Here's how the top of the CNSNews.com front page looked for a while on May 23:

Posted by Terry K. at 11:48 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Sin is never satisfied. The homofascist thirst for absolute affirmation is unquenchable.

What’s the next step? Activists now demand that adult men who desire sex with other males (“gay” scout masters) be allowed to take your sons camping overnight. Soon they’ll be insisting that “transgender boys” (girls who wish they were boys) be allowed to join as well.

What a camping trip! Imagine the pup tent. Your son and Jimmy – who’s got a crush on him – along with Billy and Billy’s boyfriend Bobby, all snuggly warm in the middle of nowhere. But make room for Sammy (formerly Suzie) and Sammy’s boyfriend Gary (formerly Gertrude).

Don’t forget to hang the disco ball.

And “always be prepared!”

-- Matt Barber, May 24 WND column

May 23, 2013, was a sad day for the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) and another tragic day for an America in decline. The Scouts’ corporate-driven leaders in their folly put sexual morality up for a vote, and when it was all over, the Scouts as we once knew them – a God-fearing, wholesome organization – were finished. Now, truly “morally straight” organizations (to quote the Scout Oath) will rise up to compete with the corrupted BSA, and parents by the hundreds of thousands will migrate with their sons to these trustworthy alternatives.

This was a completely unnecessary capitulation. The equivocating Scouts somehow managed to snatch defeat from their hard-won victory in the Supreme Court in 2000 – which preserved the Scouts’ right to live by their own moral creed. Now they have eviscerated that creed, thus rewarding the very homosexual lobby that tormented the BSA since its high-court triumph.

Pursuing godliness and virtue is not a democratic exercise but a walk of obedience. Truth is transcendent; it is not decided by polls or votes. (Two men or two women will never truly be “married.”) We all fall short and hence need a Savior, but absolute Truth never changes. God – not man – sets the standard for proper living. Allowing boys who identify with and, presumably, engage in homosexual behavior is the opposite of virtue – and certainly wasn’t a Scouting value in my father’s and grandfather’s America.

-- Peter LaBarbera, May 24 WND column

Posted by Terry K. at 5:45 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

The headline on Matt Philbin's May 21 MRC Culture & Media Institute article screams, "Left Defends Accused Child Molester Because She’s Lesbian." But it sounds like Philbin's attacking her because she's lesbian:

When your 18-year-old daughter is expelled and charged with sexual battery of a child, one option is to go public and declare she’s a martyr under fire from anti-gay bias. That’s the approach taken by the parents of Kaitlyn Hunt, a Florida teen who faces two felony charges of “lewd or lascivious battery” on a child. And sure enough, the tactic has earned Hunt some high-profile left-wing media defenders.

According to the charges, Hunt, a senior at Sebastian River High School who was set to graduate this spring, pressured a 14-year-old girl four years her junior to be her “girlfriend” and engage in sexual activity with her. But when Kaitlyn faced prosecution from her underage partner’s parents, her own parents and gay activists immediately granted her victim status, claiming she was unjustly persecuted for being homosexual. 

Would Philbin be writing about Kaitlyn Hunt if she wasn't a lesbian? Probably not -- we searched the MRC archives and found nothing at all about Genarlow Wilson, a 17-year-old male who was convicted of child molestation for having oral sex with a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s party and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

Philbin went on to whine:

Clearly, Hunt’s parents and her supporters in their “Stop the Hate, Free Kate” Facebook group disagree. They are portraying her story as a tragedy like Romeo and Juliet – two lovers separated by people who just don’t understand. 

Actually nobody's doing that -- as the link Philbin himself provides. It goes to an article about what's called a Romeo and Juliet law, which exists in several states to deal with situations such as the Hunt case, in which teenagers, one of whom is underage, get involved in a consensual sexual relationship. The goal is to keep the older teen from being branded a sex offender if the facts warrant it.

Philbin goes on to claim that those supporting Hunt are "homosexual activists anxious to topple any and all rules regarding sex." He offers no evidence to back this up, of course -- he's too slavishly devoted to his employer's anti-gay agenda to care about such things.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:55 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

The latest unverifiable claim from "Reza Kahlili" at WorldNetDaily:

Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani issued a press release Tuesday denying reports that he received a letter from Secretary of State John Kerry that said the United States would support him if he chose to run in Iran’s presidential election next month.

[...]

In a May 15 exclusive, WND reported that a secret message from Kerry was delivered to Rafsanjani of U.S. support, according to a source affiliated with the office of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The source, who remains anonymous for security reasons and who has provided valuable information before, said that on May 3, Kerry’s letter was delivered via the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh to Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal, who arranged through the Saudi Embassy in Tehran to present the message to Rafsanjani indicating support from both the White House and the Saudi monarch.

As per usual, "Kahlili" offers no on-the-record evidence to back up anything he says.

Remember, "Kahlili" a guy with a fake name using anonymous sources who has provided no reason whatsoever why anyone should trust him.

Posted by Terry K. at 8:40 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

The lovefest between Newsmax and Donald Trump isn't showing any signs of slowing down.

A May 23 Newsmax article is dedicated to ... Trump tweeting nice things about Newsmax:

Donald Trump has expressed high praise for Newsmax and its CEO Christopher Ruddy. The billionaire mogul tweeted: "Newsmax Media is one of the top media outlets in the country. Chris Ruddy has revolutionized political commentary and reporting."

The message was spread far and wide: Trump has more than 2,227,000 Twitter followers. And his TV show "Celebrity Apprentice" is one of NBC's most highly rated programs.

Newsmax is indeed a "top" media outlet — Newsmax.com has reached the No. 1 position in comScore’s News/Politics category.

Of the 61 million Americans comScore tracks seeking political news across all digital platforms, more than 13 million monthly unique visitors turned to Newsmax.com's political sites, exceeding such competitors as Huffington Post and Fox News in March.

As we detailed, Newsmax had to compare its entire website to mere parts of others to be able to say that.

Posted by Terry K. at 3:57 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

In a May 21 WorldNetDaily interview, Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness falsely suggests that an increase in male-on-male sexual assaults in the military is linked to allowing gays to openly serve in the military. According to WND, Donnelly said "the military and the federal government are kidding themselves if they don’t think some major policy decisions aren’t contributing to the rise in sexual violence."

But as the Washington Times article WND and Donnelly refererence in support of their claims points out, very few of the male-on-male perpetrators are gay. Indeed, this is a longtime problem in the military that is unrelated to the status of gays.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:03 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Fred Lucas smells a conspiracy in a May 20 CNSNews.com article:

The head of the National Treasury Employee Union (NTEU), which represents employees of the Internal Revenue Service, met with President Barack Obama in the White House one day before the manager of the IRS’s “Technical Unit” suggested establishing a “Sensitive Case Report” for the tax-exempt status applications of Tea Party groups, according to data from the official White House visitor log and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

The White House visitor log shows that NTEU President Colleen Kelley met with Obama--“POTUS,” President of the United States--on March 31, 2010.

[...]

At 11:03 a.m. Monday, CNSNews.com e-mailed the White House press office, referencing the March 31, 2010 meeting between Kelley and Obama: “Did they discuss tea party groups or other conservative groups in any context?”

CNSNews.com also called the White House press office immediately and confirmed that it had received the e-mailed question.

As the White House press briefing was ending on Monday, CNSNews.com asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney as he was leaving the podium, “Did the Treasury union chief talk about tea parties during her meeting with the president in March 2010?”

Carney did not respond.

Later on Monday afternoon, CNSNews.com again e-mailed the White House press office and Carney, with the same question sent earlier in the day. CNSNews.com also called the White House press office and confirmed that it had received the e-mailed question.

However, neither the press office nor Carney responded before this story was posted.

Had Lucas bothered to do a little actual research instead of trying to play gotcha by suggesting the White House's non-responses to him were evidence that Obama was trying to hide something, he would have learned that Kelley was one of 117 visitors who came to the Old Executive Office Building for what the log describes as a "Workplace Flexibility Forum," and she did not have a personal meeting with Obama.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:51 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Joseph Farah begins his May 20 WorldNetDaily column by admitting that it "may seem loaded and over the top" to argue that President Obama is an "accessory to murder" in the Kermit Gosnell case. Given that this statement comes from a man who once accused Obama of trying to kill God (which earned Farah a coveted Slantie Award), clearly nothing is too loaded and over the top for Farah to spew when it comes to anything related to the president.

As we've come to expect from Farah, his over-the-top accusation against Obama is rooted in a lie. He writes:

Why can’t Obama talk about it?

Because Obama is on record as supporting the kind of thing Gosnell did.

[...]

 As an Illinois state senator, Obama twice voted against bills that would have “defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a ‘born alive infant’ and entitled to legal protection.” He said he viewed the bills as backdoor attempts to deny women the right to abortion.

So, in other words, if Obama had his way, Gosnell would still be practicing – still free to kill more babies.

As we've repeatedly pointed out, Illinois already had a law at the time requiring medical care for a viable fetus that survived an abortion, and what Obama opposed were efforts to expand that law with a "born alive" clause requiring that any fetus that survived an abortion, even ones that could not survive outside the womb, receive medical care. Obama has said he opposed those bills because the law would likely have been struck down in the courts for giving legal status to fetuses, a requirement that a second doctor be present at abortions, and their lack of a "neutrality clause" to make sure the bill would not affect current abortion laws.

What Gosnell did was already illegal, and the proposed Illinois law would not have made it any more so.

This sort of casual mendacity gives away his little game of playing dumb about the partisan motive in his upcoming "Day of Prayer and Fasting." If Farah was a real Christian, he wouldn't lie with such impunity, and he would be begging forgiveness for his sins not only from God but from WND's readers.

Posted by Terry K. at 5:31 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

The Media Research Center's Tim Graham demonstrates the flip side of his employer's multimillion-dollar campaign of intimidating reporters into not telling the truth about conservatives when it makes conservatives look bad; It won't call out bad reporting as long as it makes Obama look bad.

Graham uses a May 20 NewsBusters post to mock a Change.org petition criticizing ABC's Jonathan Karl for faulty reporting on the Benghazi talking-points emails. Graham stated that Karl's reporting was merely "inaccurate" without explaining how it was: Karl had claimed he had the actual emails when, in fact, all he had were paraphrased summaries (some of which were inaccurate) from Republican staffers.

Graham went on to snigger: "Joan Walsh at Salon is angry that Karl didn't make some sort of on-air correction on 'This Week' -- as if the networks are good at on-air corrections without a lawsuit pending." Graham wouldn't be so flip about Karl's bad reporting if Obama was a Republican.

Posted by Terry K. at 2:45 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Raging homophobe Les Kinsolving is at it again, just asking in his May 20 WorldNetDaily column why bestiality isn't treated the same as homosexuality:

If lesbians, male homosexuals, bisexuals and transsexuals should have the right to marriage licenses – as a few states, including Maryland, now provide – why should the real animal lovers (whose orientation is bestiality) not be allowed to marry?

The argument that animals are incapable of making a choice is surely invalid in that some animals choose to run away when fondled by humans, while others do not – which certainly indicates their ability to choose.

Have there ever been any reports that apprehended practitioners of bestiality have as high a rate of AIDS and syphilis as do homosexuals?

Kinsolving sure knows a lot about sex with animals. Is there something you're not telling us, Les?

Posted by Terry K. at 1:50 PM EDT

Updated: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:52 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Years of bogus Obama scandal-mongering means that nobody believes WorldNetDaily anymore, but editor Joseph Farah is desperate to keep his website relevant.

You can smell the desperation in the headline of his May 19 WND column: "Hey! I got audited too!" The column itself reflects the headline: The politically-motivated-IRS-audit train has left the station, and Farah is running after it trying to get aboard, invoking his own history of purportedly politically motivated audits against various entities he used to run:

I was a prominent target of Bill Clinton’s reign of Internal Revenue Service hell on individuals and tax-exempt organizations. And I was the guy who broke the story about it – long before there was a WND. Back then, I had to get the help of the Wall Street Journal, which, to its credit, gave me commentary space to lay out the whole story and turned the sordid tale into an 11-part series of editorials.

But in this day of historical forgetfulness, no one in the media seems to remember how Bill Clinton used the IRS to terrorize Paula Jones and many other women who had the misfortune of crossing his path along with a virtual who’s who of those who made his “enemies list” like me.

Farah fails to note the fact that a joint congressional committee, formed in response to complaints by Farah's Western Journalism Center and other groups, found "no credible evidence" that the IRS was biased against anti-Clinton groups.

Further, Farah expressed no concern that we remember about claims of politiclally motivated IRS audits under the Bush administration -- heck, at one time WND was essentially begging the Bush administration to sic the IRS on a group critical of the administration's agenda.

Farah generally doesn't miss an opportunity to portray himself as a victim, which is why he's so desperate to glom onto the IRS story.

Posted by Terry K. at 2:06 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

NewsBusters associate editor Noel Sheppard is practically a correction-generating machine, frequently putting his right-wing agenda ahead of the truth in such a manner that even the normally reluctant NewsBusters has to issue corrections (though not as many as should be issued).

And so we see it again in a May 21 post, in which Sheppard had repeatedly identified Lizz Winstead, who had made a tweet of questionable taste regarding the Oklahoma tornadoes that she quickly apologized for and deleted after the scope of the devastation became clear -- as co-creator of "Jon Stewart's Daily Show."

Well, no -- Winstead was co-creator of "The Daily Show" as hosted by Craig Kilborn. Near as we can tell, she hasn’t had any direct involvement in the show since 1998 or so, before Stewart became the host.

Well, Sheppard managed to figure that out after the fact, because he has added a correction to his post:

*****Update: The original version of this article referred to Jon Stewart's Daily Show. The headline and the text have been corrected as Craig Kilborn was the original host.

By contrast, Sheppard felt no need to apologize for stating in a tweet, "If contraceptives R 2 B covered by health insurance shouldn't alcohol since sober people don't need birth control?"

Remember, this guy has a actual title (and, presumably, commensurate salary) at the MRC -- which it appears he will continue to have despite his lengthy record of screw-ups.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:03 AM EDT

Updated: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 11:14 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Bob Unruh waxes poetic -- and highly biased -- in a May 19 WorldNetDaily article:

The faux stone columns from his Denver acceptance speech are crumbling, the fireworks have fizzled and the unadulterated adulation of Barack Obama is a sour feeling of disillusion, as a new poll reveals half of America wants him impeached, including a stunning one in four Democrats.

“It may be early in the process for members of Congress to start planning for impeachment of Barack Obama, but the American public is building a serious appetite for it,” said Fritz Wenzel, of Wenzel Strategies, which did the telephone poll Thursday. It has a margin of error of 4.36 percent.

Yes, WND's ethically challenged pollster strikes again. But if you look at the questions Wenzel asked, they are so biased and so clearly designed to elicit an affirmative response for impeachment that it's no better than a push poll:

• The administration of Democrat Barack Obama has still not satisfied congressional and media questions about just what it knew and when it knew it about the terrorist attack on U.S. diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, last September 11. That attack killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya. The Obama administration has changed its explanation of that attack several times since and has so far refused to identify those officials who made key decisions not to send help to stop the attacks, and who decided not to initially call the killings a terrorist attack. Knowing that and anything else you may be aware of about this issue, do you agree or disagree that President Obama should be impeached over his handling of this situation?
• It has been learned that the Internal Revenue Service, under the administration of Democrat Barack Obama, has purposely targeted conservative and Christian groups for harassment over their tax exempt status while giving liberal nonprofit groups little or no scrutiny. Further, the IRS apparently leaked private tax information from these conservative groups to opposing liberal groups who were able to use that confidential information for political advantage. Knowing this and anything else you may be aware of about this issue, do you agree or disagree that President Obama should be impeached over his handling of this situation?
• It has been learned that the U.S. Department of Justice under the administration of Democrat Barack Obama secretly obtained confidential telephone records of many reporters of the Associated Press in Washington, D.C. Attorney General Eric Holder has said his department obtained the phone records without the permission or knowledge of the Associated Press in order to find who in the federal government was leaking information about terrorist plots against America. AP officials have strongly protested this invasion of their privacy but the administration stands by its actions. Knowing this and anything else you may be aware of about this issue, do you agree or disagree that President Obama should be impeached over his handling of this situation?

Since WND is paying Wenzel good money to get the poll results it wants, it certainly won't tell you how abysmal Wenzel's polling was in the 2012 elections. Most notably, in the Missouri Senate race, Wenzel had Todd Akin ahead of Claire McCaskill by 4 points a few weeks before the election -- which McCaskill won by 16 points.

Posted by Terry K. at 7:39 AM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink

Susan Jones does her best to take Obama adviser Dan Pfeifer's claim about it being "irrelevant" whether the IRS broke the law by allegedly giving extra scrutiny to the tax-exempt applications of tea-party groups out of context.

The headline of Jones' May 20 CNS article reads, "Obama's Point Man: 'The Law Is Irrelevant,'" and Jones herself wrote that Pfeifer "at one point told ABC's George Stephanopoulos, 'The law is irrelevant.'"

The full context of Pfeifer's remarks is, of course, buried farther down in the article. That context -- which Jones didn't see fit to lead with -- is that the legality of the IRS' actions are "irrelevant" because President Obama considers it to be wrong regardless.

This is yet another case in which CNS decided it would regurgitate right-wing talking points instead of report the truth.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:37 PM EDT

Share This Post

Permalink