CNS Quotes Gay-Bashers To Crirticize Bill Opposing Gay Therapy Topic: CNSNews.com
A May 31 CNSNews.com article by Melanie Hunter highlights a California Senate vote on a bill "to prohibit parents from seeking professional counseling for their children with the goal of preventing them from becoming homosexuals." Hunter's two main sources in criticizing the bill head anti-gay hate groups.
Hunter quotes Randy Thomasson, "president of SaveCalifornia.com, a pro-family group based in California," as claiming that the bill would "withhold emotional, mental, and physical help from a child who has been raped or molested, who, as a result of this physical and emotional exploitation, is confused about his or her sexual identity."
The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated Save California as a hate groupfor lying, defaming and spreading false propangada about the LGBT community. Thomasson even blamed a bullied and murdered gay teen for his own death by being open about his sexuality.
Hunter also quoted Paul Cameron, described as "a leading researcher and clinician and chairman of the Family Research Institute." CAmeron asserts that "“Sexual activities and sexual preferences, especially in the case of children, can be modified and changed. ... It is ethically wrong to prohibit parents from seeking and receiving professional assistance to help their own children with serious problems like this.”
As the SPLC details, Cameron's work as a "leading researcher" has been rejected by both the American Psychological Association and the American Sociological Association. We've noted how WorldNetDaily's Molotov Mitchell cited a discredited study to support his claim of a "20-year life expectancy gap between homosexual men and straight men."
When your main sources are haters and/or discredited, it's hard to make an actual news article, yet that's what Hunter tries to pass this off as.
When a press-release mill decides you're not credible, you've got problems.
A May 30 WorldNetDaily article states that PRWeb, "the biggest press release factory in the world" has decided that WND is not “credible” and is a “biased source of news,” after an Obama-bashing group called BOPAC had a press release rejected purportedly for citing a WND article. Of course, any sentient being could tell you that.
Needless to say, WND took great umbrage at this. It declared that PRWeb had "set itself up as a new gatekeeper of political correctness and journalistic propriety," with added outrage and manhood-measuring from WND editor Joseph Farah:
PRWeb is owned by a publicly held company called Vocus, which doesn’t even include any editorial managers among its top executives.
“The question I have is who might Vocus or PRWeb have within its team with the journalistic credentials to make such a call,” wondered Farah. “I have more than 30 years of experience running major-market daily newspapers, doing investigative reporting, hosting a nationally syndicated talk-radio program, consulting with NBC and other major media outlets, teaching journalism at a major university. The WND editorial staff has hundreds of years of combined experiences like mine. Is there even one person at Vocus or PRWeb who has those kinds of credentials?”
Farah loves to beat his critics with his "journalistic credentials," as we found out (except that he learned we have journalistic credentials too).
WND followed up by trying to further spin things in a May 31 article making a vague claim that "WND has been officially accredited by the United Nations for all its departments and affiliates worldwide." WND offers no proof of this, despite claiming that "Confirmation has been delivered to the independent news site that the U.N. media accreditation department officially has approved WND’s letter and accompanying application." The rest of the article rehashes the PRWeb stuff.
The headline on the article states "U.N. recognizes WND as 'bona fide media,'" but that term appears nowhere in the article, quoted or otherwise.
MRC Shocked To Discover Ed Schultz Is Liberal Topic: Media Research Center
A May 30 Media Research Center "Media Reality Check" by Geoffrey Dickens makes thisshocking revelation, so shocking that he brought out the bold italic:
Tuesday’s recall election in Wisconsin marks the end point of MSNBC’s Ed Schultz’s 15 month-long mission to destroy Scott Walker. The conservative Republican governor’s attempt to fix that state’s budget crisis, by reigning in the public unions’ influence, sent Schultz on a rampage. The liberal talk show host turned his self-titled program, The Ed Show, into a hyper-partisan platform from which union activists, liberal journalists and Wisconsin state Democrats could join Schultz in his drive to oust the “radical” Walker out office.
From February 14, 2011 through May 18, 2012 anti-Walker guests dominated by a count of 237 (99.6%) to 1 (less than .5%). In that same span Schultz devoted a portion or a majority of 128 episodes to attacks on Walker.
In other words, the MRC has proved Schultz is liberal -- which Schultz has never denied.
Dickens goes on to make a false-equivalence argument:
Critics of cable news often suggest that MSNBC and Fox News Channel (FNC) are carbon copies of each other with FNC catering to the conservative side. However, over that same time period, Shultz’s 8 PM EDT time slot competitor -- FNC’s The O’Reilly Factor -- spent only 19 shows discussing Walker and those displayed a more balanced guest list with a total of 12 pro-Walker advocates (44%) to 8 (30%) Walker opponents, with 7 (26%) neutral voices.
Of course, Schultz's show and O'Reilly's show are not the same. A more direct parallel would be to Sean Hannity, whose Fox News show is shamelessly conservative. Then again, Bozell makes a weekly appearance on Hannity's show, and hannity makes sure that no alternate view to his complaints about "liberal bias" is allowed to intrude.
Speaking of Bozell, he devotes his June 1 column to further whining about Schultz's "full-throated advocacy of the Wisconsin union agenda." This shameless conservative hack dismisses Schultz as a "shameless liberal hack" and insists that "Fox looks much more objective than Ed Schultz." No mention of Hannity, of course.
In 1938, Action Comics stunned readers with something truly extraordinary, a spandex-clad character named Superman. And with the release of that 10-cent magazine, the mighty man from Krypton introduced one of the greatest art forms the world would ever know, the comic book. Like motion pictures and baseball, the comic book was invented right here in the good ol' U.S. of A., and we still remain the number-one producer of comic books to this day.
Actually, if Wikipedia is to be believed, the first comic book appeared in the United States in 1933. Wikipedia also states that Japanese comics, known as manga, "has many more followers and dwarfs American comics in readership."
Mitchell then asked, "So what have been comic books been saying about our culture since Obama came to power?" His answer:
Well, first off, Obama's rise from '07 to '08 ran right along side one of the most tragic storylines in all of comic book history, and that would be the death of Captain America. Since comic books are an American invention, and because Captain America is the single greatest mosaic, the greatest symbol of American values and patriotism, this is no coincidence.
Astually, the "death" of Captain America, aka Steve Rogers, took place in the very first issue of the 18-issue story arc, which came out in April 2007. in the 2009 series Captain America: Reborn, we learn that Rogers ... did not die! Nevertheless, Mitchell insists later in his video that "Captain America is dead."
Mitchell added: "It's also no coincidence that only halfway through Obama's administration, the other great symbol of American patriotism, that would be Superman, renounced his U.S. citizenship."
For a less conspiratorial view, here's what a Comics Alliance writer noted at the time:
The number one misunderstanding that pundits have had about this story is that it represents an insult to or rejection of America and its values, not as a decision to step back from American politics and foreign policy, as Superman more clearly indicates in the comic. Some of you may remember when Captain America stepped back from his patriotic identity in the '70s after becoming disillusioned with the country; that is distinctly not what is happening here. There is no disillusionment, no repudiation of "The American Way" -- a phrase, by the way, that was not initially associated with Superman, and only appeared after America became involved in World War II.
It's also worth noting that while Superman may be symbolically renouncing his national identity, Clark Kent is another matter entirely, and there's absolutely no reason to think that the Daily Planet reporter's citizenship will change in any way. One of the most fundamental tropes of superheroes is the concept that they have a civilian identity, and when they step into their superhero role, they conceal aspects of that personal identity in order to protect themselves and the people around them from the repercussions of their superheroic actions. In a sense, this is exactly what Superman is doing: removing his American identity from his "professional" identity because he is unwilling to compromise U.S. foreign policy or jeopardize the safety of the American people.
And it wouldn't be ol' Molotov unless he was freaking out about teh ghey:
And most recently, following on the heels of Barack Obama's newly discovered passion for gay marriage, Marvel Comics will make comic book history with the first gay superhero wedding. When asked why they would pen a gay wedding into comics, Marvel scribes said they were merely reflecting current events. They explained most of Marvel's superheroes live in New York, and since New York allows gay marriage, well, they thought it would be appropriate. They thought it would be relevant.
Now, as much as I hate to admit it, they're totally right. If most of their characters were from New Jersey or North Carolina, you couldn't have sch aplotline. It wouldn't an accurate reflection of current events.
As a reader noted in the comments, the first gay wedding in comics was between Apollo and the Midnighter, in the DC-published comic "The Authority" in 2002. (Mitchell responded in the comments that this "was so obscure, so fringe that it was irrelevant.")
Mitchell concluded by whining that superheroes are now fighting bullying and homophobia (cutting a little close to the bone there, Molotov?), adding "Panel by painful panel, comics have not only reflected the death of Captain America, but the death of America itself. This is the zeitgeist. This is the America Obama has wrought."
Meanwhile, Molotov Mitchell is simply overwrought.
MRC, CNS Shill for Movie About Catholic Martyr Topic: CNSNews.com
How much is the production company for the new independent film "For Greater Glory" paying the Media Research Center to promote it? However much it is, the MRC is producing.
Last week's interview between CNS editor in chief Terry Jeffrey and a actor from the film, Eduardo Verastegui -- in which he parrots Jeffrey's own derogatory attack of President Obama, likening him to Henry VIII (never mind the fact that Verastegui isn't even an American citizen) -- was just one part of it. A May 11 article by Jeffrey lionized the film as "an epic story of freedom that Hollywood would not make" and interviewed a star of the film, Andy Garcia.
May 30 saw an unusual MRC convergence -- both Jeffrey and MRC chief Brent Bozell devoted their columns to the film.
Bozell's column hints that he got an advance screening of the film -- presumably a perk for all the advance work the MRC is doing. He disingenously portrays a single negative review of the film on an obscure website as representative of the entire "secularist press." Bozell went on to slobber over the film: "it's a full-fledged major motion picture with grade-A talent. And it's wonderful."
Jeffrey did his own slobbering in his column: "Long after the politicians in power in Washington today have gone the way of Plutarco Elias Calles, Americans will still be watching this movie. Unlike most movies made today, it tells a story built to last."
Jeffrey also used the film as a excuse to further his anti-Obama agenda:
Nor could the makers of "For Greater Glory" have anticipated that less than two weeks before their movie was set to be released, 43 American Catholic dioceses and institutions — including the archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and the University of Notre Dame — would file 12 different lawsuits alleging that the Obama administration was attempting to force Catholics to act against their faith by commanding them to purchase and/or provide health care plans that cover sterilizations, artificial contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.
As we've repeatedly detailed, morning-after pills and contraception covered under health care reform are not abortifacients under the medical definition.
UPDATE: Craig Bannister joins in the shilling in a CNS blog post, playing the Obama card -- headlining his post "Catholics Die Fighting President's Mandate in New Movie" and falsely suggesting that Obama "mandate[d] that all churches be closed" like the government officials in the movie -- and calling it "a humbling call to self-reflection and inspirational, the stuff of which legends are made."
Aaron Klein Anonymous Source Watch (With Bonus Support For A Dictator) Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a May 29 WorldNetDaily article, Aaron Klein claims that "the U.S. is backing protesters, many of whom, informed Middle Eastern security officials tell WND, are now pressing to openly announce an affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood" in Syria. As is his modus operandi for such Obama-bashing claims, Klein quotes no one on the record. He cites the following to back up his reporting in the article:
"informed Middle Eastern security officials"
"Middle Eastern security officials" (it's not clear if these are as "informed" as his other group of "Middle Eastern security officials")
'Egyptian security officials"
"Several knowledgeable Egyptian and Arab security officials"
"One Egyptian security official"
"An Egyptian military attaché"
How many of these are the same people? Who knows? It's difficult to take such reporting seriously with this level of overlapping anonymity.
Not only is Klein hiding behind these supposed anonymous sources, the tone of his article is surprisingly solicitous of Syria's Assad regime, calling it merely embattled and giving the regime's spokesman plenty of space to deny that the regime was responsible for the execution of civilians, including children, in the town of Houla.
Last year, Klein served as a mouthpiece for another Middle Eastern dictator, Egypt's Hosni Mubarak.
Newmax's Blakeman Botches Attack on Obama Topic: Newsmax
Brad Blakeman writes in a May 30 Newsmax column accusing Obama of various evil things:
By Obama demonizing venture capitalists and free markets he diverts attention away from his own intervention in free markets when he nationalized GM and presided over the laying off of tens of thousands of auto workers and suppliers, closed entire auto divisions like, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Saturn and Hummer and closed thousands of U.S. dealerships in order to return GM to profitability.
In fact, GM announced its phase-out of the Oldsmobile nameplate in 2000 -- nine years before Obama took office -- and the final vehicles were made in 2004.
Massie Can't Stop Slurring Jehmu Greene As A 'Negress' Topic: WorldNetDaily
Mychal Massie just can't help himself, it appears.
For the thirdtime in four weeks in his WorldNetDaily column, Massie calls liberal commentator Jehmu Greene a "Negress"-- or, more to the point, a "black racist, socialist, negress." As we've documented "Negress" is an archaic term dating from the era of segregation , and Massie is clearly using it for purposes of denigration. (Besides, "Negress" is redundant when you've already identified someone as black, as Massie did.)
In his increasing desperate attempt to generate any kind of meaningful outrage over Greene calling Tucker Carlson a "bow-tying white boy" (perhaps because Carlson is indeed a white male whose one-time shtick was wearing bow ties), Massie grumbles:
If a white male Fox News Channel contributor, in the course of a rather animated debate with a Muslim, called the Muslim a “towel-headed camel jockey” how long do you think that Fox contributor would remain with Fox?
How about a white female using that term? Ann Coulter did in her 2007 book" If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans." And she defended her insult on, yes, Fox News.
But Massie is not done making futile analogies:
Think back not that long ago. Trent Lott, in a moment of jocularity, made what was meant to be an endearing statement of collegial respect for Sen. Strom Thurmond, and he was promptly excoriated. Lott was assailed to the point that he was ultimately forced to resign from his political career.
Lott's tacit endorsement of Thurmond's segregationist 1948 presidential campaign was a lot of things, but "an endearing statement of collegial respect" was not one of them.
NEW ARTICLE: Creating A Catholic Controversy Topic: Media Research Center
Brent Bozell and the Media Research Center try to manufacture outrage over purported lack of coverage of a lawsuit by Catholic groups against the Obama administration. Too bad they feel the need to throw Jews under the bus to do it. Read more >>
WND's Farah Proud To Be Associated With Right-Wing Nutjobs Topic: WorldNetDaily
The pride is almost palpable in Joseph Farah's May 25 WorldNetDaily column:
When an extremist group like the Southern Poverty Law Center labels you one of the top 30 most dangerous radicals in America, you must be doing something right.
That’s the way I look at it.
But what is it that makes me such a dangerous, right-wing leader to Morris Dees and company?
Do you know what my political views are?
They are a mirror reflection of those of America’s Founding Fathers.
[...]
I’m honored to be listed among so many other great Americans on the SPLC watchlist: David Barton, Michael Brown, Tom DeWeese, Frank Gaffney – even three other WND colleagues: Pamela Geller, Kevin DeAnna and Molotov Mitchell. Just think about it. Of the 30 names, fully 13 percent are WND personalities. Can any other freedom-loving news organization in the world make that claim?
You know all about Muslim-hating Pam Geller and the gay-hating Molotov Mitchell. We've previously noted DeAnna as the author of a fluffy WND-published profile of Pat Buchanan in which it was revealed that Farah met his wife at a Buchanan conference.
As the SPLC notes in its list of the 30 top activists in the "radical right, DeAnna is the former head of something called Youth for Western Civilization, which has received the benefit of fundraising by none other than white supremacist Jared Taylor.
These are the kind of people Farah is proud to be associated with. Think about that.
Tim Graham Anti-Gay Freakout Watch Topic: NewsBusters
The MRC's Tim Graham spent a significant part of his Memorial Day weekend in anti-gay freakout mode, as he is wont to do.
In a May 27 NewsBusters post, Graham ranted about "promoting homosexuality in comic books and strips now that President Obama has un-closeted his long-obvious support for gay marriage," and that a Washington Post article on the subject didn't include "conservatives who thought it was a bad idea." Graham goes on to play the Depiction-Equals-Approval Fallacy card:
In other words, ["Funky Winkerbean" creator Tom] Batiuk feels "we have to" ... proselytize. He told The Huffington Post "It shows promise that this emerging generation will one day bring this cultural war to an end. Until then, this story is an attempt to reach across the divide and speak to the intolerance that still exists on the other side." In other words, liberals seek to "reach out across the divide" and tell conservatives to shut up and get with the new "relevance."
Graham is clearly uncomfortable with that truth about anti-gay activists like him being revealed for what it is.
In a May 28 post, Graham was offended that a child appearing on Ellen DeGeneres' show said he hoped that Barack Obama wins re-election because Obama "said that men and men can marry each other and woman and woman can marry each other and I think that’s right." He then attacks the child's parents for feeding the child's "recitation of liberal mantras":
Rainer and Atticus are liberally raised by their literary parents Matt Pasca and Terri Muuss. (The little fact they use their mother's surname signals the feminism.) Muuss is a survivor of incest and travels with her own stage show called "Anatomy of a Doll." She touts herself as "an actor, poet, teacher, director, and social worker."
Shouldn't we also assume that Graham's children are spouting the conservative mantras he has drilled into them?
Dishonest David Kupelian Takes Anita Dunn Out of Context Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a May 27 WorldNetDaily column about how the horrors of socialism in general and Mao Zedong in particular, David Kupelian writes:
This is even more chilling when one considers that Barack Obama’s former White House communications director, Anita Dunn – who publicly attacked Fox News as illegitimate, called it a wing of the Republican Party and “opinion journalism masquerading as news” – claimed in a speech to students that Mao Zedong is one of her “favorite political philosophers.”
As we've previously detailed when others have done it, this interpretation takes Dunn out of context.Dunn never praised Mao's ideology or excused his atrocities; she was simply pointing out that Mao and Mother Teresa share a similar philosophy about forging your own path in life.
To portray Dunn's remarks as praise of Mao is utterly dishonest. But that's the kind of guy Kupelian is.
WND Tries to Nudge Trump Into Donating to Birther Cause Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah may have despaired that "Donald Trump is not going to come to our rescue" in terms to shoveling cash into WorldNetDaily's anti-Obama super PAC, but that doesn't mean WND will stop pitching him on the idea.
An unbylined May 26 WND article touted how right-wing radio host Steve Malzberg told Sheriff Joe Arpaio to beg Trump for a donation for the cold case posse "investigation" of Obama's "eligibility."
The article also uncritically repeats Arpaio's denial that tax money is being used for sending a sheriff's deputy along with the posse's junket to Hawaii. At no point does Arpaio offer any evidence to back up the claim, nor has he disclosed the donor list for the posse, even though as a 501(c)3 organization it is required to disclose its donors.
At The MRC, 5 Blog Posts Over 5 Months = 'Obsession' Topic: Media Research Center
In a May 21 MRC Culture & Media Institute post, Paul Wilson asserts that "The Huffington Post has developed an obsession with cheating, and has spurned the very concept of monogamy."
Wilson's evidence for this? He cites five posts written over a five-month span.
That's right -- of the hundreds of posts HuffPo posts in a typical month, Wilson has declared that five posts over five months equal an "obsession."
Nevertheless, Wilson goes on to insists that HuffPo has launched an "assault on monogamy."
Which makes it even funnier when a May 25 CMI post by Taylor Hughes asserts that HuffPo, which Hughes snarkily dismisses as "The house organ for the Hollywood left," "finally acknowledged a benefit to monogamy": that men are more likely to experience heart failure when engaging in extramarital sex, as opposed to having sex with a spouse in a familiar environment.
Hughes references the "slew of articles" purportedly generated by HuffPo "citing the positive effects of cheating," linking to Wilson's post that cites only five.
WND's Klayman Just Can't Stop Libeling Obama Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've noted how WorldNetDaily's house attorney, Larry Klayman, sure libels people a lot for a guy who makes his (meager) living these days suing people for defamation. He strikes again in his May 25 column:
Third, Obama has harmed our national security by illegally disclosing classified information about our intelligence-gathering methods, sources and capabilities. In recent front-page New York Times stories I have previously written about, Obama had his minions at the CIA, National Security Agency and Defense Department criminally leaked not only how we gather intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program, but also our war plans if the United States is drawn into a conflict between Israel and the mullahs should a unilateral Israeli attack of the nuclear facilities prove necessary.
As we noted, there's no evidence whatsoever that Obama personally played any role in making such disclosures, and Klayman has not provided any.
This is the sort of thing that opens himself up to a libel lawsuit against him if he can't back up his claim.Given Klayman's long line of defamatory remarks against him, the president certainly has a case.
The rest of Klayman's column is your usual Klayman-esque torrent of Obama derangement:
The French delicacy of foie gras – light brown goose liver served in many culinary forms – should become the official food, if not symbol, of President Barack Hussein Obama’s 2012 campaign to win re-election to the presidency.
[...]
First and foremost, the American people were defrauded into electing as president a person who, even if he was not born in Kenya but Hawaii (Hawaii is unlikelihood given the doctored birth certificate Obama eventually produced), is the offspring of a Kenyan Muslim father. As provided for in the Constitution, only a “natural born citizen” can become president – that is, someone who is sired by both an American citizen mother and father. Thus, Obama was not eligible to be president of the United States, and his false claims that he is eligible is a poison he falsely rammed down the voters’ throats. This lie not only got him and his accomplices control of the White House and executive branch of government, but has severely harmed our nation, given his anti-American sympathies and acts to aid foreign Muslim countries and groups (like the Muslim Brotherhood). The framers were smart. They understood that a president like Obama, with at best divided loyalties, could present a great problem, if not a security risk, for our nation.
Second, obviously as a result of Obama’s foreign Muslim heritage, he has waged a war against not only our Judeo-Christian way of life, but also furthered a radical Muslim takeover of several Arab states that surround the Jewish state.
In fact, the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen," and no American court has issued a definition. Thus, Klayman is lying when he says that only "someone who is sired by both an American citizen mother and father" can be president.
