Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Hilarious health care question o' the day

 
EIB:

...Hillary had to loan herself money. Now, the question is, "Whose is it?" She's getting very testy about this. It's my money! It's my money! She's made about $6 million from her books. Her husband's made the rest of the money in the family, according to the financial disclosure forms and so forth.

Her staff, including the campaign manager... are now working without pay, and a reporter... asked her today, "Are your unpaid staff members getting health care coverage?" She dodged the question! ...I mean, this has gotta be stunning to these people to get questions like that from the [mainstream media] who they thought they had in the palm of their hands...

What's the emoticon for giggling?

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Zogby Polling Methodology

 
Tom Elia, writing at The New Editor:

Well, the Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll in California had Obama winning by 13 points over Clinton and Romney by 7 points over McCain.

As of 12:30AM Central Time, it looks like both Clinton and McCain won by more than 15%.

That's not good.

An inside glimpse into the Zogby backoffice may help explain.

Snake-eyes!

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Iran throws temper tantrum over Israel's new spy satellite

 
AFP reports that Iran feels angry, betrayed and post-menopausal over India's commercial launch of an Israel spy satellite last month.

...The satellite, blasted into orbit from southern India on January 21, is reported by the Israeli press to have the ability to see through clouds, carry out day and night all-weather imaging and will be used to spy on Iran's suspect nuclear programme.

"The Indian government says the issue is a technical and commercial one, but we hope that the matter can be considered from the point of view of protocol," Iran's ambassador to New Delhi, Sayed Mahdi Nabizadeh, told reporters.

"We hope that an independent and wise country like India will not give their space technology to launch any instruments of espionage. Our officials have expressed our point of view," he added...

In unrelated news, Iran also threatened (for the 702nd time -- *yawn*) to destroy Israel:

Ahmadinejad: Israel's 'days are numbered'... Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted the imminent collapse of Israel.

In a televised speech Wednesday from the port city of Bushehr, where Russia delivered the last of the uranium needed to start up Iran's first nuclear power plant, Ahmadinejad told Israel's friends to "stop supporting the Zionists, as [their] regime reached its final stage," according to news reports. "Accept that the life of Zionists will sooner or later come to an end."

"Abandon the filthy Zionist entity which has reached the end of the line... The ones who still support the criminal Zionists should know that the occupiers' days are numbered."

In also completely unrelated news, Iran is poised to attain offensive nuclear capabilities within 36 months, according to Israel's Mossad.

[Iran presents a danger not only due to its] nuclear weapons but also because of its influence on more imminent threats - such as Hamas, Hizbullah and Syria - according to an assessment presented to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee by Mossad head Meir Dagan Monday...

Iran is acting on two tracks, Dagan said, one towards the enrichment of uranium and the other towards manufacturing surface to surface missiles with large payloads... ...Syria and Hizbullah had studied the lessons of the Second Lebanon War and come to the conclusion that they cannot overpower Israel and contend with its far superior firepower. Therefore, he said, they were investing their energies in developing missiles to target the home front, which they had recognized as Israel's weak point.

Rockets and missiles are a more substantial threat than they were in the past," Dagan said. "Syria is upgrading its arsenal of surface to surface missiles, and the number of missiles and rockets it possesses today is twice the amount it had only two years ago..."

Trying to link all of these unrelated stories into a single, consistent thread is very, very difficult. Perhaps that explains why our beloved mainstream media hasn't bothered to explore this storyline.

Monday, January 28, 2008

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

The AP: willful accomplice in the run-up to idiocy

 
The Associated Press is marketing a new website by antiwar watchdog group Center for Public Integrity,, which lists "935 false statements" by President Bush and his administration during the run-up to war. The new site's headline reads Orchestrated Deception on the Path to War.

The Center's claim is galling on two fronts:
  • The group had no access to any classified documents, intelligence summaries, shared foreign intel, Presidential Daily Briefs, or similar material that would help them judge the veracity of the statements.
  • The group carefully restricted which persons could issue false statements (e.g., they had to be Republicans), ignoring the scores of Democrats who had access to the same information and made the same "false" claims.


"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"I never believed in the link between Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and Islamist terrorism," -- Madeline Albright, 2003


"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, 1998

"This war has been a grotesque mistake that has diminished our reputation in the world and has not made America safer." -- Nancy Pelosi, 2004


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, 2002

"[I]t is clear that the Administration's rhetoric played upon the well-founded fear of the American public about future acts of terrorism." -- Robert Byrd, 2003


"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, 2002

"Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one." -- Ted Kennedy, 2003.


"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, 2002

"The absolute cynical manipulation, deliberately cynical manipulation, to shape American public opinion and 69 percent of the people, at that time, it worked, they said 'we want to go to war'... [Saddam] wasn't going to attack us. He would've been isolated there... He would have been in control of that country but we wouldn't have depleted our resources preventing us from prosecuting a war on terror which is what this is all about." -- John Rockefeller, 2006


"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton, 1998

"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done... It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country." -- Bill Clinton, 2005


"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"He [Bush] betrayed this country! He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place." -- Al Gore, 2004


"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation." -- John Kerry, 2003

"Iraq was not a terrorist haven before the invasion... Iraq was not even close to the center of the War on Terror before the president invaded it." -- John Kerry, 2003

No party has changed course more often, more wrongly and with less commitment to the national security of the United States than the modern Democrat Party.

I think I'm going to summarize all of the false statements by the AP and the CPI and publish my own expose of their idiocy. Though I may need something more powerful than an Access database to track all of their fabrications.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Sponsor a journalist -- save a reporter today

 
Iowahawk's Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation on the national crisis in journalist violence has spawned a non-profit foundation and scores of shiny new posters.

Won't you please help? If we can save even one journalist, it will all have been worthwhile. Nothing tugs at my heart-strings like watching unemployed Los Angeles Times editors queued up in front of the soup kitchen.

Lemmings: the story of the Los Angeles Times

 
It happened again:

The Los Angeles Times fired its top editor after he rejected a management order to cut $4 million from the newsroom budget, 14 months after his predecessor was also ousted in a budget dispute, the newspaper said Sunday.

When they write the book on this debacle, I've got the cover.

Patterico has more.

Hat tip: BizzyBlog

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Hollywood refuses to be left behind

 
After the New York Times' expose of American vets who return from war only to turn into cold-blooded murderers... and the AP's story of American vets who return only to become homeless... Hollywood has but one choice.

Certain to be coming soon to a theater near you.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

HuffPo's Hillary Clinton Sleaze Database

 
I don't frequently recommend articles over at the Stuffington Roast, but Paul Loeb's latest ("Hillary Clinton's Sleaze Parade") is worth the time. Loeb has assembed a veritable database of sleaze related to the Hillary campaign, including:

* Hired Burston-Marsteller's CEO, the PR firm known for its union-busting activities

* Received donations from Rupert Murdoch and massive amounts of dough from defense, oil and health care companies

* Accepted money from fugitive Norman Hsu, tainted database guru Vin Gupta, alleged bribery specialist Dickie Scruggs, the Tan family (international sweatshop owners), and Peter Paul

* Used mailers that intentionally distorted Barack Obama's positions on abortion-related legislative votes

* Through proxies, worked the court system to discourage participation by voters inclined towards Obama and Edwards, most recently on the Vegas Strip

* In various settings, refused to answer hard questions while planting questions repeatedly

The list goes on and on and on.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Ain't capitalism grand?

 
The Journal has a fascinating story of a man who had a really, really good 2007.

Hedge fund manager John Paulson pulled down an estimated $3 billion last year ($4 billion, according to some accounts) betting that banks had done a poor job underwriting real estate loans. He correctly figured that the valuations of real-estate investment vehicles like CDOs (collateralized debt obligations) were vastly overblown. The result for his investors? One of Paulson's funds returned 590% in '07.

For those who complain about "income inequality," I pose a simple question. Would it be better for a Saudi Arabian prince or a Chinese General to have made those risky wagers? Or is it better for a smart American to have created a successful investment firm and returned incredible results to his investors?

Income inequality is the fantastic byproduct of free-market capitalism... and those who oppose it would do well to move to Cuba to immerse themselves in an alternative model. In fact, the more income inequality, the better. Bill Gates pulled down tens of billions of dollars by creating Microsoft, and thereby helped make the U.S. a tech behemoth in the process.

Of course, no one tell Paul Krugman any of this. He's not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed, so it's bound to confuse him.

Update: In October, Paulson also gave $15 million to the Center for Responsible Lending, which assists families facing foreclosure.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Make big money in match-stick repair (and TV news)!

 
If I told you that:

* only 19.6% of Americans believe most news media reporting, down from 27.4% in '03..
* that 86% believed the media attempts to influence public policy, up from 77%...
* and that Americans think the New York Times and NPR are roughly four times more liberal than conservative...

Would you believe it?

That's what a recent national survey showed. Suitaby Flip has the details.

Oh. I forgot to mention that the most trusted name in news is Fox News (27.0%), followed by CNN (14.6%), NBC News (10.90%), ABC News (7.0%), CBS News (6.8%), MSNBC (4.0%) and PBS(3.0%). As recently as 2003, CNN led Fox News on "trust most for accurate reporting" 23.8% to 14.6%.

Yet another Clinton fraud?

 
Newsbusters reports that the Clinton Machine may have pulled off another scam.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign stop was interrupted Monday when two men stood in the crowd and began screaming, "Iron my shirt!" during one of her final appearances before the New Hampshire primary... Clinton, a former first lady running to become the nation's first female president, laughed at the seemingly sexist protest that suggested a woman's place is doing the laundry and not running the country.

"Ah, the remnants of sexism — alive and well," Clinton said to applause in a school auditorium.

It turns out that the protesters work for Boston station WBCN 104.1 FM and were promoting a local show.

You know, this might make my "Top 12 Hillary Fabrications list."

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Will Democrats determine the Republican nomination?

 
EIB offers a sobering insight into the nomination process:

...McCain and Huckabee are feverishly trying to get Romney out now, as soon as they can, and this is why they are being vicious in their attacks on Romney.

...the states that allow independents and even Democrats to vote in their Republican primaries are not indicative of the Republican Party, which is why McCain and Huckabee have shots in them. McCain and Huckabee are winning these early states, where Republicans are outnumbered. It's not Republicans; it's not conservatives in majority who were electing Huckabee or McCain, so far, voting for them.

...This is key to understanding, and it's fascinating because Romney figured Iowa and New Hampshire would launch him. Now he's gotta go to Michigan, and he's gotta go to Nevada, and then everybody's gotta go to South Carolina. So it's fascinating to me, folks. Here we have Republican primaries in which Democrats and independents are determining our winners!

...[Now Romney] will precisely not get out until [after] Super Tuesday because the real conservative voices in terms of the American people have not been heard! It's independents and Democrats who have given victories to Huckabee and McCain so far. It was Romney who won a majority of Republican votes in New Hampshire. But they were outnumbered by all the other people that could cross over and vote from whatever party or no party. So Romney's not going to get out. His strategy is to wait 'til Republican conservatives actually start voting here, in these primaries, and they haven't yet, in terms of a majority, and it's not going to be the case in Michigan, either...

Here's hoping Romney remains in it for the long haul.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Digg, CBS Interactive team up for political coverage

 
CNet informs us that Digg and CBS have teamed up to provide online coverage of the 2008 election.

Through this partnership, the recognizable "Digg buttons" will be featured on CBSNews.com articles and videos that pertain to the election. In return, Digg's election-related headlines will be displayed throughout CBSNews.com.


In unrelated news, CBS is reporting that Ron Paul was just elected the 44th President of the United States.

Quick Takes

 
Clinton boo-boo

Dan Riehl:


You need to appreciate Democrat politics to really understand how significant this could become, even beyond Hillary if she gets the nomination. Video here. It sounds like Obama's camp is going to run with it and it could destroy Hillary in South Carolina...

"Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," Clinton said. "It took a president to get it done."

...As far as political instincts go, Hillary apparently just doesn't have them. Playing down the role of King in the Civil Rights movement while heading into South Carolina next week is simply dumb...

I forget. Which state was Hillary's "firewall state"?

Friday, January 4, 8PM Cable viewers:

FOXNEWS O'REILLY: 3,019,000
ALL OTHERS: 2,958,000
  CNN COOPER 915,000
  MSNBC OLBOREMANN 845,000
  CNNHN GRACE 699,000
  MSNBC HARDBALL 499,000

People must really love their faux news. Or perhaps the faux news is exactly what viewers have shunned. Ever consider that, Keith Pelosi-Schumer?

Is Norman Hsu out of prison yet?

Karen Tumulty at Time writes that Hillary's cash position is running dangerously low (hat tip: PrairiePundit).

"...by every measure, I hear they are in a real financial crunch," says one prominent fundraiser. "Here's the dilemma: You have a situation where there clearly is a full court press to raise more money, but considering the state of decline of the campaign, there's a real question of whether people are going to want to give. It's more than just raising money; you've got to give people a sense of potential."

...One reason for the new drive to raise cash quickly is the fact that Clinton spent lavishly on what turned out to be a debacle in Iowa. Numbers circulating among fundraisers — but not confirmed by the campaign — suggest that the campaign may have as little as $15 million to $25 million left on hand.

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Line o' the day: Keep your head on a swivel, Nancy Benac

 
Gateway Pundit wins our oh-so-prestigious Line o' the Day award.

Nancy Benac of the Associated Press may want to sleep over at a friend's house tonight after this pieceon the Clintons...

In a presidential race where the Democratic candidates are competing as agents of change, Hillary Rodham Clinton's most reliable campaign prop is something of a political relic — her husband.

The former president was at her side to help put the best face on her third-place finish Thursday in Iowa, and he was beside her again when dawn broke the next day on the final push to Tuesday's New Hampshire primary... "I was never more proud of Hillary in all the days we've been together and all the days of this campaign than when she gave that speech in Iowa," the ex-president told New Hampshire voters.

No loyal spouse would say any less.

..."Senator Clinton needs to make this campaign about her vision, her plans and her strengths," says Brazile... The candidate's husband, meanwhile, tends to ramble on about himself.

[and] since when did Bill Clinton become a "loyal spouse"?

Apparently, Nancy's never heard the term 'Arkancide' before.

In 1992, the LA Times reported:

[Clinton friend and state medical examiner Dr. Fahmy] Malak's controversial rulings include:

* ...On June 28, 1985, Raymond P. Allbright, 50, of Mountain Home was found in his yard dead of gunshot wounds. Allbright had been arrested the night before on charges of theft. Malak ruled his death a suicide.

But Allbright had been shot five times; all five shots were in the chest. The weapon was a high-powered pistol. "We think," says Maggie Hall, Allbright's ex-wife, "he was murdered..."

* ...On Aug. 23, 1987, Kevin Ives, 17, and Don Henry, 16, were run over by a train near the town of Alexander. They had been lying squarely on the tracks. Malak ruled that they had been smoking marijuana and dozed off and had slept as the onrushing freight train bore down.

But a second autopsy indicated that Henry had been stabbed in the back, that Ives had been struck on the skull and that both boys probably had been placed on the tracks unconscious, maybe already dead.

A grand jury overruled Malak: The boys had been murdered...

Keep your head on a swivel, Nancy.

Illustration: Lil' Freeper

Saturday, January 05, 2008

Create your own letter to the New York Times!

 
Matthew Sheffield, writing at Newsbusters, introduces us to the New York Times' favorite letter writer: faux Republican Henry Lowenstein.

..."lifelong Republican" Henry A. Lowenstein, ...has managed to get 20 different letters published in the New York Times since 2003, a remarkable feat when you consider that the Times (by its own admission) receives around 1,000 letters a day and prints only 15 on its letters page. That means the odds of the average liberal person (the paper freely admits it favors left-wing letter writers) getting his or her letter printed are about 1.5 percent.

It's worse when you think of the numbers on a yearly scale. In the past five years, the Times has received approximately 1.8 million letters. It's printed 20 of Lowenstein's...

To help our readers get their letters printed in the Times, we offer the following easy-to-use template. Just follow the instructions, make your choices, send your letter in, and wait for the calls from friends and neighbors.

To the Editors:

As a lifelong Republican until the presidency of George W. Bush, I am:

(a) shocked and saddened
(b) ashamed and disgusted
(c) embarrassed and horrified
(d) nauseous and flatulent

by the loss of:

(a) civil rights
(b) personal liberty
(c) societal values
(d) Celine Dion

and the:

(a) general apathy
(b) stultifying morass
(c) decrepit morals
(d) fiscal leprosy

that this country has sunk into. As I travel around the world and speak to peoples of all races, religions and social standing, it is painfully obvious that we have become a:

(a) global pariah.
(b) murderous imperialistic regime.
(c) 21st century version of the Deathstar.
(d) thuggish gang of Crusaders and Jews.

We have allowed this administration to:

(a) lie, cheat, break the law, and to break its sacred oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
(b) send "disloyal" journalists to concentration camps and execute scores of Hollywood celebrities
(c) serve rubbery fried calimari and stale weiner-dogs at White House receptions.
(d) fondle interns in the White House, sell missile secrets to the Chinese, pardon terrorists, and fail to defend America.

As we go forward into 2008 I remain confident that America will elect a president who will return us to

(a) our precious values and help us take back the moral high ground
(b) the Internet boom, Y2K, the USS Cole, the first World Trade Center explosion and the Khobar Towers
(c) the days of the Andrews Sisters, the '57 Cadillac, and the Brooklyn Dodgers
(d) legal bikini Jello wrestling on free TV

from which we can lead the world. The true greatness of America is that we will probably survive eight years and two so-called election victories by G. W. Bush.

Henry A. Loweinstein, New York

Hat tip: LGF's cool new feature -- 'Spinoff Links'

Friday, January 04, 2008

More proof that the Lancet "Study" is birdcage liner

 
Remember the "Lancet Study"?

This was the controversial report, released in 2006, that claimed over 4 kazillion jillion Iraqi civilians had died at the hands of American troops. Or something like that.

As the London Times noted in 2007, Lancet refused to release the data used to fuel the study. So there was absolutely no way to validate or refute their assertions.

Gateway Pundit spotlights the latest Lancet-debunking news:

The powerful and revered Iraqi spiritual leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani issued a statement in September blasting the foreign press for, "Exaggerating about the reports of deaths and explosions and depicting them in a way as if tribal war is underway in Iraq." It was the first time that the Ayatollah attacked the foreign press.

But it probably won't be the last time.

Today, The National Journal dismantles this bogus study further:

Three weeks before the 2006 midterm elections gave Democrats control of Congress, a shocking study reported on the number of Iraqis who had died in the ongoing war. It bolstered criticism of President Bush and heightened the waves of dread -- here and around the world -- about the U.S. occupation of Iraq...

...Over the past several months, National Journal has examined the 2006 Lancet article... probed the problems of estimating wartime mortality rates; and interviewed the authors and their critics... NJ has identified potential problems with the research that fall under three broad headings: 1) possible flaws in the design and execution of the study; 2) a lack of transparency in the data, which has raised suspicions of fraud; and 3) political preferences held by the authors and the funders, which include George Soros's Open Society Institute.

George Soros? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!

Update: LGF: it's the final nail in the coffin for the Lancet pile of manure "study".

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Excerpt from the Today Show's interview with Hillary Clinton

 
Here's an excerpt from the Today Show's softball interview with Hillary Clinton. Actually, the questions weren't softballs, they were whiffle-balls. Made of cardboard. Wet cardboard.

"Up close, the Senator and First Lady is natural, confident and warm."

Question: "Who are you, Hillary?..."

Question: "...At your core. At your very core."

Question: "Who are you and why do you believe you would be a good President..."

Question: "...and why do you even want to be President?

Answer: "I want to be President, because ---"

Answer: "-- at my core, I am a... a... ar r a.. a.. a... uhrg..."

Answer: "YOU DARE QUESTION MY MOTIVES, MORTAL? ALL THAT YOU KNOW, ALL THAT YOU DREAM, VERILY, ALL OF HUMANITY NEARS ITS END. FOR THE RIVER COCYTUS HAS BEGUN TO BOIL AND THE ACHERON HAS FLOODED ITS BANKS. THESE ARE THE SIGNS OUR MASTER'S RETURN IS NIGH.

THE LAMENTATIONS AND WOE OF MANKIND WILL SOON REACH A BLOODY CRESCENDO!

BOW YOUR HEAD, MORTAL, BOW YOUR HEAD FOR BEELZEBUB!!
"

Question: "Hillary? Hillary? Are you okay?"

Answer: "...uhm... urp... be- because I am an American, through and through..."


Answer: "...and I am so grateful for the opportunity, for all of the opportunities and blessings that I've had."

Hat tips: Dan Riehl and Larwyn