Tag Archives: MSNBC

Super-Obama Takes Out Al-Qaeda Leader al-Awlaki

The people of Libya heard a dramatic swoosh of air last night, and upon looking up into the darkened moonless sky, started shouting, “look it;s a bird, no it’s a plane, no it’s… Super-Obama! Here to save the world  from the evil American capitalists and the dreaded Senior citizens of the Tea Party . Over at MSNBC, Chris Mathew’s whole body was engulfed in massive electrifying tingles as he cheered on Super-Obama upon hearing of his single-handedly hunting down and killing the Al Qaeda murdering Muslim cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki.   And then the Liberal lefties awoke to the reality that Super-Obama did not in fact kill al-Awlaki in a superhero-style act of bravery and courage. Sorry lefties, Super-Obama did not fly into Libya as pictured here and blast the vehicle that al-Awlaki and company were traveling in at the time with his high-intensity laser-firing super decoder ring. While that scenario may sound pretty far-fetched,  it is not however, too far from the Liberal media tale-telling we are already hearing from the leftists posing as news people today, in their ever-constant fluffing up of  what will go down in history as the biggest fraud to ever get near the White House, Barack Hussein Obama. Now that we have that out of the way, let’s look at the actual facts that brought about the demise of this really nasty-minded coward and a few his cohorts. Unlike the Liberal “journolists” and Josef Goebbel’s-esque students in the art of propaganda and history re-writes over at MSNBC, we will report the facts as best we can here, without adding any fluffy tales of fake Democratic Superheroes. Yes, we all know there is an election for Super-Barack to worry about, but that’s his problem.

First of all let’s get one very important fact straight here. The Global Multi-Culturists and assorted New World Order society manipulators seem to feel the need to label the murdering Muslim terrorist  al-Awlaki and his now dead Jihad-preaching pal Samir Khan,.. as Americans. These two misfits were about as American as another obviously mentally deranged lunatic, the anti-American President of Iran, Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,  period. Just being born here, or spending some time in America simply does not qualify a person as being an American. To be an American is an honor and a privilege to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave, while assimilating to the American culture and the rule of law. These two Muslim Jihadis were anti-Americans at their core, and therefore should not EVER be labeled as Americans.

Samir Khan, a Muslim Terrorist Plotting Murder Openly in America, while Politically Correct Law Enforcement Endangers the Public by Ignoring the Warnings.

Samir Khan was born in Saudi Arabia, and raised in Queens, N.Y. In the beginning of his time in Queens at the age of seven, Khan appeared to be a regular neighborhood child, wearing baggy pants and listening to hip-hop music with his neighborhood pals. As he matured towards adulthood, Mr. Khan then joined two ‘supposedly’ non-violent Muslim groups and was indoctrinated into Sharia law, as is the custom for all Muslims regardless of their host country. [ To worship Sharia law and live by it’s draconian 7th century ideology is in fact, in direct conflict with being an American.]  Mr Khan’s family then relocated to North Carolina in 2004, where he is said to have gravitated towards radicalism after watching videos of Muslim Jihad-inspired suicide bombers blowing themselves up at American checkpoints in Iraq. It was at this time that Samir Khan stated  openly supporting Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda in his online writing. He even went so far as to be interviewed with the N.Y.Times, in which he stated that his favorite video was of  a suicide bomber in Iraq blowing up an American military base. Yes he was still living in America at this time.  Upon explaining his favorite video of Americans being murdered in Iraq, Khan told the Times reporter, ” It was something that brings great happiness to me.”  What kind of a coward can sit there listening to this extreme anti-American statement and not call the police and demand that Samir Khan be arrested immediately?  A politically correct reporter, working for The New York Times, just sat there and took notes while this lunatic basically came right out and said the killing of innocent Americans by Muslim terrorists brought great happiness to him. Mr Khan went on to become the propaganda minister of al-Qaeda’s English-language magazine Inspire, where he wrote articles “inspiring” young Americans to wage war against the infidels in America and other western countries,targeting anyone who does not bow down to Sharia law in what he termed as the non-believers.

Anwar al-Awlaki , The bin Laden of the Internet

Anwar al-Awlaki was born in the United States of Yemeni parents, who then moved him back to Yemen at the age of seven, where he studied at the Azal Modern School for eleven years, until he reached the age of eighteen when he returned to the U.S. to attend engineering college in Colorado. In another apparent failure of our intelligence services and U.S. State dept, al-Awlaki was given a foreign student visa that allowed him to reenter the U.S. while falsely claiming that he was born in Yemen. al- Awlaki received his engineering degree after four years in Colorado, then earned an M.A. in Education Leadership for San Diego State University, and in 2001 ( that year ring any bells?) studied at the George Washington University Graduate School of Education and Human Development until the end of 2001, just 3 months after the 911 Muslim terrorist murders of over 3000 innocent Americans.al-Awlaki was an imam of The Denver Islamic Society from1994-1996, and also served as an imam in America from 1996 – 2000 at a mosque on the outskirts of San Diego. He left the Denver imam post after being chastised by an elder for supposedly encouraging other students to wage jihad against westerners. Did said elder report al-Awlaki’s radicalism to the authorities? Of course not, the so-called religion of peace while demanding the good life in America almost never reports the radical Muslims among them.

In 1998 and 1999, al-Awlaki served as the vice-president for lovely sounding Charitable Society for Social Welfare in… San Diego, California. In a page that seems to have eerily taken right out of the American Liberal Social Justice fraudster’s handbook, this “Social Welfare” charity group was founded by one Abdul Majeed al-Zindani of Yemen, who had been designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist  by the U.S. gov’t. The FBI also said in sworn testimony that this “Charity ” was nothing more than a front group for terrorist funding. Two of the 911 suicide bombers frequently attended the Mosque in San Diego where al-Awlaki was an imam. al-Awlaki disappeared to parts unknown overseas in 2000 only to be allowed reentry into America again in Jan. 2001, where he settled in Falls Church Virginia, right outside of our nation’s capitol. Again, this shows us just how politically correct morons within our government refused to snatch up this obvious terrorist and American-murder-plotting Muslim that could have stopped the 911 attacks before they happened, all because some politically-connected lawyers say it would somehow violates his civil rights.  Even though al-Awlaki was a proven Muslim terrorist waging war against America and plotting thousands of murders around the world,  certain ass-backwards people think he should not have been killed this week.

That is further proof of just how denigrated American society has become today, due largely in part to the Globalist agenda of the U.N mandates of  their Social Justice fraud being forced onto the American public. De-fund the U.N. immediately, and kill anyone involved in the murder of innocent Americans. Our very own government is funding anti-American terrorists through many U.N. so-called foreign aid mandates. The country of Yemen was harboring al-Awlaki at the time of his demise on Friday. Yemen is a hotbed of terrorist training camps and has been for decades, and our government still gives them our tax dollars by the billions today. This is in 2010, and Hillary and company have even increased U.S. cash payments to Yemen even more in 2011.

Yemen US aid 2010

Defense relations between Yemen and the United States are improving rapidly, with the resumption of International Military Education and Training assistance and the transfer of military equipment and spare parts. In FY 2010 approximate funding for U.S. Foreign Military Financing (FMF) for Yemen was $12.5 million, International Military Education and Training (IMET) was $1 million, and Non-Proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Programs (NADR) was $5 million. In FY 2010 Yemen also received approximately $5 million in Economic Support Funds (ESF), $35 million in development assistance, and $155 million in Section 1206 funding.

The Obama administration and Hillary Clinton’s state dept. resumed military funding, equipment, and training assistance to the country of Yemen, to the tune of about some 200 million dollars, in addition to all of the direct and indirect foreign aid we were already giving them. Al-Awlaki’s parents were from Yemen, and they took him back there at the age of seven, to be schooled in the Muslim indoctrination into Sharia law and their 7th century ideology of waging war against all infidels who refuse to worship Allah. Then al-Awlaki came back into the U.S. and continued his promotion of Jihad against America unabated, thanks to the incompetence and political correctness of the U.S. government, resulting in the murder of thousands of innocent Americans on American soil and abroad. The ignorant children and teaching professors of Liberal ideology in America today have called for president G.W.Bush to be arrested for war crimes for over a decade now. How about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s proven crimes of funding the terrorists of Yemen ? al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen. The government of Yemen was supporting him and protecting him at the time of his demise, and yet  Barack and Hillary are increasing funding to the Yemeni government even more as we speak. How about it lefties? Will we see you marching outside the White House this week, and calling for the arrest of your Super-hero Barack Obama? They still harass former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and tried to arrest him just this week, so how about Hillary Clinton receiving the same treatment? That simply will not happen due to the fact that the misguided misfits of the left are nothing short of pathetic hypocrites with an agenda, being led around by the nose by the con artists of the fake Democratic Party of today.

The people of Yemen recently saw U.S. drone and fighter-jet strikes swoop down and demolish a convoy of vehicles which carried Anwar al-Awlaki and his fellow jihad propagandist, Samir Khan to their much-deserved fiery death, in an emphatic show of U.S. military might. Chalk one up for the good guys there. Anwar al-Awlaki had been hunted down by the brave warriors of the CIA, FBI, and the U.S. military troops who risk their lives by putting boots on the ground in hostile territories such as Yemen. Meanwhile, Barack Obama and Leon Panetta sat safe and sound back in their luxurious taxpayer-funded offices and simply micro-managed this situation and are not to be designated as being  some kind of ultra-courageous Super-heroes, much to the dismay of the Liberal media propagandists that will try to use this episode in true American warrior heroism, as part of a ploy to get Obama reelected. That  awe-inspiring  attack by  U.S. predator drones and fighter jets that swooped down and blew these anti-American Muslim terrorists to a fiery death was a powerful example of  just what will happen to these types of cowards who decide to attack and murder Americans around the world today. Let’s leave the Barack-the-Superhero- takes-out-Al-Qaeda -leader-Anwar al-Awlaki comic book episode to the propagandists of the Liberal media and the reelection campaign operatives of Super-Obama, shall we?

Being Held for something we 'might' do?

Prolonged Detention.

Rachel Maddow addresses the President’s proposal to indefinitely detain persons who are threats to this country, because of something they “might” do.

I looked the video up because some say Al-Awlaki should not have been killed.
They are saying he should have gotten a trial.
 
Awlaki was placed on the CIA capture or kill list – he was involved in the underwear bomber’s activity among other detestable plans to recruit our own people and turn them against us with intent to bring our country to it’s knees, as well as murder her citizens.

I understand the fear of slippery slope, (declaring a person a threat and then “taking them out” without due process of law) but his were acts of war agains this nation.

Awlaki made himself a part of Al-Queda.

As for the slippery slope – the ability to detain a person since they are very likely to commit a crime against our nation – I regret to inform you, that the first few steps have already been tread upon it.  This video is two years old.

In it, President Obama proposes to construct a “legal regime” with congressional and judiciary oversights.
This means separate from our judicial system and military commissions.

His examples are in regards to those who are training in terrorist camps today.
Here is the information for anyone who wants it.

Rachel Maddow on Prolonged Detention

 

Herman Cain Makes MSNBC Round Table Look Like Whiny Poli-Sci Undergrads

Herman Cain took the opportunity to school the entire MSNBC Round-table after the Reagan Library debate last night.  He picked off every tired, predictable talking point (favor the rich, hurt the poor, women and minorities, etc.) starting with Al Sharpton, who managed to sound like the Constitutional idea of states’ rights was more disgusting than the Rev’s greasy hot comb at the end of a long week.  Cain did not back down, refuted every ridiculous assertion and was able to highlight his agenda.  Cain is currently running at the back of the pack, but he’s the candidate that just won’t go away.  He seems to be one of the few GOP’ers who gets better with each appearance.  Is this because he was so “green” in the beginning that any improvement seems big, or is Herman Cain becoming a genuine candidate?

GOP Reagan Debate: The Herminator, Texans & is Jon Huntsman an Android?

The latest GOP debate was held at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley and it may go down as one of the best so far.  Brian Williams and John F. Harris moderated what MSNBC was obviously hoping would be remembered as the Perry vs. Romney debate.  The first ten minutes were devoted to a spirited back and forth between the two front-runners, aided by Williams’ laid-back moderation.  It was clear MSNBC was setting the two Governors up from the start.

Unlike the previous Fox debate, this was a strong showing for most of the candidates.

Herman Cain continues to improve with each debate.  He is doing his homework, and it shows.  As usual, Cain was strong on jobs and the economy.  He ran some big pizza company and did rocket science stuff, so he’s pretty smart.  At this point, Cain is trailing the pack, but his greatest strength is his ability to study and adapt.  He showed he is not to be easily discounted and his intelligence is clearly his greatest asset.  Also, I have a sneaking suspicion Cain throws one hell of a family reunion every year.  This could add a whole new appeal to the White House.  Cain is a long shot, but he is clearly not out of this race yet.

Michele Bachmann was poised and deliberate and made a very strong case for why she should remain in the House.  Having no clear record to run on, Bachmann frequently harkened back to the fights she has infamously backed in the House.  It is clear that the battles in our Congress are varied and essential, and a solid Conservative like Bachmann is desperately needed to continue those fights.  There was a time when Bachmann may have had a fighting chance to be President, but she seems to be saddled with a woeful campaign advisory team. For someone who is clearly so passionate and driven, in the debate format she comes off as forced and deliberate.  One can almost see her checking off the boxes in her head as she addresses each issue.  Bachmann is a great asset to the conservative movement, but tonight’s debate suggests that America may best be served with her in the Congress, instead of the White House.

And that brings us to Newt.  Oh, crazy, cantankerous Uncle Newt!  What is there to say about Newt?  Clearly there is no one in this race who can touch Newt when it comes to intelligence.  It is nothing short of a pleasure to hear him speak on any issue.  His vast wealth of knowledge and experience shows in every answer.  Newt’s internal polling must be showing that he comes off as a little stiff, because he was heavy on passion tonight.  As usual, the crowd loved it and was quite responsive, but Newt’s passionate strength is also his weakness.  With his furled eyebrows, immovable silver hair, and a condescending tone, Newt comes off more as the cranky old uncle at the family reunion than a President.  Add to that the fact that he looked like he just haphazardly threw on a suit and tie and ran over to the Library after his evening workout.  In the end, no one can match Newt’s razor sharp intelligence.  Debate after debate he proves he would be an invaluable pick for a cabinet position or advisor.  Here’s hoping the future Republican President remembers that.

Ron Paul put in a great performance.  Ron Paul understands the benefits and ideals of personal responsibility better than any candidate out there.  He handled each question with the ease of a man who believes what he says.  And then he was asked an immigration question, and that’s when Ron Paul just had to go get all Ron Paul-ish and ruin everything he had said in the previous 40 minutes.  There was some weirdness about a border fence working to keep Americans IN instead of Mexicans out and then the moderators moved on, but it was too late.  Ron Paul just couldn’t hold the Ron Paul in long enough.  The secret is out.  Ron Paul is a great Congressman and a great libertarian, but Ron Paul is also kooky.  And kooky doesn’t win the Presidency.

Rick Santorum was there.  Let’s not bring up the salmon tie.

Jon Huntsman showed America what a calculated statesman he is.  He arrived freshly oiled, with screws tightened, and his newly installed Political Platitudes software was working perfectly.  Jon Huntsman was Governor of Utah, you know?  He has a record there.  He has a record in Utah.  And he speaks Chinese.  And he lived in China.  And his record in Utah reflects his time in China, and Chinese and China.  Oops, sorry.  There is a glitch in the program.  We’ll get back to him later, after his handlers generate a less pukey-colored tie for him.

So that leaves us for the REAL reason for this debate tonight: Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.  Many were anxious to see how the Texas Governor would fair in this debate tonight against the other front-runner, Romney.

Perry exuded a patriarchal confidence, from his high collared shirt to his answers on the science of global warming.  Perhaps it is his Texas drawl, but Perry affects the air of a man who knows where he’s been, what he likes, and where he wants to go.  Some of the questions had him reaching for words and it seemed at times as if he was searching for the right phrasing, but in a way it made him seem more human (non-Huntsmanlike), as if he were coming up with the answers as he received the questions, and not checking the boxes ala Michele Bachmann.  Perhaps Perry’s highest point came when he referred to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme.  This is sure to be the sound bite that will be echoing through the stenographer’s pool in the MSM for the rest of the week and rightfully so.  It cannot be stressed enough the scam that Social Security has become for Americans in the 21st Century.  If that bite is all that anyone remembers about Perry from tonight, he’s gone a long way to locking down the nomination.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment of the night was Mitt Romney’s hair.  It just didn’t have the spunk of previous debates.  Usually Romney’s hair is “Presidential” hair, but tonight it was just gym hair.  But maybe that was a good thing.  Mitt’s lackluster hair meant an opportunity for Romney to shine in his own right, and he pretty much did that.  Romney stood firm and looked as relaxed as ever when sparring with Perry.  He looked confident, hit all his talking points, displayed good humor and attacked Perry’s record without looking like he was ATTACKING Perry’s record.  It was a good showing for the healthcare-beleaguered governor, but it wasn’t enough to overcome the sheer spectacle of seeing the Texas governor in debating form for the first time.

An honorable mention goes to Brian Williams and MSNBC for what was probably the most engaging debate format to date.  Williams has an easy yet professional charm that moved the debate along while still leaving room for the back and forth that gets audiences engaged.  Dishonorable mention goes to Williams’ colleague, John F. Harris, who sounded like a whiny kid trying to score the “gotcha” for the school newspaper so he can finally have the confidence to ask his editor out on a date.  Boo, to you Harris! Williams was right to let you talk less and less as the debate wound down.

The clear winners for this debate tonight were Brian Williams and MSNBC, for hosting a surprisingly even-handed forum.  It must have been difficult for them, but of course they were sure to line up Sharpton, Maddow, and Matthews in the post-debate to spew the proper amount of garbage afterward, so it evened out.  Perry and Romney came out very strong and with the exception of Huntsman, the GOP pack proved that the bench on the Right is pretty deep.  There is still more to hear from these candidates, but with each debate the field is getting sharper and sharper.  That bodes well for the future of this Presidential race. Stay tuned!

Obama Blinks – Moves Speech to Thursday

Obama requests speech at same time as GOP debate

Despite having said that it should be country before politics, Obama put his politics before almost everything – including politics.

Before his most sudden change of heart, Obama had demanded that he address Congress on the same night as the next GOP debate – September 7th.

Obama sent a letter Wednesday to House Speaker Boehner requesting a joint session of Congress so that he may deliver his jobs plan. On any other night that week, there would be no reason not to grant the teleprompter a reason to explain to us what Obama’s ever-changing group of economic advisers wrote down. The day Obama originally requested is also the night of the next GOP Presidential Debate.

The debate is to be carried by MSNBC so any damage to their viewership will be negligible, as are their ratings. The real question is why did Obama pick the same night as the GOP debate?

Politics, of Course

It won’t hurt the GOP candidates just to have the debate and the president on at the same time. Between DVR’s and archived streams, anyone who wants to see both, will be able to. What is interesting is that now we’re hearing that the moderators may push the candidates to respond in real-time to the President’s plan – a plan his advisers spent months on.

Obama gets to take his time, studying the speech someone wrote for him, the plan someone else devised. The candidates have seconds to respond? Way to go MSNBC, you’ve managed to top CNN’s bungle of a Presidential debate -AND- confirm the New York Times assertion that they are nothing but a marathon of liberal propaganda from 6-11pm. Although the need for the time boxing is questionable.

Obama could be assured that MSNBC would pounce on any opportunity to make the GOP candidates look unprepared and uninformed while the President reads calmly from the teleprompter. All he had to do was schedule his speech at the same time and on the same day as the MSNBC-hosted debate.

Rep. Ron Paul is said to be weighing his options as to whether he will attend the GOP debate or the President’s speech.

There is Football to Consider

John Boehner has stated that he was only given 15 minutes to consider the Obama request before it was announced nationwide. Boehner publicly asked the President to consider moving his speech to Thursday. As Thursday is the kick-off of the 2011-12 NFL football season, our sports fan-in chief is likely to refuse.

Boehner Asks President to be More Considerate

Letter to President Obama re: Request to Address a Joint Session of Congress

The President Changes His Mind

At about 9:20pm this evening, the White House blinked. The President will address a joint session of Congress on September 8th. So far the White House only alluded to Speaker Boehner’s concerns as the reason to move the date.

TIME Editor Calls Obama ‘A Dick’ On Live TV- MSNBC Suspends Him


Time Magazine Editor Mark Halperin should have known better. While on-air “gaffes” are not rare, a media member flatly stating his opinion on-the-air only because he thought it could censored out later is not a common occurrence. Perhaps Mark should take some motherly advice- “If you can’t say something nice about someone, say nothing at all!”

That might be too much to ask in this day and age where everyone thinks their opinion matters (point proven in this article as I, the author give my personal opinion).

Then again… maybe Mr.  Halperin was right. While a lady should never talk that way, I would have to agree with his assessment of the President’s attitude yesterday.

What I find sadly amusing is how this situation has played out this morning.

First there was the incident itself.

Then came the syrupy-sweet apology.

Then MSNBC announced that Mark Halperin, the reporter who made the “gaffe”, was “indefinitely suspended”.

The video posted does not show the entire exchange between Joe Scarborough and co-host Mika Brzezinski during Mr. Halperin’s apology, but it has been mysteriously scrubbed from the internet. Ms. Brzezinski was what I would call syrupy-sweet and very over-the-top in saying that they also apologized, etc., etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.

I find interesting that  Mr. Halperin has been “indefinitely suspended” for his remarks, yet it’s “anything goes” when discussing Conservatives. Just a few examples for you to mull over:

  • Chris Matthews calls Michele Bachmann a “balloon head”
  • Some have said that MSNBC has an “almost unhealthy obsession with Sarah Palin”- and I am sure it is obvious their “obsessive” coverage of Governor Palin is not positive
  • Specifically, Governor Palin was blamed by NUMEROUS MSNBC  (as well as other MSM outlets) hosts, pundits, etc. for the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords
  • Ed Schultz, another MSNBC host, was given a slap-on-the-wrist discipline of a one week suspension for calling Conservative talk-show host Laura Ingraham a slut
  • Cenk Uygur, yet another MSNBC host, mocked a gay GOProud chairman in an on-air interview

These are just a few of the endless remarks against Conservatives that have had little or no repercussions for the offender.

Another interesting note for readers. In my research for this article, I read that the rumor mill is churning with whispers of CBS possibly being in talks to steal “Morning Joe” and replace their never ending boring morning programming with Joe and Mika. I’m guessing the rumor mill may be grinding to a halt after today’s fiasco.

_______________

Sources:

Mediaite
Hollywood Reporter
Gay Conservative Mocked

Washington Post Creates False Conflict Between O’Donnell and NBC

Lawrence O'DonnellChris Mathews washed out and got replaced. Lawrence O’Donnell is quickly on his way to washing out and getting cancelled. To create a fake controversy, The Washington Post wrote a story about the conflict that wasn’t.

O’Donnell criticized the network that employs him for continuing to host Trump’s “The Apprentice”. On O’Donnell’s MSNBC show, “The Last Word”, he said, ““NBC has created a monster and it is called Donald Trump,” and he continued by calling the Donald “the most deranged egomaniac in the history of the NBC Entertainment division”. O’Donnell brought up the tired assertions that Trump is a birther and called the Trumpster’s actions sleazy.

Where WaPo comes in is in it’s attempt to raise O’Donnell to media hero status for having said such brave things against the NBC star.

After his very public broadside against his employer, he waited for a reaction. And waited. But there were no angry calls from NBC executives, no take-him-to-the-woodshed meetings at 30 Rock, MSNBC’s home. “We didn’t get a single call” from the brass, O’Donnell says, a sly smile breaking across his lips.

The non-reaction bespeaks either the network’s tolerance for self-embarrassment or O’Donnell’s critical importance to MSNBC.

Wow. The experts at creating straw men to knock them down, the Washington Post (you’ve seen the ridiculous “5 myths” crap from them right?), is now putting the absolute failure of a commentator that is Lawrence O’Donnell on a pedestal because NBC didn’t respond to him criticizing Trump??

The Washington Post is quickly becoming supermarket tabloid material. News Flash WaPo, EVERYONE is already criticizing Donal Trump. It was a show boat move on his part. He never intended to run. We all got that months ago.

Granted, the Post did publish it on Friday when everyone’s busy doing everything other than reading news. It still doesn’t hide that absolute bias that lives within the halls of the Post.

Condoleeza Rice Talks About Iraq and Bin Laden’s Death

On Thursday, Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice sat down with Lawrence O’Donnel on “The Last Word” and she honestly, got the last word. O’Donnell was skewered on point-after-point on Iraq as his lack of journalistic integrity came to the forefront. The total segment was 15 minutes long, more than eleven and a half minutes were spent on the war.

Lawrence started the Iraq war segment out saying that Bush made “huge mistakes”. Impartiality and balance apparently no concer.  Then again, it is MSNBC.

Part One: Bin Laden’s Death

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Part Two: Iraq War

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Condoleeza Rice handled O’Donnell with deft precision. And as O’Donnell tweeted, “Condi Rice just told me I’m a terrible interviewer. You decide at 8:00 pm ET tonight. #condoleezzarice #lastword@lawrence” – I agree.

Canadian’s Keep Ban on “False News” – MSNBC Loses Last Hope

Last week, the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CTRC) killed a decade old inquiry into whether the long-time ban against false or misleading news should stand.

Despite a misleading (a.k.a. false?) publication on HuffPo, The original request to review the policy came from a parliamentary committee more than ten years ago, not the current Conservative Prime Minister.

Indeed, the broadcast regulator now says it never wanted the regulatory change in the first place and was only responding to orders from a parliamentary committee.[1]

I’m not Canadian so if they want to have government-approved drivel blown up their butts on a regular basis, more power to them! That’s what the Chinese and Iranians get to watch.

I prefer having the choice to ignore Chris Mathews, Rachel Maddow et al. And judging by MSNBC’s ratings, so do almost all Americans that don’t live in the mother’s house or live off the government.

MSNBC might have done very well in Canada, but we will never know – thanks to the CTRC.

Sources:
[1]False News Proposal Killed by CRTC –  http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2011/02/25/crtc-false-news.html

Activist Judges: A Closer look.

    Last week, when  Florida’s Judge Vinson shredded President Obama’s vaunted Socialized Medicine Healthcare Law, he was called an “Activist Judge.”  The Obama administration was caught in a shell game when they originally campaigned to create Obamacare, as it is widely known. They called the mandated fees for Obamacare taxes at one point, and later on argued that it wasn’t a tax. Tax or no tax, fees or mandated charges, you cannot, and never will be allowed to force the American people to buy a service or product, especially one cooked up by Rule of law/Constitution- ignoring Liberals. At the root of it all is the Unconstitutionality of  forcing Americans to purchase any product, whether it be the favored Che and Mao t-shirts the radical leftists are so proud to wear, or Healthcare insurance. Judge Vinson did his homework, before this ruling and did it well. He  did not take this responsibility lightly as he stated after his ruling that said the individual mandate in Obamacare is illegal , and since that becomes null and void, the whole Socialized Medicine house of cards comes tumbling down with it. Here is his Judge Vinson’s statement:

““Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications,” Vinson writes.

   As many expected this will go to the Supreme Court of the United States to be decided. Judge Vinson made a very calculated and clear ruling on forcing Americans to buy Government run healthcare insurance: It is against The Rule of Law. While Judge Vinson has a very long  history of fair and just interpretations of U.S  laws and our Constitutional rights and protections, parts of our society, and even our very own President came out and labeled this honorable protector of  all Americans and our freedoms as a “Political Activist Judge.”  That tactic is right out of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals,” the companion booklet of  “The Communist Manifesto,” which teaches radicals how to overthrow a government to insert Socialism/Communism. Labeling Judge Vinson an Activist Judge right away to further promote Obamacare and Socialism in  America falls right under rule 13* from Mr. Alinsky:

“13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…

     “…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’
     “One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)”

 

  So there we see the true reason Liberal Democrats, agenda-serving Leftits Media puppets, and even our very own President Barack Hussein Obama deemed it important to label this honorable Judge Vinson as some kind of extreme activist unworthy of the bench. Herr Goebbels, the Propaganda Minister of another era would be proud of this tactic. I find it disgusting and a serious offense to America and The Rule of law. Judge Vinson has no history of Judicial activism what-so-ever ! 

When looking for actual Activist Judges today, we need to look no further than the very controversial and radical 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court just slapped down five of their misguided, illegal, radical activist-laden rulings in a row recently. As reported in an article over at FoxNews.com,** we see actual proof of Judicial activism:

“The Supreme Court may be sending a message to one of the country’s most liberal appeals courts, unanimously overturning five consecutive cases out of the 9th Circuit in less than a week”

“That’s an indication this court is way out of the mainstream,” said Kent Scheidegger, legal director for the California-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. “They’re getting impatient with them. They just keep coming back with this stuff.” 

In a Jan. 19 reversal, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the 9th Circuit committed a “clear error” by overturning the murder conviction in the case of a Sacramento man. The Supreme Court accused the circuit of having “failed to accord the required deference” to the state court’s decision — in other words, the 9th Circuit horned in on the state’s business when it shouldn’t have.  Kennedy accused the circuit of demonstrating “judicial disregard” for “sound and established principles.” (emphasis mine)

  With this very important information showing the activist Judges within the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals malfeasance, people should be asking why our President and Liberal Democrats refuse to label  them as Judicial Activists ? Oh, wait, could that be because they support their Liberal agenda? As Sarah Palin would say: “You betcha! ”  How about the so-called Mainstream Media here ? If the MSM doesn’t want Americans calling them leftist puppets, why do they refuse to call out the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ? The following networks need to answer that question: MSNBC, CNN , CBS, ABC, NBC. I won’t hold my breath waiting for that answer, but until I get one, the before-mentioned groups willl be referred to as Liberal Puppets, Obama-sheep, and all around  dangerous propagandists lacking any form of unbiased Journalistic integrity they show themselves to be today! Clear enough ? Lay off of Honorable American Judges like Roger Vinson and do some real reporting on the true “Activist Judges” in America today.  As far as President Obama and his leftist propaganda minions trying to label Judge Vinson as an activist with exactly zero basis for it, save your breath, as we no longer believe you any more than we desire your Socialized medicine that you are trying to force upon us using the Alinsky tactics mentioned above.

      In 2012, lets remember that every Democratic Senator just voted against the stated demands of the American people that Obamacare be repealed. If that doesn’t tell people who needs to be fired for ignoring the true wishes of the people, I don’t know what does ! That isn’t the actions of true representatives of the people, that is the action of self-serving Tyrants. Remember them in 2012.

 

*http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm

** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/02/hint-supreme-court-rejects-rulings-row-west-coast-bench/

Crazy Times: MSNBC Settles on “Lean Forward” for new Tagline

So the powers that be at MSNBC have chosen a new tagline, “Lean Forward.” And they’re introducing it today. How original! That must have been one heck of a focus group that swooned over that bit of marketing excellence! I guess we can dispense with the legacy “Assume the Position,” aka ATP, which also involves leaning forward – though probably to a greater degree than what the MSNBC wizards contemplate. And let us not forget that all those drones who are Assuming the Position have likely done it repeatedly in the past – which fact contributes to another disease of the joints – BOHICA – Bend Over, Here It Comes Again! A guy could get whiplash from all the leaning forward, ATPing, and BOHICAing going on.

As a commenter on Hot Air pointed out upon hearing the exciting news “I would have thought their new motto would be ‘MSNBC, Last place is still a place.’”

Another Hot Air denizen went a step further:

I’ve got a few promotional ideas for their line-up. Free of charge.

Lean Forward Dylan Ratigan Puts the Lotion on the Skin

Lean Forward Rachel Maddow Needs to Check You for Ticks

Lean Forward Ed Schultz is Coming Down the Hallway

Lean Forward Andrea Mitchell Doesn’t Look Any Younger

Lean Forward Chris Matthews is Here For Your Reach-around, Mr. President

Lean Forward Keith Olbermann, But Not Within 100 Yards of Contessa Brewer. And Stop Calling and Leaving the Notes. I Know it’s You.

–  David Combs

Lean Forward

Phil Griffin is the President of MSNBC. It is while under his expert tutelage that Lean Forward has risen to such prominence. According to Griffin, the tagline “defines us and defines our competition.” Well, I don’t know about the competition but it certainly defines MSNBC! One would imagine that by executive decree, the entire staff will now assemble in the employee lounge for some communal Leaning Forward prior to the morning news. Will Rachel Maddow participate? How about Chris Matthews? This could bring a whole new meaning to Hardball. At least we now know what causes the syndrome. The visuals are stunning. Keith Olbermann leans forward – falls flat on his face. Film at 11.

Even the liberals are mocking MSNBC’s new tagline. For evidence, I submit the following tidbits of wisdom gleaned from reader comments on the Huffington Post:

“You are now tuned into MSNBC…grab your ankles, nonsense will be forced upon you…”

“Great slogan, but if they (opinions) are earned could we take them away too? What does one have to do to get a thrill up his leg? How does one earn that?”

“How about ‘Bend Over.’ That’s how I feel after watching Chris or Keith.”

“Lean Forward. Brilliant. /sarc”

“Nooooo!!! This needs to be axed right now before it’s too late! The Place For Politics was so great while this is horrible! Lean Forward?!? Imagine the double entendres that are going to follow this!”

See what I mean? The marketing geniuses at MSNBC appear to lack the minimum daily requirement of common sense. This whole entertainment bonanza reminds me of my days in journalism school when a professor, who just happened to be a former copy editor for the San Francisco Examiner proclaimed “You don’t have to have a dirty mind to be a good copy editor. But it helps!”

Bend Over, Here It Comes Again

BOHICA

My only regret is that I took up editorial writing instead of becoming a marketing writer. Imagine the money I could have raked in writing taglines like “Lean Forward.” Makes me want to cry, I’m so envious. Yes, sir, I prefer the 1099 option.

If Lean Forward won, just imagine the taglines they must have discarded:

  • Topple backwards.
  • Tilt.
  • Fall sideways.
  • Up yours!
  • Down the hatch!
  • The Spin Starts Here!

Okay, I’m slow, but I’m getting there. Considering the competition, Lean Forward is the best of the bunch. They had no choice.  As reported on www.fireandreamitchell.com this new MSNBC slogan is no joke.

“No seriously! This is MSNBC’s new slogan! No longer will it be ‘The Place for Politics.’ Either this is some sort of progressive type slogan or simply them hearkening back to the good ole days of the 1990s when Monica Lewinsky used to do this with Bill Clinton.”

I’m not kidding, that’s the quote! Unbelievable!

Assume The Position

Leaned a Bit Too Far Forward

Here are a few more reactions from the public, plucked at random off the web:

  • “The tagline ‘defines us and defines our competition…’ Their programming defines them. That is why they have relatively few viewers.”
  • “Lean Forward…and Reach Around.”
  • “Lean forward? A march to socialism is to lean backwards to proven failed policies worldwide! What morons!”
  • “News Flash for MSNBC: A new tag line won’t help your ratings.”
  • “That’s it? Really!?! Weak. So very, very weak.”
  • “Lean forward = bend over. Are we supposed to take that as an order?”
  • “The tagline, “Lean Forward,” will be publicly unveiled Tuesday, at the start of a two-year advertising campaign intended to raise awareness of the channel among viewers, advertisers and distributors.” Good luck with that.”
  • “Lean forward, grab your ankles, and you’ll be prepared for a dose of what the left has in store for all of us…”
  • “LOL. Lean forward and change the channel to Fox.”
  • “If I had more internet skill I’d post the pictures of Obama “leaning forward” to bow to the Saudi King, the Japanese leader, etc. Perfect for their ads, ha ha ha.”
  • “Media Schadenfreude.”
  • “Sounds like the punchline to a dirty joke.”
  • “Lean forward? In other words, unbalanced. Definitely not fair and balanced.”
  • “IF MSNBC was a legitimate news organization, they wouldn’t be “leaning” in ANY direction…”
  • “They can lean forward and kiss my A$$.”

I’ve got to cut this editorial short. I can’t take it anymore. I’m getting sick to my stomach. I’m going to the bathroom, gonna lean forward and take an Obama. There, I feel better already!

Dangerous Precursors to Censorship: Government Stepping In

During President Obama’s election bid, the fairness doctrine garnered some of the spotlight.  Conservatives warned that the doctrine would censor the media and filter it of any messages the administration did not agree with.  The liberals.. well, that’s what they were hoping would happen.

Liberal media is facing the end of an era.  The three-network liberal oligopoly that owned nightly news broadcasts for decades is serving fewer and fewer news consumers, the left-biased newspaper industry is losing papers one-after-another, liberal radio shows such as Air America have been falling off the dial due to lack of interest and MSNBC’s heavily left-leaning messaging is falling on deaf ears.  The most-obvious liberal mass-media outlet, MSNBC, is facing ratings shortfalls and they are not improving.  MSNBC’s viewership is one third of Fox News and losing ground constantly.  From Mediabsitro.com:

All MSNBC programming was down double digits compared to Q1 of ’09. Monday to Sunday, MSNBC’s primetime for the quarter was down -15% in Total Viewers compared to Q1 of ’09 (-22% demo). “Countdown” was down -26% in Total Viewers (-42% demo), and “Rachel Maddow” was down -25% (-38% demo).

America is a right-of-center country and it should be no surprise that they prefer messaging that is in-line with their core beliefs.  Unions, community organizations, and other liberal groups would prefer the old days of liberal networks and print media being the only mass-media available.  To push for a return, those groups are asking the FCC to censor what we see and hear.  It’s clear that these groups believe that people are too stupid to discern good news from hate speech and that the government will need to do that for them:

A coalition of more than 30 organizations argue in a letter to the FCC that the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news. .. The groups argue the Internet has made it harder for the public to separate the facts from bigotry masquerading as news..

Although MSNBC is an obvious underdog to other less-liberal TV news outlets, it’s still an outlet and has opinion shows to balance those of more Conservative programming.  NPR isn’t dead by any stretch of the imagination and offers some left-of-center programming in that medium – the far left find that NPR isn’t near left enough, ya’ can’t please everyone).  Why the need to label anything they disagree with as hate speech?  Because, that’s what Alinskey told them to do.

If one government assault on new media wasn’t enough, the Federal Trade Commission is chiming in.  Now why would so many in the government, led by those chosen by President Obama, all be working towards the same end?  Mull it over.

The FTC published a discussion memo which it hopes to lead discussions on how government policy could save the print media industry.  Even though the introduction tries to say that all forms of media are equal, the entire memo documents the plight of newspapers.

The memo has some strange motives.  In one section, the letter actually discounts the tactic of taking newspapers to an online only model:

..many newspapers still receive approximately 90% of their advertising revenues from print advertising, with somewhat less than 10% coming from online advertising. Print advertising revenues still account for more than half of newspapers’ revenues. Thus, even though, in theory, newspapers could move to online-only and save approximately 50% of their costs (due to printing and distribution), such a move would not make economic sense.

What a catastrophically misguided assessment that is.  If a newspaper went online only, their print advertising revenues should convert at better than a 0% rate.  Does this socialistic, self-preoccupied gang of over-thinkers really believe that a newspaper that goes online couldn’t get at least a small percentage of their local, online ad customers to pay for online exposure?  Secondly, that comment dictates that they would only gain savings from print and distribution.  What about a modern, non-office workforce?  Think of all the office space not necessary as journalists, editors, formatters, ad salespersons, etc all don’t need a desk.  Think how small the office would be, how furniture costs, computer, phone, electricity… one could go on.   This comment is meant to provide protection for the dearest of liberal special interests .. unions.  If newspapers go all online, newspapers will have little use for union labor, and a work-at-home workforce will be nearly impossible to organize.

Another questionable entry states that newspapers are struggling do to manpower issues:

Staff downsizing has caused significant losses of news coverage. For example, coverage of state houses and state perspectives on news from Washington, D.C. has declined, as has coverage of local government issues, foreign affairs, and specialty beats such as science and the arts.

Imagine how many journalists they could add if they didn’t have to afford those expensive unionized print and distribution employees.

Ultimately, liberal media realize that they need a government bail-out.  The free-market system isn’t working for them (the demand part).  If they need to abuse federal hate speech laws to get a hand-out, they have no problem with that at all.

Next the memo seeks to demonstrate how news media that has gone online has not been able to create a sustainable business model.

Although dozens of newly created online news sites have found sufficient funds to keep going through the early years of their existence, virtually no sites have yet found a sustainable business model that would allow them to survive without some form of funding from non-profit sources.

Well this article demonstrates that not only did a formerly print newspaper go online, it’s online arm is much more profitable:

The Wall Street Journal Online has 731,000 paid subscribers, up 5.2% from the previous quarter, at $84/year. Yes, that’s a $61.4 million annual revenue stream.

Of course, liberals aren’t even going to discuss the success of the Wall Street Journal, they don’t believe it matches their messaging.  Then again, that may be why it’s also successful.  Well, what about The Guardian in the U.K.?  It turned a profit in … 2006!  It is not impossible to create profitable online news content, it just requires that there is a market for your style of content.

Now that the memo has worked so hard to put it’s ill-conceived justifications, here come the brain-trust that is the FTC’s recommendations.

Thus, this speaker suggests amending the copyright laws to create a content license fee (perhaps $5.00 to $7.00) to be paid by every Internet Service Provider on eaaccount it provides. He suggests creating a new division of the Copyright Office, would operate under streamlined procedures and would collect and distribute these fees. Copyright owners who elect to participate would agree to periodically submit records of their digitized download records to the Copyright Office.

Sure, at first, the submission of digitized download records is only those who “elect to participate”.  What happens when the government sees the benefit in having everyone do this?  Not everyone wants big brother watching everything they do online.  Highly-critical Conservative media could well be silenced by fears that submitted critiques of the government may bring down the wrath of the U.S. Government.  It could limit the “fair-use” of copyright material as fears of accidentally stepping over some subjective line could bring lawsuits or worse if the content isn’t favorable to the government.

Another recommendation should be no real surprise, give more direct federal dollars (read: your money) to *drum roll* NPR:

Public radio and television should be substantially reoriented to provide significant local news reporting in every community served by public stations and their Web sites. This requires urgent action by and reform of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, increased congressional funding and support for public media news reporting, and changes in mission and leadership for many public stations across the country

In the same FTC memo, the point had just been made that these subsidies get too expensive and are unsustainable:

Since that time, the amount of subsidies for newspapers and periodicals has substantially decreased. According to some, if the federal government in 2008 had “devoted the same percentage of the Gross Domestic Product to press subsidies as it did in the early 1840s, it would have spent some $30 billion to spawn journalism.

Several of the remaining proposals are just ways for the greedy government elitists to get their hands on more money:

  • Tax credits for hiring journalists
  • Citizen news vouchers only payable to non-profit media sources
  • Journalism grants to universities
  • Increase the postal subsidies for newspapers – remember that $30 Billion umber a few paragraphs ago?  This was the subsidy that would have caused it.
  • Tax on airwaves – had to know this would come
  • Additional taxes on consumer electronics – not sure what my PS3 has to do with journalism..
  • Spectrum tax – a tax on the way they sell the airwaves they are already planning to tax – these guys have no limits
  • Advertising taxes
  • ISP-cell tax – I think this is a tax on mobile phone data plans

Giant surprise, they have proposed more taxes than good ideas.  Give the money to the government so they can fix private entities.  That’s been working.  These taxes are intended to allow the government to funnel more money into the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (e.g. NPR).  In fact, this whole memo is a brainstorming document for how the government can get left-leaning, union-fed news media to be popular again.

People are going to watch what they want to watch, read what they want to read, and as they become more informed, the majority are turning away from the.  This tactic is just another attempt to force-feed the public their viewpoint.  If readers, listeners and viewers believed their commentary, they wouldn’t be in trouble.

Recent Entries »