Erik Rush: America's A Drunk Sorority Girl, Obama's Trying to Date-Rape Her Topic: WorldNetDaily
Yes, Erik Rush wrote this in his Nov. 11 WorldNetDaily column:
Like the sorority girl who fell asleep drunk, awakening to an opportunistic frat boy peeling her clothes off, Americans let their guard down in a big way. Fortunately, the fear roused us from that torpor and insensibility, and we were able to fend him off before the deed was done. But we have a responsibility now to determine that he doesn't have the opportunity to harm anyone else.
It's Anti-Gay Week At the MRC Topic: Media Research Center
It's apparently Anti-Gay Week at the Media Research Center. It started off by complaining that that a magazine honored a gay teen -- being nice to gays is irrefutable evidence "liberal bias," as far as the MRC is concerned -- and it's only ratcheted upward.
A Nov. 9 NewsBusters post by Matt Hadro was perturbed that CNN show graphic footage of gays attending church and featured "a Christian pastor who accepts gays and lesbians in his congregation and disputes historic, biblical teaching on the immorality of homosexuality." Hadro seemed even more disgusted that "CNN also featured clips of congregants praising the church's affirming stance on gay and lesbian relationships." Apparently, such graphic footage of non-homosexuals praying to a Christian God is utterly offensive to Hadro.
This, presumably, is what the MRC's Tim Graham was referring to when he tweeted: "CNN: We're the objective, nonpartisan network. (Except for offering hours and hours of propaganda time to the GeLBoT cause)."
"GeLBoT"? What does that even mean?
Then, in a Nov. 10 MRC Culture & Media Center article, Erin Brown was outraged a lack of outrage, asencapsulated in her headline, "Media Apathetic About Glee’s Gay Kiss":
The November 9 episode of Glee titled “Never Been Kissed” was quite the show stopper – unless you’re the media. The unexpected homosexual kiss between male high school students was nothing short of jaw-dropping, and yet the liberal media were “ho hum” on the controversy.
Glee’s stereotypical jock character Karofsky, who has bullied openly gay character Kurt all season, planted a kiss on Kurt in last night’s episode. Kurt, played by actor Chris Colfer has been heralded as nothing short of a superhero for his sensitive portrayal of the difficult high school experience of gay high school students.
The “groundbreaking” musical comedy-drama has never shied away from debate, as it has aired episodes featuring teen pregnancy, oral sex, and high school students discovering their sexual identity, among other hot topics. But it’s curious that the media would simply report the gay kiss as merely “the other kiss that made news was the same sex smooch,” wrote CBS.
Teen pregnancy is apparently not a problem for Brown since there are no gays involved.
Is Molotov Mitchell Encouraging Violence Against Gays? Topic: WorldNetDaily
Molotov Mitchell uses his latest WorldNetDaily video to ratchet up his already prodigious hatred of gays by appearing to encourage Christians to commit violence against them, complete with the factual misrepresntations we've come to expect from him.
Mitchell says:
A few years back, a homosexual art exhibit "Ecce Homo" came to Sweden. "Ecce Homo" contained 12 photographic portrayals of Jesus Christ, often in the nude, surrounded by leather fetishists and cross-dressers. It was so vile it even offended many of the homosexuals in Sweden.
In fact, only one of the 12 photos in the exhibit depicts Jesus in a state of graphic nudity; the others include depictions that would not be out of place in religious imagery, which the photos by artist Elisabeth Ohlson Wallin were trying to emulate.
Of course, the point of Wallin's exhibit was to depict Jesus in the company of societal outcasts as a commentary on how some religious people and institutions have treated homosexuals. But since Mitchell thinks gays are icky, that point was presumably lost on him.
Molotov continues:
But the bridge-building gay artist didn't just set up in Swedish art houses or museums. That would be too considerate, that would be too normal. No, "Ecce Homo" was displayed in churches. Yes, big churches, churches like the Uppsala National Cathedral, the leading cathedral in Sweden, with the permission of the Protestant Bishop Hammar of Uppsala. May God grant that guy everything he deserves.
Well, the "Ecce Homo" tour across Sweden was going gaily until it reached a Christian center in the evangelical stronghold of Jonkoping. There, zealous Christian youth said enough and started setting things on fire outside the gallery. When the museum staff showed up to stop it and put their hands on the kids, they bit off more than they could chew. A riot erupted. Roughly 30 Christians were in there throwing punches and kicks. The police had to be called. It was a Swedish free-for-all.
Molotov declares this to be violent behavior worthy of emulation:
Of course, we gentle American Christians would never behave in such a hateful, un-Christ-like manner. I mean, would Jesus do that? Actually, he did. Look it up. What's the one time in Scripture that Jesus got so angry, so furious, that he actually went and made a whip, went into a building and started a one-man riot? When the temple, the church was being defiled. Ah, yes, you may be thinking, I do seem to recall some business with a whip.
Yes, Jesus, the most loving person to ever walk the face of the earth, even he didn't hesitate to run up in there and wreck the place. So for all of you politically correct American Christians, I ask: What's your problem?
Nothing like a little violent censorship -- the logical extension of which is violence against people he hates -- to liven up ol' Molotov's day.
Polling today for the 2012 presidential race is an exercise in futility since it cannot possibly predict how things will turn out two years from now. So anyone who does it likely has an ulterior motive.
See if you can detect the ulterior motive in the headlines of Newsmax's 2012 polling:
This is what passes for "media criticism" at NewsBusters. From a Nov. 9 post by Noel Sheppard.
Keith Olbermann on Tuesday almost dislocated his shoulder patting himself on the back for all the attention he got after being suspended by NBC last Friday.
Like a kindergartner bragging to his parents about the fabulous day he had in school, the "Countdown" host told his viewers how many people signed a petition for his return, the number of tweets he received, and the various television programs that wanted to interview him[.]
[...]
Readers probably noticed only a brief clip of these disgusting festivities was provided. This was intentionally done to protect computers from the damaging effects of the nausea most would have experienced if subjected to the entire segment.
In the history of television, no man has ever spent so much time congratulating himself while the cameras were rolling.
After giving his side of the story, again like a kindergartner, Olbermann played video clips of various TV personalities discussing - you guessed it! - him.
Having done so, and obviously feeling uniquely proud of himself, MSNBC's biggest star concluded by saying how this incident was a fine example of democracy in action, for people quickly after he made his political contributions found out about them.
By contrast, if he had donated to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, America would never have known.
Show of hands: who wishes he had contributed to the Chamber thereby saving us from this pathetic and embarrassing display of juvenile self-congratulation?
For those that are curious, this seeming six-year-old was actually born in 1959.
Yep - he's 51.
Tough to believe, isn't it?
Sheppard's contemptuous screed demonstrates that if there's anyone who knows about behaving like a kindergartener, it's him.
(We're mildly surprised he didn't lazily work in "smackdown" somewhere.)
Kincaid's Favorite Economist Is A Vaguely Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Freak Topic: Accuracy in Media
A Nov. 8 Accuracy in Media column by Cliff Kincaid plugs the claim by writer Zubi Diamond that the Federal Reserve is "interfering in free markets through currency manipulation," which is "the type of stuff we accused the communist and socialist governments of doing," adding that the Fed's policy of quantitative easing is in alignment with "George Soros’s agenda to destroy global capitalism."
Kincaid hasdonenumerouscolumnsfeaturingDiamond, whom he touts as a "financial expert," and Diamond himself his written two AIM columns. Diamond is also the author of the curiously punctuated "Wizards of Wall Street: & Washington Lap Dogs; The Scam That Elected Barack Obama: The Economic Crisis."
But who is Diamond beyond thte "writer-composer" and "entrepreneur investor by trade" he claims to be? As it turns out, he's a conspiracy theorist with apparent anti-Semitic leanings.
As Media Matters details, the self-published "Wizards of Wall Street" engages in smears of George Soros that are rooted in anti-Semitic stereotypes, including calling Soros the "mastermind" behind of a "cabal of slithery rich" who "visited financial violence on the American people to get Barack Obama elected."
Diamond goes on to state that Soros "chose Obama" to be president because he "wanted somebody that hates the traditional America, and its constitutions, a left wing radical, like himself."
No wonder Kincaid likes Diamond so much -- Diamond's as much of a conspiracy freak as Kincaid is.
Obama and company remind me of certain groups in the Middle East who are only interested in working together and compromising when it buys them time to secretly regroup and rearm.
MRC's Gainor Tries to Portray Obama As A Druggie Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Dan Gainor ventures into some serious Obama-hating territory in his Nov. 4 column. In the midst of a post-election tirade about the "liberal media," he writes:
So-called journalists went digging into [Christine] O’Donnell’s high school spelling but ignored what her opponent did in college. This was the identical strategy news outlets used in the 2008 presidential race where The New York Times savaged John McCain’s wife Cindy for her legal drug use and never did a similar investigation into Obama’s own confessed drug activity.
Perhaps that's because Obama's "confessed drug activity" took place as a teenager and there is no evidence it ever ventured into a full-blown addiction. Cindy McCain, meanwhile, was a fully grown adult when she ventured into what Gainor whitewashes as "legal drug use" -- in fact, it was an addiction to painkillers so severe that she was was caught stealing drugs from her nonprofit organization to feed her addiction. And the New York Times hardly "savaged" McCain over this; rather, the Times mentioning it in just two paragraphs of a 41-paragraph profile of her.
The last person to obsess over Obama's "confessed drug activity" was rabid Obama-hater Jerome Corsi, who laughably claimed that Obama "has yet to answer" questions about whether he stopped using drugs.
Gainor also railed against how election discourse has fallen "somewhere deep into the gutter where bloggers offer $100,000 for a non-existent Glenn Beck sex tape." Gainor didn't mention that this was universally criticized, and that even the NewsBusters link he provides notes that the solicitation has been deleted and the author apologized.
And needless to say, Gainor casts a blind eye to bad election behavior by conservatives, such as Carl Paladino's threatening a reporter.
LeBoutillier Mulls Rooting For Bad Economy To Hurt Obama Topic: Newsmax
John LeBoutillier has an existential crisis in his Nov. 8 Newsmax column: He wants President Obama to lose in 2012, but a recovering economy would play to Obama's benefit. Should he root for the economy to remain in the doldrums just to spite Obama?
Here is a terrible conundrum: we all want our fellow Americans to do well, to be happy, to find the jobs they desire. We all want the economy to recover — and soon. But if that recovery happens, it is likely that President Barack Obama will get the credit (presidents get the blame or credit regardless of what they do) and will be a strong favorite to be re-elected in 2012.
Furthermore, his big government spending spree will be credited with the recovery — just as FDR’s New Deal “cured” the Great Depression. For generations to come, historians, political scientists, and economists will once again praise massive federal spending as the sure-fire cure-all for economic problems.
On the other hand, we can’t be rooting for the economy to remain lifeless. Yes, that might very well spell doom for President Obama’s chances in 2012. But do we want years more of the misery we are experiencing now?
No!
So we root for economic recovery. And if the price is Obama getting re-elected, so be it. Maybe the Republican House and a 2012-elected GOP-controlled Senate can restrain the worst of Obama.
If LeBoutillier is thinking about this, you can bet other conservatives -- and conservative members of Congress -- have as well. And one must also wonder if those same conservative congressmen sought to obstruct Obama's economic legislation in order to blame him for a stalled recovery. It's not a new idea, after all.
Gutless Aaron Klein Still Ignoring Us Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily loves to whine when it or one of its writers is attacked by what it considers an easy target (as we found out). It doesn't like to get into fights with people who fight back with facts (as WND subsequently learned about us).
So we have a Nov. 3 WND article complaining that the conservative-leaning UK Telegraph called anti-Obama screed author Aaron Klein a "polemical journalist based in Jerusalem." WND declared this to be a "slam."
The newspaper claims that Klein "launched the idea of Obama as Manchurian candidate, a hollow figure promoted by the 'anti American fringe nexus instrumental in building his political career,' and the 'top Czars with Communist links' in the White House, who include Obama's political strategist and former campaign manager David Axlerod."
Klein countered, "The book boasts almost 900 footnotes and is the most exhaustive journalistic investigation ever performed into Obama and his background. It is not an 'Obama-hating' work. In fact, it is an academic tome."
Still, WND was proud that the Telegraph prounounced Klein's book among the "heavyweight champions" of the "no less than 46 'hate Obama' books published so far."
Of course, the idea that Klein's book is "an academic tome" is laughable. We should know -- we read it and exposed its bias, misleading claims and conspiracy-mongering.
But Klein won't criticize us. After all, we work in facts, and WND and Klein don't dare get involved with trying to rebut facts.
WND and Klein are content to take potshots at those it considers inferior. They won't respond to us, which is evidence of their respect for us and our command of the facts.
New Article -- More Than An Endorsement, Part 2: The Flip-Flop Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax endorses the Republican candidate for Florida governor it fought against during the primary -- and donates $100,000 to a group linked to him. Plus: Newsmax hosts the website for Dick Morris' PAC. Read more >>
Looking for the truth about Obama's trip to India? Don't go to WorldNetDaily -- it's content to report lies, and that comes straight from the head man himself.
By now every American knows how much U.S. taxpayers are spending for Barack Obama's 10-day trip to India this week.
The price tag is $200 million a day – or an even $2 billion for the whole excursion that involves the deployment of 3,000 people, 34 warships and hundreds of helicopters.
The White House denies the $200 million price tag, but that's what India officials estimated. The White House refuses to provide a figure.
Farah is lying to you. "India officials" is actually a single, anonymous claim reported in the Indian media. Farah's taking refuge in claiming that the White House won't reveal the real cost -- even though it would compromise Obama's security to do so -- is just a pathetic attempt to keep the story alive.
The $200 million figure has been discredited by pretty much every credible news source on the planet -- even Fox News. That leaves disreputable outlets lke WND who insist on clinging to the lie in order to further its anti-Obama agenda.
But if WND couldn't lieaboutObama, it wouldn't have much of an anti-Obama agenda.
MRC Upset That Magazine Honored Gay Teen Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center lets its anti-gay agenda fly again in a Nov. 3 Culture & Media Institute column by Erin Brown, who is upset that a magazine would dare to honor a gay teen:
To be honored as one of Glamour magazine’s “Women of the Year,” a woman must have made a huge impact, changed the world for good, broken boundaries, stereotypes, etc. Except when she doesn’t. Sometimes all she needs to do is complain to the ACLU that her high school is refusing to let her bring a lesbian date to prom.
Constance McMillen, a high school senior in Fulton, Mississippi, received national attention this past spring when her school rejected her idea to come to prom, in a tuxedo, hand-in-hand with her girlfriend. McMillen reported Itawamba Agricultural High School to the ACLU, and was heralded as a hero by prominent lesbian activists such as Ellen Degeneres and Melissa Etheridge. When asked why McMillen deserved to be honored as one of Glamour’s “Women of the year,” Etheridge (a 2005 Glamour WOY winner) said, “She stood up and said, ‘This is who I am.’ When someone does that, it changes the world. It gives hope.”
McMillen was honored among truly great women that did significantly more than display stubbornness at a young age and wreck everyone else’s prom.
How did McMillen wanting to bring the date of her choice to the prom "wreck everyone else’s prom"? Brown doesn't explain.
This is not the first time the MRC has denigrated McMillen. In June, the MRC's Tim Graham bizarrely suggested that McMillen was cashing in on the prom rejection because "Ellen DeGeneres gave her a $30,000 scholarship check" and "she's meeting with Obama and being celebrated at Gay Pride parades and ACLU fundraisers at Woodstock."
Reisman Explains Word She Invented Topic: WorldNetDaily
We noted that Judith Reisman, in her Oct. 27 WorldNetDaily column, made use of the heretofore unknown word "homosexist." Reisman's Nov. 6 WND column explains the word -- namely, the fact that she made it up:
I recently coined the terms "homosexist" and "homosexism" to describe "Spirit Day," Oct. 22, 2010 when President Barack H. Obama challenged American youth to view homosexuality as "a source of pride and a source of strength."
I've been asked, as Socrates says, to define the word "homosexist."
Webster defines "homosexual" as "of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex." Many homosexuals, aware of their early physical and emotional wounding, are now "ex-gays," while others quietly endure.
However, the suffixes -ist, -ism, -ize connote someone who holds certain principles, doctrines, schools of thought, as in "sexist" or "racist."
Synonyms include "chauvinist, doctrinaire, dogmatist, fanatic, fiend, maniac, monomaniac, opinionated, partisan, persecutor, zealot" – as opposed to "humanitarian, liberal, tolerator."
"Homosexualists" are zealots, partisans, chauvinists and persecutors, dogmatists in their fanaticism (see "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation").
Even the left-leaning Wikipedia admits "homosexists" label normal married couples "breeders," "a term of disparagement used primarily by homosexuals to describe heterosexuals who have produced or will produce offspring."
What is the "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation" she is referring to? She explains:
In our study, "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation" (1995), Dr. Charles Johnson and I analyzed the premier "gay" magazine, The Advocate.
Was The Advocate humanitarian, or homosexist? To answer that question, our research rank-ordered the numbers of most-to-least "In Search of" advertisements. The Advocate published ads and essays on sex with boys and on how to seduce "straight" men and boys. I have sanitized the language for this column.
Here's the paper she's referring to. In it, Reisman and Johnson compares ISO personal ads in the "predominately heterosexual" Washingtonian magazine with those in the "predominately homosexual" Advocate in order to determine "what is common heterosexual and homosexual conduct. Needless to say, Reisman finds results designed to further her anti-gay agenda: Gay personal ads are more likely to seek someone for"prostitution services" and "man/teen sex," while heterosexual ads are more interested in "time-bound relationships" and someone "to share nonsexual interest."
Reisman's methodology is flawed. In citing demographic data, she overlooks that the a magazine geared toward a specific city and a magazine geared to a nationwide audience in a specific culture defined by sexual identity are not really equivalent, despite her unsupported assertion that the Advocate "is often described as the homosexual equivalent of Newsweek." And even she concedes that "it is inaccurate to state that the men advertising ISO represent all male readers of these two publications."
Reisman, of course, is not interested in an objective analysis of the subject -- she's too biased. She has an agenda, and it takes shoddy research and mae-up words to advance it, she's totally down with that.
