the blog:

The Romney campaign’s lone evidence that Ryan is a bipartisan leader amounts to a vague blueprint he co-wrote with Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) late last year that mirrors key elements of his Medicare plan. Wyden voted against Ryan’s budget and said Romney’s characterization of their work was dishonest.

“Governor Romney is talking nonsense. Bipartisanship requires that you not make up the facts,” Wyden’s office said in a statement. “I did not ‘co-lead a piece of legislation.’ I wrote a policy paper on options for Medicare. Several months after the paper came out I spoke and voted against the Medicare provisions in the Ryan budget. Governor Romney needs to learn you don’t protect seniors by makings things up, and his comments sure won’t help promote real bipartisanship.”

Uh-OH!

 

BUSTED! This is just as entertaining as the time when Ms. O’Brien used Wikipedia to define Critical Race Theory in an interview with Breitbart’s Joel Pollak last March.   Robert Stacy McCain also posted about this unbelievable event writing– “The Most Trusted Name in News”? She’s a disgrace.

H/T Viral Read

H/T Ali Akbar

CNN Reports Back Romney Bain Claims

cnn-john-king_320

If you tell a lie often enough people will believe you. This seems to be the case for Team Obama regarding Mitt Romney’s departure from Bain Capital. Continuing to spread falsehoods and exaggerations may turn one or two naive voters back to the Obama camp.

CNN should have no axe to grind in this story. If anything they are trying to improve their viewership by reminding us that they can report unbiased news. You can help by refuting the stories with news clips like this:

CNN Accuses Republicans of Stirring Up ‘Uncertainty’ About ObamaCare

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

CNN’s Christine Romans played Obama spokesperson on Monday’s Starting Point and accused Republicans of creating “uncertainty” about ObamaCare in trying to repeal it. That fits what has seemingly become a CNN line of “stop fighting this law and get in line.”

“I’m wondering, should Congresspeople be spending more time helping their constituents comply with the law rather than continuing all this uncertainty about it?” Romans challenged Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.). Ironically, CNN’s own poll shows a majority in favor of Congress repealing the law.

CNN has scoffed at Republican attempts the repeal the law before. Hours after the Supreme Court upheld the law, anchor Brooke Baldwin asked Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) if he wasn’t being a “sore loser” for continuing to fight ObamaCare.

Romans continued to grill Blackburn about helping her constituents comply with ObamaCare. “I mean, I hear more from Republicans saying ‘we’re going to make this not come true,’ not ‘here’s how we’re going to help you get your business to comply’,” she lamented.

Romans also revealed she counsels small business owners with less than 50 employees that the law won’t crush them, but Blackburn fought back. “[W]hen they talk to their insurance provider, the insurance provider says because of the new regulations that are going to be contained in Obamacare, this is what is happening to your insurance cost,” she insisted.

« Older Entries