ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

ConWebWatch: home | archive/search | about | primer | shop

Saturday, November 24, 2012
NewsBusters Finds Bias In Fake News
Topic: NewsBusters

The Media Research Center is so obsessed with uncovering "liberal media bias," it's trying to find it in fictional news.

A Nov. 20 NewsBsuters post by Ryan Robertson complains about a story at the satirical news site The Onion, which features how "8-year-old Palestinian boy Walid Suleiman expressed both joy and astonishment Monday that he has yet to be killed in an Israeli military attack." Robertson's complaint? "At no point in the short piece does it reference the terrorist organization Hamas, the death and destruction they cause, or Hamas terrorists' penchant for firing rockets from locations that are full of innocent civilians."

Um, Ryan? It's fake news. Why waste precious MRC resources complaining about fake news?

(Of course, given the $5 million the MRC blew on an spectacularly ineffective anti-media campaign this year, maybe those resources aren't all that precious.)


Posted by Terry K. at 11:44 PM EST
WND Pushes False Voter Fraud Claim
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Here's one of the key pieces of evidence that President obama stole the election, according to WorldNetDaily:

  • On WND's "big list of voter fraud reports," it's stated that "in one Ohio county – widely considered ground zero for the election – Obama received 106,258 votes from 98,213 eligible voters – an impossible 108 percent of the vote."
  • A Nov. 12 article by Bob Unruh uncritically repeats a claim in a petition on the White House website that "In one county alone in Ohio, which was a battleground state, President Obama received 106,258 votes … but there were only 98,213 eligible voters. It’s not humanly possible to get 108 percent of the vote."
  • Andrea Shea King suggests that an right-wing blog item headlined "Good News: Obama Won County in Ohio with 108% Voter Registration" documents evidence of voter fraud.
  • WND editor Joseph Farah asserted that "In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108 percent of the voters registered."

Just one little problem: It's not true.

The Columbus Dispatch reports that the county has been identified in some places as Wood County, Ohio -- where, in fact, 61,967 Wood County voters cast a ballot on Nov. 6 out of 104,461 registered voters.

WND has never offered evidence that the Ohio over-voting claim has any basis in fact, nor has it bothered to issue a correction for this clearly false claim.

Just consider this yet another reason why nobody believes WND.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:29 AM EST
Friday, November 23, 2012
Newsmax's Walsh: Most Mexican Immigrants Are From 'Lower Economic and Uneducated Class'
Topic: Newsmax

James Walsh just doesn't get Hispanics.

Fresh off advocating a return to migrant-worker programs once called "legalized slavery"  as a way for Republicans to attract Hispanic votes, immigrant-basher Walsh is back at it in a Nov. 21 Newsmax column in which he continues to not understand why Hispanics didn't support the Republican for president:

Hispanics voters, particularly the Mexican majority, proved to be a paradox in the 2012 election. The image of Hispanics as family and faith oriented, hard-working, entrepreneurial, conservative economically, supporters of education, and opponents of legalizing drugs was debunked at the polls.

Pre-election surveys showed Hispanic voters more concerned about jobs, the weak economy, education for their children, and healthcare than they were about immigration; yet they voted for four more years of President Barack Obama.

Republicans need principled politicians such as former Gov. Jeb Bush (left) and Sen. Marco Rubio to sell U.S. values to Hispanic voters.

By doing so, they found themselves supporting attacks on religion and promoting gay marriage, abortion, legalized marijuana, fiscal irresponsibility, and “revenge” voting.

Of course, a vote for President Obama's re-election does not equal "revenge voting" -- outside of Walsh's head, that is.

Walsh then purports to offer this explanation of Hispanics in America, in which he notes that the majority of them are "the lower economic and uneducated class" from Mexico:

To understand the Mexican voter, Republicans need to look at Mexico’s history. Mexico was “discovered” by the Spaniards in 1519 and conquered by 1521. After three centuries of Spanish dominance, the Mexican people were led in an 1812-13 revolt by a Catholic priest who was later executed by the Spanish authorities.

For the next 120 years, Mexico suffered political revolutions, assassinations, internecine fighting, and turmoil. In 1857, a radical liberal Constitution was pushed through by President Benito Juarez, a Mestizo (of the uneducated class).

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, nihilistic leaders like Juarez, Villa, and Zapata led the Mestizos in attacks on business, military, and “rich” communities as part of class warfare that included attacks on religion, especially the Catholic Church.

Historically, Mexico has had three economic and social classes, Mestizos — Indians or indigenous people, and the lower economic and uneducated class; Criollos — those of mixed Indian and Spanish/European blood and the middle class; and Peninsulares — pure Spanish/ European blood (white) and the business and land-owning class. The majority of illegal aliens entering the United States are Mestizos.

As members of the lower economic class, they favor the Democrats who offer welfare programs, strong government intervention in economic affairs, and progressive taxation of the “rich.” These immigrants see Republicans as elitists (like the Peninsulares) who favor the “rich” over the “poor”— a viewpoint influenced by Mexican history.

In contrast, Mexican-Americans who have lived in the United States for decades and centuries favor the Republican political model.

Walsh goes on to write, "One Hispanic said, 'We vote with our hearts,' and another proclaimed, 'We own America. They owe us.'" Who is this "one Hispanic," where did Walsh find this purpoted quote, and how did Walsh decide that he speaks for all Hispanics in America? Walsh doesn't explain.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:39 PM EST
Updated: Monday, January 7, 2013 11:50 PM EST
WND Ignores Explanation For 'Inexplicable' RNC Consent Decree
Topic: WorldNetDaily

In trying to push the sour-grapes idea of voter fraud contributing to President obama's re-election, Bob Unruh writes in a Nov. 20 WorldNetDaily article:

Voting machines suspiciously defaulting to Barack Obama? Buses loaded with strangers appearing at polling stations? Even ballots turning out 100 percent for one candidate in precinct reports?

In short, suspicions of vote fraud?

That’s too bad, because a race-based consent decree negotiated by Democrats against the Republican National Committee a generation ago still has tied the RNC’s hands, and GOP officials could be cited for contempt – or worse – if they try to make sure American elections are clean.

Impossible?

No. Fact.

The case is the Democratic National Committee vs. the Republican National Committee, originally from 1982.

Democrats alleged Republicans were trying intimidate minority voters in New Jersey and brought the legal action. The RNC, inexplicably, decided to agree to a consent decree before a Democrat-appointed judge rather than fight the claims.

Even though Unruh links to a summary the ruling in question, he apparently didn't bother to read it, for it contains an explanation. According to the JudicialReview.com summary Unruh links to:

During the 1981 New Jersey gubernatorial election, the DNC, the New Jersey Democratic State Committee (“DSC”), Virginia L. Peggins, and Lynette Monroe brought an action against the RNC, the New Jersey Republican State Committee (“RSC”), John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado, alleging that the RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in an effort to intimidate them in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“VRA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. The RNC allegedly created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters and, then, including individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls. The RNC also allegedly enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.

Unruh seems not to understand that voter intimidation does not equal what he calls "ballot security activities." By that same definition, the New Black Panthers were engaged in ballot security activities" in 2008, though Unruh would certainly never call it it that. It can also be argued that the RNC's conceding to a consent decree is a tacit admission of wrongdoing.

Further, the consent decree doesn't actually prevent the RNC from engaging in post-election "voter fraud" challenges -- it simply prevents them from engaging in voter intimidation and suppression. From the JudicialReview.com summary:

To settle the lawsuit, the RNC and RSC entered into the Consent Decree at issue here. The RNC and RSC agreed that they would:

[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:

(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;

(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;

(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;

(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.

Also, fact that there were "ballots turning out 100 percent for one candidate in precinct reports" is not "voter fraud." As we've noted, many of those precincts in which everyone voted for Obama are nearly exclusively black and Democrat.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:49 PM EST
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Now That Election's Over, MRC's Bozell Criticizes Romney (And, For Some Reason, Transgenders)
Topic: Media Research Center

The election is over, and Mitt Romney lost. Time for Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell to do some Monday morning quarterbacking in his Nov. 21 column:

So what went wrong? Let me add my analysis. Three words: Message. Messenger. Messaging.

The messenger was flawed, unwilling to take risks, unprepared for the Obama political wrecking machine, left dazed and confused Election Night.

If inept messaging could be deemed a felony, this campaign was a crime against humanity. I've never seen worse commercials more badly placed on the wrong media than this. In Virginia, we had to suffer through 10 gazillion TV ads attacking China for stealing American technology. China?

More can and should be written about the messenger and his messaging, but let's concentrate on his message. Or the lack thereof, which was the fatal problem.

The message was there in black and white. If only Mitt Romney had embraced Reagan's vision and philosophy and record and pitted it against Obama's on all counts.

Then apropos of nothing, Bozell changes the subject and decides to take a whack at transgenders:

I write all this on the Transgender Day of Remembrance. The what you say? Yes, you heard me correctly. You see, "Transgender Day of Remembrance is commemorated each year on Nov. 20 to memorialize those we have lost as a result of hate and violence all too often faced by transgender people."

Who am I quoting, you ask? It must be some extremist nut job, you say. Actually, that's true, but let me continue. "I invite you to the Secretary's Conference Room ... for a special discussion with three transgender appointees doing tremendous [sic] throughout the Administration. Deputy Chief of Staff Mary Beth Maxwell will moderate an interactive discussion with Chloe Schwenke, U.S. Agency for International Development, Amanda Simpson, U.S. Department of Defense and our own Dylan Orr, Office of Disability Employment, U.S. Department of Labor." The memo is signed by one Ana M. Ma, chief of staff at Barack Obama's Department of Labor.

It was all such low hanging fruit for Mitt Romney.

We did not realize that hating transgenders qualifies as "low hanging frult," unless Bozell was attempting a horrible pun.

Bozell's mini-rant stems from a Nov. 20 article at his CNSNews.com. Bozell's MRC has regularly freaked out about perceived transgender "propaganda" as part of its anti-gay agenda.


Posted by Terry K. at 8:44 PM EST
WND's Massie Examines "Bitter Black Mindset,' Ignores His Own
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Mychal Massie's Nov. 18 WorldNetDaily column carries the headline "Understanding the bitter black mindset." One might think (or hope) that he was writing about himself -- after all, his unhinged Obama derangement and eagerness to spread lies more than demonstrate that he's one of the most bitter and hateful black men in America.

Alas, that is not to be be. Instead, Massie ponders why "Reasonable minds are often perplexed as to why many blacks are bitter and angry at society in general and conservatives specifically." And he express his bitterness at Obama yet again:

I would bet a box of Altadis Behike cigars that 95 percent of the number of blacks who voted for Obama cannot name one policy that explains their support. That’s because the color of his skin and his code-speak (which receive infused credibility because of his wife) trump character and good governance.

This is something whites – and white so-called conservatives specifically – will never be able to overcome until they approach these people with the truth and not apologies. The strength of the truth must be allowed to stand on its own, absent of vapid, guilt-ridden apologies.

Massie might want to actually try a little self-analysis sometime -- and explain to us all why  he is so dripping with bitterness and pathological derangment against President Obama and his wife.


Posted by Terry K. at 6:30 PM EST
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
NEW ARTICLE -- Ronald Kessler: A Return to Romney-Fluffing
Topic: Newsmax
Following his dalliance with Donald Trump, The Newsmax writer goes back to his first presidential love, Mitt Romney. Read more >>

Posted by Terry K. at 11:18 PM EST
MRC Falsely Ties Soros to Walmart Strike
Topic: Media Research Center

Writing about a planned strike by Walmart employees on Black Friday, a Nov. 21 MRC Business & Media Institute item by Mike Ciandella states that "according to The Daily Caller, the activist group MoveOn.org, which is funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros may help boost their numbers. MoveOn e-mailed subscribers to encourage them to join the protestors on Black Friday."

But the Daily Caller article that Ciandella cites has issued a correction:

An earlier version of this story connected the liberal financier George Soros with MoveOn.org. Soros was a major contributor to one of MoveOn’s political organizations more than six years ago, but does not appear connected to its current Wal-Mart protests.

Will Ciandella issue a correction as well? Don't count on it.


Posted by Terry K. at 3:41 PM EST
Judson Phillips Doesn't Understand the Constitution (And Neither Does WND)
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Judson Philllips' Nov. 19 WorldNetDaily column was dedicated to the idea that President Obama could be kept from returning to office by Republicans boycotting the Electoral College, thus denying the quorum needed to convene:

And the best part – this is totally constitutional.

The 12th Amendment of the Constitution as well as Article II of the Constitution govern the Electoral College.

According to the 12th Amendment, for the Electoral College to be able to select the president, it must have a quorum of two-thirds of the states voting. If enough states refuse to participate, the Electoral College will not have a quorum. If the Electoral College does not have a quorum or otherwise cannot vote or decide, then the responsibility for selecting the president and vice president devolves to the Congress.

But Phillips clearly didn't read his Constitution very well. Here's what the relevant portion of the 12th Amendment says:

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. 

In other words, it appears that a quorum is demanded only when no candidate has a majority of Electoral College votes and the vote goes to the House of Representatives. That does not apply to Obama, who has a majority of votes.

Phillips, by the way, is head of Tea Party Nation, so you'd think he'd know his Constitution better than that.

Since publication, WND has added an editor's note admitting the error:

Editor’s note, Nov. 20, 2012: Since this column was posted it has been discovered that the premise presented about the Electoral College and the Constitution is in error. According to the 12th Amendment, a two-thirds quorum is required in the House of Representatives, not the Electoral College.

WND didn't explain why no editor at an organization that purports to be Constitution-savvy (witness its longtime birther obsession over the definition of "natural born citizen") made an effort to save both WND and Phillips some embarrassment by catching Phillips' error before it was published.

Just consider this yet another reason why nobody believes WND.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:04 AM EST
CNS Bizarrely Blames Tollway Crashes On Transportation Secretary
Topic: CNSNews.com

Susan Jones began a Nov. 19 CNSNews.com article this way:

Brand-new express lanes on the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia -- praised by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood as a "model for American infrastructure" -- opened with a bang on Saturday: multiple collisions involving multiple vehicles.

Were these accidents really LaHood's fault, as she suggests? Of course not. Even Jones herself eventually reports that according to police, "every accident was caused when a driver suddenly swerved or made a sudden lane change to avoid the toll lanes." That has nothing whatsoever to do with LaHood's support for such toll lanes.

Jones also ignored the fact that the project to create these toll/express lanes was created in 2007, more than a year before the Obama administration even existed.

In other words, LaHood wasn't even present at the creation of these lanes. Yet Jones wants you to think that this is somehow his fault.

That willingness to be dishonest is how much CNS hates Obama.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:36 AM EST
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Wayne Allyn Root Still Can't Believe His Prediction Of A Romney Landslide Failed
Topic: Newsmax

When last we saw Wayne Allyn Root, he was predicting a "Reagan-like landslide" for Mitt Romney and assailing the New York Times' Nate Silver for insisting that President Obama would win, insising that the election results would mean that "liberals should give delusional and clueless pollster Nate Silver of The New York Times a gold watch and a retirement dinner."

Well, not so much. And Root is still a little stunned that his prognistication skills failed him. From his Nov. 15 Newsmax column:

My prediction was based on a combination of scientific evidence and common sense. First, it was based on common sense that no president could possibly be re-elected with the worst economy of our lifetimes — with an economy that has produced more months above 8 percent unemployment (43) than produced by all the presidents between Harry Truman and George W. Bush combined (39).
 
People just don't vote for the guy that brings you misery, malaise, foreclosures, and bankruptcies, record unemployment, and inflation at the gas pump and grocery store. This election should have been, 100 out of 100 times, a repeat of Reagan’s landslide over Carter.
 
Secondly, my prediction was based on common sense that turnout, enthusiasm, and the makeup of the electorate would be far different than 2008. Obama's coalition of single women, minorities, and young people were the groups most hurt by his economy. They are the ones without jobs. They are the ones suffering, with 14.3 percent black unemployment and 53 percent under-unemployment for college grads. Logic dictated these groups would not come out in record numbers again.
 
No one is such a glutton for punishment they'd return and ask for a second helping of misery, malaise and despair, right?
 
Well, I was wrong. The 2012 electorate looked almost identical to 2008. Obama's supporters didn’t just come for a second helping of misery — they came out enthusiastically and cheered for more.
 
Lastly, my prediction was based on SCIENCE — the University of Colorado's predictive model had never failed. It worked to perfection in the presidential elections of 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008. It predicted a Romney landslide based on scientific facts and historical precedent.

[...]

Obama’s re-election proves that bribery as a campaign tactic is validated. Promise enough "free stuff” and you win votes, even if the end result is no jobs, no hope, and a lifetime dependent on government. You wouldn't believe this could be true. Not in America. That's why my prediction went wrong.

Since he was apparently reluctant to do so before the election, Root launched into a list of reasons why Romney lost, which largely centered around him playing it too safe and, thus, screwing up his prediction. Indeed, he ends his column by writing: 

If Romney had been aggressive and not played it safe, would we be talking about President Romney, and celebrating my brilliant prediction? We'll never know. But if Romney had picked Rubio as his VP, and GOP Senate candidates Akins and Mourdock had never tried to tackle abortion and rape, I have no doubt my prediction would have been "on the money."

Presumably Root knew all of this before the election. He could have adjusted his prediction to better reflect reality, which he apparently did not, choosing instead to  put being a Romney shill ahead of smart analysis.

Root also owes Silver an apology, but none was forthcoming in this column.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:55 PM EST
Updated: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:27 PM EST
The MRC's Hypocritical Attack on Christi Parsons
Topic: Media Research Center

Who's the journalist the Media Research Center hates the most this week? Christi Parsons. She's the Chicago Tribune writer who made the mistake of congratulating President Obama on his re-election during a press conference last week.

In a Nov. 14 MRC item, Scott Whitlock called Parsons "a gushing fan" who "cooed to Obama that she had 'never' seen him 'lose.'" On his weekly appearance on Sean Hannity's Fox News show, MRC chief Brent Bozell sneered that "no one, but nobody seemed the least bit perturbed that she and [President Obama] are playing kissy-face in a press conference. Nobody was at all surprised by that. What does that tell you about our press corps?"

It's rather hypocritical that Bozell and Co. are pretending this sort of thing has never happened before. Take, for insteance, this November 4, 2004, press conference by George W. Bush, the first after his re-election:

THE PRESIDENT: Herman. I'm probably going to regret this. (Laughter.)

Q I don't know if you had a chance to check, but I can report you did eke out a victory in Texas the other day.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, sir.

Q Congratulations. I'm interested in getting back to Steven -- Stevenson's question about unity. Clearly, you believe you have reached out and will continue to reach out. Do you believe the Democrats have made a sincere and sufficient effort to meet you somewhere halfway, and do you think now there's more reason for them the do that in light of the election results?

Who is "Herman"? We don't know. It apepars that the MRC was so uninteresting in his fanboy fawning that it didn't bother to record the event for posterity.

Apparently, fanboy reporters are permitted at the MRC when they're fawning over a Republican.

(h/t reader A.P.)


Posted by Terry K. at 5:46 PM EST
Aaron Klein's Big Scoop: Hamas Follows CNN on Twitter
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Really, this is the subject of Aaron Klein's Nov. 19 WorldNetDaily article:

With over 28,000 Twitter followers, the official military wing of Hamas follows only seven organizations on its Twitter platform – CNN and six pan-Arab news networks and blogs.

Hamas’ Al Qassam Brigades, one of the deadliest terrorist organizations in the world, sends out nearly hourly English-language updates on its Twitter account, @AlqassamBrigade.

We're going to play that game, are we, Aaron? Waddaya say we rummage through the folks Klein follows on his Twitter account, shall we?

Aside from nutbars like Alex Jones (both his personal feed and the Infowars feed) and  Pam Geller, there's ... wait, what is that right at the top?

Yep, it's the Al Qassam Brigades.

Note to Aaron: Live by the gotcha, die by the gotcha.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:36 AM EST
CNS Puts Words In Tim Geithner's Mouth
Topic: CNSNews.com

The headline of Elizabeth Harrington's Nov. 19 CNSNews.com article reads "Treasury Secretary Geithner: Lift Debt Limit to Infinity." Harrington starts the article by writing, "Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Friday that Congress should stop placing legal limits on the amount of money the government can borrow and effectively lift the debt limit to infinity."

Just one little problem: Geithner never says the word "infinity." While Geithner does advise eliminating the debt ceiling, it's to keep it from being used as "a tool for political advantage," as Harrington eventually concedes, not out of a desire to "lift the debt limit to infinity."

CNS has a notable history of putting words in the mouths of their political enemies.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:14 AM EST
Monday, November 19, 2012
WND's Farah: We're All Gonna Die Because Obama Was Re-Elected, But First Let Me Sell You Something
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Joseph Farah has been speaking in increasingly angry and apocalyptic terms since President Obama was re-elected:

On Nov. 6, he asserted that Obama's re-election was "God’s judgment on a people who have turned away from Him and His ways and from everything for which our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor."

On Nov. 8, he called for "a counter-revolution in the culture – to start creating new institutions and restoring some of the old ones, to withdraw from the institutions that are corrupting our culture and degrading our principles and to create their own counter-cultural institutions.

On Nov. 13, he declared that Obama voters have "gone awhoring."

Farah takes it to another level in his Nov. 18 column, by digging around in the book of Hosea to declare that America is "where ancient Israel was before being destroyed by God":

Do you want to know where America is today in historical and biblical terms?

It’s where ancient Israel was before being destroyed by God.

In Hosea 8, God speaks to the prophet about the precipice on which Israel stands: “They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off.”

We are in full apostasy boogie.

We have left our Judeo-Christian roots, values and heritage and are pursuing other gods.

We think we’re too sophisticated for accountability to God.

God’s laws and judgments are, well, too judgmental for a secular and advanced society like America’s.

We know how to do it better.

Which, of course, immediately turns into  an excuse to try and sell something from the WND online store:

This is, in fact, the subject matter of the No. 1 faith film in America this year – “The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment,” which I was privileged to produce. Its popularity – 35 weeks as the No. 1 faith film and a top five documentary during most of that time – suggests not all Americans are falling for this retreat from reality. It’s a visual retelling of the No. 1 Christian book of 2012, “The Harbinger.”

Apparently, if America is about to be destroyed, Farah is going to try and fleece his readers for as much money as he can before the end.


Posted by Terry K. at 11:05 PM EST

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Read my blog on Kindle

Support This Site

« November 2012 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Technorati Favorites

Add to Google

Subscribe in Bloglines

Add to My AOL

Add ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch to Newsburst from CNET News.com