Your WND Obama Lie of the Day Topic: WorldNetDaily
Yes, it's another Obama-related lie at WorldNetDaily. This time, surprisingly, the lie isn't about Barack Obama himself, and it can be plausibly argued that the culprit is general stupidity and shoddy reporting rather than the outrightmalice that colors most of WND's anti-Obama coverage and causes it to disregard basic concepts of truth in reporting.
An Oct. 14 article rewrites a blog post by an anonymous (of course) person claiming to the parent of a student in Racine, Wis., whose son allegedly had a eighth-grade literature textbook that "laud[ed] Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's "change" theme and highlighting his 2004 Democratic National Convention as an example of good literature."WND repeatedly calls this section of the textbook an "article."
In fact, it appears to be a segement of Obama's 2004 speech to the Democratic National Convention. The picture of the first page of the speech segment on the blog post indicates that the speech is in the textbook for analysis purposes by students. One text segment is called "Focus on Form"; another asks, "What words or prhases help you know that this is a speech?"
But WND never bothers to specifically identify this text as Obama's speech. Instead, it baselessly claims that the textbook publisher is "promot[ing] Obama's 'literature'"and it uncritically quotes the anonymousmother smearing Obama:"Honestly, what has Obama really done to be included in this book?"
The article doesn't get around to mentioning until the 12th paragraph that according to the textbook's publisher, "the Obama article was included because of "an editorial decision" that was made before Obama announced his candidacy, and it was deleted from versions of the book after that announcement." And it not until another five paragraphs later that WND vaguely hints at the larger purpose of the textbook by stating that the publisher "makes available on its website a CD featuring his speech in 2004. The CD also has speeches from Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bill Clinton and Laura Bush to teach children about public speaking, 'both when it's effective and when it fails.'"
WND never bothers to explore the actual purpose the textbook. From the publisher's page on it:
McDougal Littell Literature invites students to explore the world of art, literature, and life’s big questions.
The unique organization around clusters of standards allows for the teaching of major literary concepts across genre. Standards that belong together are taught together. Students analyze fiction, nonfiction, poetry, drama, and media across clusters of standards. Special features support visual and media literacy, along with research strategies.
Sample pages from the book include the classic O. Henry short story "The Ransom of Red Chief," which is used to examine the literary device of conflict and resolution, using an shot from a Road Runner cartoon to illustrate the story's concept of things not going according to plan. Another invokes "Back to the Future" to examine movie plots, settings and visual techniques.
In other words, the textbook attempts to invoke popular culture as a way of engaging students in the study of literature. The Obama speech is likely in there as an example of a good speech that is worth examining for its structural elements.
Remember -- most, if not all, of the employees of WorldNetDaily either homeschool their children or send them to private Christian academies. They have never encountered a modern textbook used in public -- er, "government schools" except for purposes of cherry-picking purportedly offensive passages, as is done here.
WND, with its obsessive Obama-hate, will never concede that near-universal opinion that Obama gave an excellent speech in 2004 and will never accept the idea that it was added to the textbook for any reason other than to "promote" Obama.
And as a capper, the WND article adds:
WND columnist Jack Cashill, meanwhile, has documented evidence that Obama didn't even write the book published under his name, "Dreams from My Father." Cashill suggests the author actually was Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers, whose relationship with Obama has become a contentious issue on the campaign trail.
WND, of course, fails to mention that Cashill's "documented evidence" is ajoke. But then, so is the rest of this article.
In an Oct. 14 NewsBusters post promoting David Frum's accusation that MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has been "intensifying the ugly tone that exists in politics today," Noel Sheppard sought to counter Maddow's claim that a member of the audience at a McCain Palin event shouted, "Kill him" in reference to Barack Obama. "For the record, Patterico on Tuesday debunked the leftwing claim that the person in the crowd at the McCain-Palin event in question was shouting for Obama to be killed," Sheppard wrote; the right-wing blogger Patterico asserted that it was "unambiguously a call to kill [William] Ayers, not Obama." So, somehow that makes it OK?
It appears both Sheppard and Patterico may have spoken too soon. From a Scranton Times Tribune blog post on an Oct. 14 speech by Sarah Palin in the city:
Chris Hackett addressed the increasingly feisty crowd as they await the arrival of Gov. Palin.
Each time the Republican candidate for the seat in the 10th Congressional District mentioned Barack Obama the crowd booed loudly.
Caruba Again Falsely Claims Earth is Cooling Topic: CNSNews.com
In an Oct. 13 CNSNews.com column, Alan Caruba repeat his previous claim that "there is NO global warming. Nada, zip, nunca, niete! None! The Earth has been in a cooling cycle now for a decade."
As we pointed out the last time Caruba claimed this, British meterological experts and researchers point out that "[t]emperatures are continuing to rise" and states that "[a] simple mathematical calculation of the temperature change over the latest decade (1998-2007) alone shows a continued warming of 0.1° C per decade." Further, NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies reports that "[t]he eight warmest years in the [global] GISS record have all occurred since 1998, and the 14 warmest years in the record have all occurred since 1990."
That's right -- Kincaid has fully merged two obsessions -- Barack Obama and Frank Marshall Davis -- with sex. You think Kincaid aroused himself a little by writing that headline and by describing Davis as a "Communist sex pervert"? (And is being a "Communist sex pervert" better or worse than being a regular sex pervert?)
Kincaid goes on to happily tout that "the tabloid National Enquirer has seized upon the Frank Marshall Davis story in its October 20 issue. It glosses over his Communist Party membership and focuses instead on his role as sex pervert, pedophile, pornographer and mentor to Obama. This 'exclusive' was actually broken wide open by my group America’s Survival, Inc. weeks ago." One wonders if Kincaid served as the undisclosed source for the Enquirer story -- and how much the Enquirer paid him.
Kincaid insists that the Enquirer story "is definitely true," which means that Kincaid must also accept that the Enquirer's claim that Sarah Palin had an affair with her husband's former business partner is also true.
But he won't, since he's too busy sending his imagination into fevered overdrive about what he thinks happened between Obama and Davis:
Was Davis Obama’s sex teacher? Did he influence Obama to take liberal views on such matters as homosexuality and abortion? This possibility makes the Davis-Obama relationship one of national political importance.
What exactly happened in Davis’s home? We know from the record that Davis and Dunham drank alcohol and smoked pot together. Obama admits drinking with Davis as well and going on to smoke marijuana and use cocaine. What else happened between them besides listening to Davis’s poetry?
If Barack Obama is declared winner of the vote this Nov. 4 — and if Democrats attain a filibuster-proof 60 seats in the U.S. Senate — Democratic leaders have promised speedy imposition of the “Fairness Doctrine.” This will choke off the free speech of citizens, not only on talk radio but also on the Internet, the only two media where criticism of Democrats can readily be found, and uncensored, unfiltered voices of ordinary people can be heard.
All media could soon become today’s mainstream media, whose mannequins and womannequins dutifully repeat and amplify the Democratic Party line propaganda glorifying Obama and ridiculing Republicans. The entire news media would serve only a daily unbalanced brainwashing from the gibbering monkey faces of Big Brother’s lackeys like Paul Begala, Chris Matthews, and Keith Olbermann.
All of America will become Chicago, where four out of every two voters cast their ballots for Democrats.
Every future ballot box will be stuffed, every election stolen, to secure an overwhelming Democratic majority for centuries to come, I dreamed. And the symbolic light of Lady Liberty’s torch will be snuffed out.
Ponte also rehashes numerous horror stories about "vote fraud involving Obama’s ally ACORN" while failing to mention the inconvenient facts that 1) fraudulent voter registration forms virtually never lead to fraudulent votes being cast, 2) ACORN is required in many states to turn in all registration forms it collects, even those it suspects are fraudulent, and 3) ACORN regularly cooperates with authorities by flagging potentially fraudulent registration forms.
In an Oct. 13 column, Ponte tries to parse his previous assertions about Obama's links to ACORN (which we've previously debunked) against the Obama campaign's denials in a desperate effort to make them kinda-sorta true.
For instance, Ponte had claimed on Oct. 6 that Project Vote was "ACORN’s voter mobilization entity" at the time Obama worked for the group in 1992. In fact, as the Obama campaign pointed out, it was not a part of ACORN in 1992. But the only attempt Ponte makes at trying to disprove that claim is when he quotes the Capital Research Center's Matthew Vadum -- who has his own accuracy issues on the subject.
Cashill Keeps Building His Obama Conspiracy Topic: WorldNetDaily
Jack Cashill is starting to sound like conspiracy-obsessed Richard Mellon Scaife (but without the bottomless barrel of cash). Just as Scaife insisted that Vince Foster's death was the Rosetta Stone of the Clinton presidency -- and threw millions of dollars at people to smear Clinton with conspiracy theories about Foster's death -- Cashill (who has penned his own Clinton conspiracy book) is clinging to the idea that nautical references are the Rosetta Stone to his otherwise unsubstantiated claim that William Ayers ghost-wrote Barack Obama's book "Dreams From My Father."
Cashill asserts in an Oct. 14 WorldNetDaily column that "A newly discovered anecdote from Bill Ayers' 1993 book 'To Teach' solidifies the case that he is indeed the muse behind Barack Obama's 'Dreams From My Father.'" This blockbuster evidence: Both books anecdotally reference the tidal nature of the Hudson River.
That's it. Really.
Nevertheless, Cashill declares:
This one anecdote holds a host of problems for Obama. For one, the East River would be hugely out of his way no matter where he lived in New York and especially if he lived anywhere near the Columbia campus on the upper West Side.
More troubling, his serendipitous journey to the river enables him to tell a story that is transparently fabricated and almost assuredly hatched in the weathered brain of Bill Ayers.
Even were there no other clues, Obama's frequent and sophisticated use of nautical metaphors makes a powerful case for Ayers' involvement in the writing of "Dreams."
Remember: Cashill is the same guy who spent a seven-part series for WND in 2002 "proving" that anti-abortion extremist James Kopp didn't murder abortion doctor Barnett Slepian and weaving a grand conspiracy that Kopp was framed -- a few months before Kopp confessed to the killing.
Krugman Derangement Syndrome Topic: Media Research Center
There's a case of some very sour grapes at the Media Research Center over Paul Krugman being awarded the Nobel Prize in economics.
In an Oct. 13 NewsBusters post, Mark Finkelstein took great pleasure in the folks at MSNBC's "Morning Joe" treating the award as a joke, then mocked Andrea Mitchell for trying to set people straight:
Can Mitchell seriously believe this was other than a supremely political pick by the lefty Nobel Committee? Does Andrea honestly imagine Krugman was awarded the prize for his academic work and not for his Republican-bashing and promotion of the road to collectivism on the pages of the Gray Lady? Don't make us laugh!
Finkelstein then sneers: "According to the official Nobel announcement, Krugman was awarded the prize for "his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity." Right."
Then, in an Oct. 13 appearance on Fox News' "Your World," the MRC Business & Media Institute's Dan Gainor was in a similar sneering mood, eager to delegitimize the award because it isn't given to people Gainor likes. From an Oct. 13 NewsBusters post by Nathan Burchfiel (the video of Gainor's appearance wasn't functional at the time of this writing):
"They've given Al Gore, they've given Jimmy Carter, they've given the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," Gainor told Fox News Channel's "Your World" host Neil Cavuto Oct. 13. "The last three literary awards have gone to left and lefter writers and according to this paper called The New York Times there's a lot of critics who are questioning whether the committee is actually making decisions based on reasons other than best literary reasons."
Ouch. They'll get over it eventually. Then again, Tim Graham still hasn't gotten over that macaca thing...
Is AIM Boycotting NY Times, Or Stumping For McCain? Topic: Accuracy in Media
Accuracy in Media has launched a "Boycott the New York Times" website, aimed at, according to an Oct. 8 press release, "encouraging news consumers to boycott the most powerful media voice in America to protest its persistent leftist bias." The press release further quotes the editor of the site, Don Feder, as saying, "The Times has, over the course of decades, blatantly distorted the news to advance an ideological agenda."
How ironic -- Feder has done the same exact thing.
As we've detailed, Feder has a long record of making dishonest and hypocritical claims. He's also an anti-immigration activist who is a member of the advisory board of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, headed by John Tanton, who -- despite Feder's attempts to obfuscate the issue -- has likened immigrants to bacteria.
So it's no surprise that Feder brings his shoddy writing to AIM's Times-bashing site as well.
A Sept. 28 article by Feder is little more than a regurgitation of McCain campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt's anti-Times talking points: "Of course, Schmidt is right."
In an Oct. 2 article, Feder peddles more baseless and even false talking points blaming Democrats for the financial crisis, even quoting directly from a McCain ad. For instance, he claimed that "It was Jimmy Carter who first pushed Fannie and Freddie to lend to high-risk borrowers, to increase minority home ownership, pandering to one of the Democrats’ favorite constituencies." Feder is referring to the Community Reinvestment Act, a law passed during the Carter administration; in fact, less than one-fifth of subprime loans were made by financial institutions subject to the CRA.
Feder also asserts, "Some of Barack Obama’s closest allies were key figures in pressuring Fannie Mae to make high-risk loans — they include Franklin Raines and Obama campaign advisor Jim Johnson." But Raines is not among Obama's "closest allies"; both he and Obama's campaign deny he has any sort of advisory role.
Feder further claims, "Obama himself is #2 on the list of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae executives. He’s received $126,349, second only to Banking Committee Chairman Dodd." In fact, the Times itself has compiled a list -- which Feder has yet to refute -- showing McCain receiving more than $169,000 in donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives and lobbyists.
Feder and AIM claim to be building a case to "progressively limit [the Times'] influence," but all it's done so far is serve as a public relations arm for the McCain campaign. Isn't that illegal under AIM's 501(c)(3) tax status?
Newsmax Takes Andy Martin's Side -- Again Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax stood behind noted anti-Semite and fabulist Andy Martin in 2007, when it printed a Martin column baselessly claiming that Barack Obama "locked ... away" his white grandmother "in his racist closet." It does so again in an Oct. 13 article attacking the New York Times for telling the story behind Martin and his serving as the genesis for the debunked claim that Obama's a secret Muslim:
The Times pinned the blame on this "persistent falsehood" about Obama on an Illinois man named Andy Martin.
In a story headlined "The Man Behind the Whispers About Obama," the paper said Martin had singlehandedly fomented the claim that “Obama is a Muslim who has concealed his religion.”
The paper also claimed Martin had past psychiatric illness and had made anti-Semitic statements.
But the Times ignored the allegations by many others that Obama is hiding his upbringing as a Muslim.
But in citing anti-Islam activist Daniel Pipes -- who, like Martin, claims that Obama currently is a Muslim (but unlike Martin, Pipes uses the reasoning that children of a Muslim father are automatically Muslim, thus discounting the idea of free will) -- Newsmax buys into Martin's argument. Newsmax tries to parse the issue by focusing on Pipes' claims about the allegedly Muslim aspects of Obama's childhood, itglosses over Pipes' insistence that due to paternal heritage, Obama is now a Muslim.
Is Newsmax so desperate to paint Obama as a Muslim that it defends the indefensible Andy Martin? It appears so.
Farah Suddenly Concerned That McCain Will Lose Topic: WorldNetDaily
For a guy who claims he doesn't want John McCain to win the election, Joseph Farah is surprisingly bothered by the possibility that McCain will lose.
In his Oct. 11 WorldNetDaily column, Farah points out that "I have been predicting with some degree of certainty that John McCain would win the presidential election," then laments that "He is floundering worse than even I could have imagined."
Farah then reverts to his old McCain-bashing: "John McCain is a disaster as a candidate. And he would be a bigger disaster as president. But don't worry, he doesn't have a clue as to how to win it."
So, if McCain is such a "disaster," why is Farah worried about him losing to Obama?
Sounds to us like more evidence that Farah's "none of the above" campaign is a hollow lie. But then, Farah and WND are no strangers to tellinglies.
Too Much Macaca, Not Enough Fact-Checking Topic: NewsBusters
Poor Tim Graham. He just can't get over the macaca thing.
Graham isn't even two paragraphs into his Oct. 13 NewsBusters post ostensibly about a Washington Post reporter's comments about William Ayers before he's pointing out that the reporter he's criticizing "spent 2006 making an enormous mountain out of George Allen's utterance of 'macaca.'"
As we've noted, Graham remained bitter for months after the 2006 election over coverage of Allen's "macaca" remark. He still is, apparently.
Anyway, Graham does make his way to accusing the reporter of not "explaining how Ayers recruited [Barack] Obama to the Annenberg Challenge," going on to assert that the PolitiFact.org item on Obama and Ayers cited by the reporter -- which points out that the Annenberg Challenge was funded by noted Republican Walter Annenberg, staffed by "mainstream" folks and funded by "a host of respected, mainstream institutions" -- was somehow a lie. Rather than refuting any of the actual claims in it, Graham complained that it "trash[ed] Stanley Kurtz of National Review" and wasn't "detached fact checking." Graham also doesn't note that, as we've pointed out, contrary to his assertion that "Ayers recruited Obama to the Annenberg Challenge," any evidence that that actually happened is circumstantial at best.
Perhaps Graham was a little too busy thinking about macaca to actually refute the fact-check.
Jeffrey Misleads Again on Obama, Abortion Topic: CNSNews.com
You know how CNS' mission statement claims that it "endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story"? Well, not so much.
For the second article in a row, CNS editor in chief Terry Jeffrey has refused to tell the full story about Barack Obama's stance on a "born alive" law in Illinois. In his Oct. 13 article, Jeffrey uncritically repeats assertions by Sarah Palin about "Obama’s unwillingness to support legislation that would protect babies who were born alive after botched abortions" without pointing out the misleading nature of them.
Jeffrey repeats claims by "Jill Stanek, who went public about the 'induced-labor abortions' that were taking place at the Chicago-area hospital where she worked" while failing to tell readers that Stanek's allegations were never substantiated. Jeffrey also rehashes a statement that then-Illinois state Sen. Patrick O’Malley "was told by the state attorney general’s office that no existing state laws protected these babies" while ignoring other assertions that the behavior that would be outlawed under a "born alive" law was already illegal.
What Jeffrey has done here is act as an agent for the McCai-Palin campaign by uncritically quoting Palin. That can be called a lot of things, but "journalism" is not one of them.
An Oct. 13 WorldNetDaily article declares that Jerome Corsi "has fallen ill after he was forced to endure detention at the hands of armed Kenyan immigration authorities." The article quotes WND editor Joseph Farah as saying, "Corsi is still recovering from his traumatic abduction at the hands of Kenya security officials who halted his planned press conference in Nairobi and denied him and his party food for an entire day before allowing them to depart for London."
Funny, Corsi didn't sound very traumatized when he called into a radio show from Nairobi while in detention and accused Obama of orchestrating it. Nor did he sound traumatized when called more radio shows after leaving Kenya to make more baselessallegations against Obama.
The only trauma we see on Corsi's and Farah's part is that their little publicity stunt in Kenya didn't go off quite as planned. And when will Corsi admit that his so-called proof that Obama is buddy-buddy with Raila Odinga is bogus?
UPDATE: Apparently Corsi really isn't horribly traumatized or near death's door after all: He's doing a teleseminar later this week.
Klein Accuses Obama of Lie, Won't Apologize for His Own Topic: WorldNetDaily
An Oct. 12 WorldNetDaily article by Aaron Klein asserts that "Sen. Barack Obama's campaign is misleading the public regarding the presidential candidate's ties to a radical leftist organization that has admitted to major financial improprieties and has been convicted in numerous, massive voter fraud scandals." The article's headline goes further: "Obama website lies about ACORN ties."
The main claim Klein singles out is the Obama campaign's claim that "ACORN was not part of Project Vote" when Obama worked for it in 1992:
Obama's campaign claims ACORN was "not part of" Project Vote, but the organization's incorporation papers, obtained by WND, show Project Vote is a trademark name whose parent company is registered at the same New Orleans address in which ACORN and multiple ACORN affiliates are housed.
But Klein doesn't offer any evidence to back up the claim. He doesn't detail the information on the "incorporation papers" Klein claims he "obtained" or provide a copy of them with his story.
So this article proves nothing, and the rest of it is little more than playing guilt by association between ACORN and Obama, parsing words, and a rehashing of the worst allegations against ACORN.
Further, while Klein is accusing Obama of lying, Klein has yet to retract or apologize for his own lie about Obama.
As we detailed, Klein claimed in July that Obama made a "distortion of the Holocaust," suggesting that Obama is a Holocaust denier. In fact, the issue at hand was which Obama relative helped to liberate which concentration camp during World War II. Obama said nothing about the Holocaust, let alone "distored" it.
Klein needs to clean up his own house of lies before hurling (more) accusations he can't properly back up.
Brent Bozell's Favorite Domestic Terrorist Topic: Media Research Center
An Oct. 12 NewsBusters post by Tom Blumer asserts that a Chicago Tribune article "demonstrates that for all these years a large plurality, if not a majority, of Democrats who hold the levers of power ... really haven't had a problem welcoming [William] Ayers, [Bernardine] Dohrn, and their unrepentant views of their violent pasts."
What Blumer doesn't mention: His NewsBusters publisher has no problem welcoming its own unrepentant terrorist and convicted felon into the mainstream.
G. Gordon Liddy was a featured "accepter" at the Media Research Center's 2008 Gala. As we've detailed, Liddy is the unrepentant Watergate felon who plotted to kill numerous people and plotted to bomb a liberal-leaning think tank. Liddy appeared in 2007 as well, in which he "accepted" an award for Katie Couric. An April 2005 CyberAlert reprinted a Washington Times article noting that Liddy was among the guests that "roared at the assembled clips and commentary" during the 2005 awards gala.
Liddy also served as a judge for the MRC's year-end Notable Quotables awards in 1992, 1995 and 1997.
The MRC further sought to whitewash Liddy's 1994 statement on his radio show that "if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests" by insisting in a November 1995 MediaWatch that "Liddy meant shooting in self-defense."
The MRC and its writers and bloggers might want to keep their employer's unwavering, uncritical support of Liddy in mind the next time they want to distort Obama's relationship with Ayers.