NewsBusters' Double Standard on Likening People to Terrorists Topic: NewsBusters
The hypocrisy at the Media Research Center truly knows no bounds.
In a Dec. 23 NewsBusters post, Tim Graham complains that a gun-control advocate likened "gun-rights advocates" to terrorists and that NPR host Terry Gross "explicitly comparing the war on terror to the government’s war on gun rights." Not that Graham can name any actual concrete proposal by the government that would qualify as a "war on gun rights."
Then, the very next day -- the very next day! -- Tom Blumer likens journalists to terrorists:
What similarities are there between a domestic terrorist organization and the alleged journalists at the Journal News headquartered in White Plains, New York? At least two biggies: total lack of respect for privacy and complete disregard for others' safety.
Blumer is upset that a New York newspaper published a map of concealed-carry permit holders in its area, claiming that it "Gives criminals an easy roadmap for identifying homes from which they might steal guns" and "identifies who doesn't have 'pistols' as targets who will likely be less able to resist robbery, assault, or worse, both at home and especially in public." Blumer does concede, however, that this information was already public before the newspaper published it.
So, essentially, Blumer is calling a newspaper a terrorist organization for publishing publicly available information. But you already knew that the MRC is an anti-media organization.
If it was bad for Terry Gross and her guests to invoke terrorism, why is it OK for Blumer to do so, just a few posts away from where his rhetorical device was denounced?
WND's 'Man of the Decade' Timing Is A Bit Off Topic: WorldNetDaily
A Dec. 20 WorldNetDaily article by Taylor Rose rather peculiarly touts Rep. Ron Paul as WND's "Man of the Decade":
WND’s “Man of the Decade” award is designated for the man who has, over many years, done the most to represent goodness, perseverance, manliness and character. The recipient should be someone prominent enough to have had an impact on wider American and global opinion. Their successes and failures for the year are to be weighed and considered.
There were no runners-up considered in the category.
What Rose doesn't explain: Why a "Man of the Decade" now? It's not a year ending in zero, which is when decade-long honors are given. It doesn't coincide with anything at WND, which is celebrating its 15th anniversary this year. It has never given such an award before that we can remember.
Given that nobody else was considered for this so-called award, it seems likely that WND just wanted to give some kind of award to Paul before he left Congress at the end of the year, logic be damned.
MRC's Graham Thinks Wash. Post Just Invented 'Saturday Night Massacre' Term Topic: NewsBusters
Tim Graham spends a Dec. 20 NewsBusters post having a hissy fit over the Washington Post's story on the death of right-wing jurist Robert Bork noting his key role in President Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox:
In the immediate aftermath of a real massacre, couldn't the Post back off its ancient ideological hissy fits and acknowledge that firing a special prosecutor -- and the resignation of several officials who didn't want to do the firing -- is not comparable to Adam Lanza mowing down first-graders? Could there be a one-week grace period on overheated Watergate metaphors? Apparently not. When liberal justices die, do they discuss the actual "massacre" of American abortion they legalized?
Is Graham really not aware that the Post did not just invent the term "Saturday Night Massacre" to describe Bork's actions? That it has been called such since shortly after the incident in 1973? It's even in the Encyclopedia Brittanica, for Pete's sake.
The Post was not making a comparison, they were calling it what is has always been called. Is Graham really that stupid, or is he just so desperate to find sometyhing to attack that he felt he had to do this?
WND Columnists Ramp Up Obama Derangement On Sandy Hook Massacre Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bradlee Dean moves past maliciouslying and into full-blown derangement in his Dec. 20 WorldNetDaily column, in which he argues that the Sandy Hook massacre was a setup to aid the passage of a gun treaty at the United Nations:
Shortly after the horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., where Adam Lanza killed 26 people, Barack Obama, the “Architect of this new America,” put himself in front of the cameras to address the massacre and read a scripted plea, attempting to cry over “our children.” He then promised “meaningful action.”
According to Obama’s record, “meaningful action” has been to vote over 241 times in favor of murdering 3,700 of “our children” in the womb per day, going so far as to make sure babies are “snuffed” out if they happen to be born alive.
“Meaningful action” to Obama is gunrunning high-powered assault rifles to Mexican drug lords, leading to the deaths of 300 Mexicans, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and now a Mexican beauty queen. This was in an obvious attempt to pass gun-control legislation, only to blame the American people.
The Sandy Hook shooting occurred just days after Sen. Rand Paul sent out an alert that the U.N. was set to pass the final version of the Small Arms Treaty, supported by Obama the day after election.
Part of the treaty bans the trade, sale and ownership of all semi-automatic weapons … like the one Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and 6 adults.
The “Batman shooting” in Aurora, Colo., also happened to coincide with the same time as negotiations of the U.N. Small Arms Treaty.
The timing is impeccable.
As we reflect upon massacres such as Sandy Hook, Aurora, the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, Tuscon, Ariz., and Columbine, we cannot help but see the similarities: conflicting news reports on what happened, who did the killing and the number of shooters. Eyewitnesses in all of these massacres said there were more shooters than the media maintain, indicating the shootings were coordinated and planned. (See linked reports above.)
Those "linked reports" go to fringe websites like those of Alex Jones.
Adolf Hitler was responsible for attacking his own Reichstag to start a world war. Hitler was also responsible for sending his brownshirts to incite the people so he could play the role of solving their problems. No one believed Hitler was guilty of these crimes until after the fact.
Dean also includes a video suggesting that the Oklahoma City bombing and the Columbine shooting were similarly staged.
Meanwhile, Dean's fellow WND columnist Erik Rush -- after writing that "the Newtown massacre has presented the Obama administration with a stellar opportunity to divert attention from its own abject criminality" -- suggests armed resisitance against anyone who tries to restrict guns, presumably including Obama:
It is of the utmost importance that Americans become aware of the dedicated efforts that are being made to transform us from citizens into subjects, and that we are already at war. This is a war we have not seen the likes of previously and that will challenge notions of war for centuries to come. Even if we did not have the Second Amendment to stand on, I would still support gun rights, because guns are not the issue – power is. Next will come edged weapons control, then blunt weapons control, then compulsory periodic assessments of citizens by government psychologists.
There are millions of Americans for whom “it can’t happen here” has been well-inculcated into their worldview; these have been conditioned to operate at the basest of intellectual levels. They are also the ones who will blindly obey any laws enacted by government, whether these imperceptibly erode their liberties, or require their reporting neighbors to secret police.
There are also Americans – some misguided, some ideologues – who work every day of the week in the cause of compromising our liberties. They are just as dangerous and criminal as those who would stifle any of the liberties contained in the Bill of Rights.
I suppose suggesting that we shoot them wouldn’t be taken very well – although that is precisely what it came down to 236 years ago.
MRC Ignores Its Soros-Bashing To Criticize Koch-Bashing Topic: Media Research Center
Liz Thatcher starts her Dec. 14 Media Research Center Business & Media Institute report on the right-wing Koch brothers by writing, "Few wealthy individuals are demonized as much as Charles and David Koch." Thatcher also made a point of noting the "death threats" the brothers allegedly receive.
Thatcher, of course, doesn't mention that one of those wealthy individuals who is so demonized is George Soros, and that it's her MRC co-workers who are doing that demonizing.
Lead among those is Thatcher's boss, Dan Gainor, who has obsessed over Soros donating less money to liberal media organizations in a decade that billionaires like Rupert Murdoch, Richard Mellon Scaife, and Sun Myung Moon have spent propping up right-wing newspapers in a single year.
Thatcher's article was followed by a Dec. 18 BMI article by Mike Ciandella attacking professor Jeffrey Sachs as a "Soros crony."
Thatcher engaged in her own demonization of Soros, bashing him as a "left-wing billionaire ... who has been open about his wish to change America." She also doesn't mention that such anti-Soros demonization means he gets death threats too.
Thatcher also touts how the Kochs are "big funders of conservative and libertarian-leaning groups and politicians," but doesn't disclose that the MRC has received Koch money through Koch-controlled charities like the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundationand the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.
WND's Prelutsky Blames Jews For the 'War on Christmas' Topic: WorldNetDaily
Although it seems a long time ago, it really wasn’t, that people who came here from other places made every attempt to fit in. Assimilation wasn’t a threat to anyone; it was what the Statue of Liberty represented. E pluribus unum, one out of many, was our motto. The world’s melting pot was our nickname. It didn’t mean that any group of people had to check their customs, culture or cuisine, at the door. It did mean that they, and especially their children, learned English, and that they learned to live and let live.
That has changed, as you may have noticed. And I lay a great deal of the blame at the feet of my fellow Jews. When it comes to pushing the multicultural, anti-Christian agenda, you find Jewish judges, Jewish journalists and the largely Jewish funded ACLU at the forefront. What makes them even more obnoxious is that, by and large, the Jews who are leading the crusade against what is, we should never forget, a national holiday, are secular. So it’s not even a question of their religion being shortchanged; they hate their own, as well. They’re the pinheads who pretend that “separation of church and state” appears in the Constitution.
I should confess that because my family was Jewish, Christmas was never celebrated while I was growing up. But what was there not to like about the holiday? To begin with, it provided a welcome two-week break from school. The decorated trees were pretty, the lights were beautiful, “It’s a Wonderful Life” was a great movie, and some of the best Christmas songs were even written by Jews.
But the dirty little secret in America is that in spite of the occasional over-publicized rants by the likes of Mel Gibson and Michael Richards, anti-Semitism is no longer a problem in society; it’s been replaced by a rampant anti-Christianity.
It is the ACLU, which is largely funded by Jews and has a legal department that is almost exclusively Jewish, that is leading the attack against Christianity in America. It is they who have conned far too many people into believing that when the First Amendment states that Congress is prohibited from establishing a state religion, what it really means is that a Christmas wreath can’t be placed on City Hall. They also cynically ignore the part that prohibits Congress from “abridging the free exercise” of religion.
You may have noticed, though, that the ACLU is highly selective when it comes to religious intolerance. The same group of self-righteous shysters who, at the drop of a “Merry Christmas” will slap you with an injunction, will fight for the right of an American Indian to ingest peyote and a devout Islamic woman to appear veiled on her driver’s license.
I happen to despise bullies and bigots. I hate them when they represent the majority, but no less when, like too many Jews in America, they represent an infinitesimal minority.
I am getting the idea that these self-righteous secular Jews won’t be happy until they pull off their own version of the Spanish Inquisition, forcing Christians to either deny their faith and convert to agnosticism or suffer the consequences.
TPM's Ryan J. Reilly reports that Ronald Kessler is leaving Newsmax due to "editorial changes." We haven't seen any other confirmation of this yet, but it seems to be a reliable report, and it ends six years of largely hacktastic work.
Kessler joined Newsmax in 2006, where he set the tone of his Newsmax tenure by writing fawningly about the Bush administration and bashing Democrats. He cranked that up for the 2006 election, to the point where he essentially blamed then-Rep. Mark Foley's dalliances with congressional pages on the pages, not Foley.
For the 2008 presidential campaign, Kessler was Mitt Romney's man, writing fluff pieces and being kinda creepy toward Romney's wife. But when Romney lost the nomination, he was a good Republican soldier and promoted John McCain, despite having spent the previous several months bashing him to boost Romney's prospects. He also attacked Barack Obama by obsessing over Jeremiah Wright.
Once it was clear that Trump would not run despite Kessler's best efforts, Kessler returned to his once and future presidential love, Mitt Romney, going so far as to declare that Romney would beat Obama in a landslide.
If this is truly the end of Kessler at Newsmax, we bid him a sad farewell, if only because his brand of biased, obsequious reporting is one of the reasons ConWebWatch exists.
Clinton Derangement Syndrome, Mychal Massie Division Topic: WorldNetDaily
In the past year Hillary Clinton has been photographed swilling booze and waddling around on dance floors the world over. And though she presented an unflattering exhibition of cankles and perspiration, she managed to stay upright. She suffered no symptoms from dehydration, and she was able to keep her diplomatic appointments the following day.
But with her appearances before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee this week hanging over her head like the sword of Damocles – she first developed a tummy ache and then, to further bury herself in the part, we’re told she became dehydrated, fainted and suffered a concussion.
And while we’re told she’s resting at home, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear she was observed driving around New York in a red 1961 Ferrari 250GT California Spyder a la a certain Mr. Ferris Bueller.
Newsmax's Hirsen Pushes Dubious Link Between Video Games, Violence Topic: Newsmax
James Hirsen writres in his Dec. 17 Newsmax column on the Newtown massacre:
The time has come for industry figures to take the lead in examining the violent content of entertainment product. Empirical data now exists that links violent content in a variety of media forms to overly aggressive behavior in individuals.
The video gaming industry, however, is of the most pressing concern and deserves particular scrutiny due to the unique characteristics inherent in video game products and the greater potentiality for negative societal consequences as a result of active engagement.
Video games are distinctively interactive and have actually been shown to have addictive qualities. Many of the games are laden with highly charged content.
In November 2012 an Australian National University psychology researcher confirmed the addictive nature of video games, discovering that frequent gamers had “attentional bias,” i.e., individuals were unable to stop thinking about gaming when attempting to focus on other tasks, a phenomenon that also occurs in alcohol, drug, and gambling addictions.
Hirsen doesn't mention that the study also portrays video game addiction as more of a symptom, rather an cause, of other issues:
"Addicts were also more likely to have psychological traits associated with avoiding problems and difficulties rather than actively dealing with their problems....According to Victoria University researcher Daniel Loton, the correlation suggests that excessive computer gaming may be a symptom of possibly unrelated mental anxieties as gamers seek to avoid their problems through immersion in gaming. He said the suggestion that excessive gaming may be a "coping mechanism" is reinforced by the finding that excessive gaming didn't appear to be damaging a gamer's success or satisfaction at work or study. "In fact, excessive players showed marginally higher success in their studies, failing fewer subjects and scoring higher grade averages than they had intended,'' said Mr Loton, a PhD candidate at VU's school of education.
"The excessive gaming may be a coping mechanism for dealing with pre-existing mental health problems," he told the HES."
Further, the Washington Post compiled data showing there appears to be no direct correlation between video game consumption and gun violence, and that countries with higher video game spending per capita than the U.S. have lower rates of gun-related murders.
NEW ARTICLE: WorldNetDaily's Time of Tribulation Topic: WorldNetDaily
WND is not taking President Obama's re-election well, and Joseph Farah's anti-Obama rhetoric is getting more apocalyptic. Read more >>
MRC Fearmongers to Raise Money Topic: Media Research Center
Ads like this are being found across the various Media Research Center websites:
The ads link to the URL mediaofmasscorruption.com, which is actually a fund-raising page for the MRC. There's lots of bold type, italics and fearmongering about the "liberal media":
The liberal media were out of control this year as they worked on behalf of President Obama's reelection. They pulled out all the stops—from covering up his scandals and failures to blatant journalistic fraud. The leftist news media were not only 100% FOR Barack Obama and the liberals, but also 100% AGAINST anyone or anything that threatened them and their socialist agenda.
In the weeks leading up to the election, the left-wing "news" media:
Knowingly covered up the administration's Benghazi debacle
Consistently buried negative economic news—no mention of gas prices, real unemployment numbers, inflation, or the looming fiscal cliff
Refused to report to America what Obama intends to do in the next four years
This isn't just media bias . . . it's censorship disguised as journalism—and it must be exposed!
This recent election has made it abundantly clear that the real battle for the hearts and minds of Americans is not being waged in Washington, D.C., or even on the campaign trail. It's being waged in the media, and the liberals are actively committed to victory by any means—even if that's a complete betrayal of every journalistic principle they were taught. This is why your gift to the Media Research Center is more important than ever. Your support will give the MRC the firepower to:
Continue serving as the ONLY organization capable of and dedicated to exposing the media's anti–free enterprise agenda and to promoting a fair portrayal of the business community in the news and entertainment media
Employ the most dedicated team of conservative expert news analysts who daily monitor all major nationally televised and print news broadcasts, publishing them daily in our state-of-the-art print and Internet publications, e-newsletters, blogs, websites . . . the works
Remain on the cutting edge in the quest for truth, exposing media bias through our network of bias-busting resources—CNSNews.com, MRCTV.org, Newsbusters
Act as the go-to resource for our conservative allies in journalism and talk radio, such as Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, and Cal Thomas, providing them with the indispensable counter-punch to the Left's most notorious purveyors of liberalism in the press
With your support, it won't be long before the liberal media have lost ALL credibility and can no longer influence public opinion.
The MRC probably won't be telling potential donors how it squandered $5 million on billboards and Republican convention festivities and trying to keep people from finding out the truth about Republicans. And really, does the MRC have any credibility given all the dubious "research" it conducts and the false claims it publishes?
WorldNetDaily has long had an adversarial relationship toward correcting false information on its website, typically waiting until an actual or threatened lawsuit to do so. Other times, false information is changed or simply disappears without notifying readers that anything has been changed.
When WND actually does publicly correct something, it's done with as much foot-dragging as possible. A vivid demonstration of this is a Dec. 17 WND article by Chelsea Schilling, snottily headlined "Here's your correction, Wikipedia founder."
Schilling details the tale of how Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales objected to Judith Reisman's claim in a Dec. 14 WND column that he "made his original fortune as a pornography trafficker." Schilling details WND's pissiness in pointing out that a search portal Wales once operated called Bomis had a "premium" feature offering access to X-rated content, as described on a Wikipedia page about it:
However, Wales told WND the Wikipedia page “doesn’t say anything remotely like me making a ‘fortune’ from ‘pornography.’” He asked, “What do you intend to do about this libel?”
Farah responded, “Let me get this straight: You admit making money from pornography, but you feel defamed because you didn’t make enough for it to be considered a ‘fortune’?”
Wales also argued that the factual accuracy of Wikipedia’s own “Bomis” entry is irrelevant: “We are not discussing Wikipedia. If there are errors in Wikipedia, this does not relieve you of the moral and legal responsibility not to defame me, sir. You know that.”
Farah asked, “Now Wikipedia is lying?”
“We are not talking about Wikipedia,” Wales retorted. “This is a defamatory falsehood. I have never made any ‘fortune’ as a ‘porngraphy [sic] trafficker.’ Fix it.”
Attempting to get to the bottom of the issue, Farah asked Wales how much money he generated from Bomis.
“For a few years, I took a modest salary as programmer and CEO (averaging less than $60k per year for the life of the company),” Wales explained. ”The company declined until we closed it; there was no sale and no big earnings of any kind.
“The revenue of the company was primarily advertising. The best period of time for the company came when we were part of the NBCi network (a search engine and web portal run by NBC television), but that quickly went away when NBCi collapsed as a part of the general dot-com collapse.”
Farah asked: “Are you suggesting that Bomis was not trafficking pornography? Or that you were not involved in Bomis?”
“By any sane measure of our revenue and profits, no, we were not ‘trafficking pornography,’” Wales replied. ”Like many dot-com startups of the era, we struggled with what kind of advertisers to accept and we did have ‘adult’ advertisers – as did all the other major portals at the time. 99% of our revenue was not from that, so it’s totally ludicrous to claim we were ‘trafficking pornography.’”
Wales added, “You might as well claim that the owner of a local convenience store chain (who probably made more money than I did during that era) made a fortunate a [sic] pornography trafficker if they sold Playboy behind the counter. It’s nonsense and you know it.”
Ultimmately, Schilling writes: "After thoroughly researching the issue, WND has edited Reisman’s column to read: 'Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s creator, originally made his living off a website that earned revenue from pornography traffickers.'" Yet Reisman's column contains no correction or any other notification that a false claim has been changed.
Schilling has a lengthy record of making false and misleading claims that WND has not seen fit to correct, so this show of purported "thorough research" is the exception rather than the rule.
Schilling uses the remainder of her article to rehash WND's war on Wikipedia for publishing objectionable images and for purportedly allowing people to mock WND and editor Joseph Farah. Schilling also includes this note from Farah to Wales:
“You might recall that Wikipedia once claimed I had an affair … (Untrue) It claimed I was a homosexual. (Untrue) Both of these false accusations actually resulted in material and professional harm to me. So I am sure you will extend some patience while we address this issue.”
Farah fails to understand how Wikipedia works. He should ask his employee Aaron Klein, who had a subordinate write and edit Klein's Wikipedia page, making sure any less-than-flattering information was deleted.
Farah also apparently doesn't understand the difference between a user-generated site like Wikipedia and a supposedly professionally edited and curated site like WND, which theoretically should have higher standarrds. Yet Farah himself has admitted that -- and apparently has no problem with -- WND publishes false information.
Also: How exactly did Farah suffer "material and professional harm" from malicious Wikipedia edits? We'd love to hear the details, but we also suspect it's not all that true since most people understand that these things happen.
NewsBusters Tries to Build Clinton Concussion Conspiracy Topic: NewsBusters
In a Dec. 17 NewsBusters post, P.J. Gladnick is very, very upset that the media is taking at face value Hillary Clinton's claim of a concussion as a reason to testify before Congress about the Benghazi attack, insisting that it has been "conveniently untreated" and that "mainstream sources conveniently bought into Hillary's excuse." Gladnick adds, "One has to wonder if these same reporters would have lacked any skepticism if, say, H.R. Haldeman had claimed that a "concussion" for which he was not hospitalized prevented him from testifying about Watergate."
The MRC has long despised Hillary Clinton -- Brent Bozell and Tim Graham even wrote a book trying to pre-emptively torpedo her 2008 presidential campaign. So why wouldn't it treat her concussion as some sort of Watergate-level conspiracy?
Birther Dead-Enders At WND Are Still At It Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily has de-emphasized its birther obsession since President Obama's re-election -- given that WND staked what little reputation it has on trying to destroy Obama with birtherism as its centerpiece only to fail miserably, that's not a bad idea -- but it hasn't given up the ghost completely.
It is well-known that Obama had for years refused to release his claimed Hawaiian birth certificate and other official documents that reflect on whether he was born in U.S. territory as he claims, or in Kenya where his father of the same name hailed. If born in Kenya or somewhere else outside of American territory, Obama would be ineligible to run for and serve as president. And, even if born in America, Obama does not qualify as a “natural born citizen” under our Constitution, since he was not, as also required under our law to be president, sired by two American citizen parents. Only his mother was an American at the time of his birth.
As even a casual birther observer knows, Obama has released two birth certificates, the state of Hawaii has certified that he was born there, and the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen" Klayman is lying when he says Obama does not qualify.
Meanwhile, a Dec. 16 WND article by Bob Unruh details Klayman's latest filing in his birther lawsuit on behalf of Michael Voeltz in Florida. Unruh uncritically repeats Klayman's discredited arguments and, as is official WND policy, refuses to tell the other side of the story. Which makes Unruh a propagandist, not a journalist.
MRC Issues Not-So-Special Report On 'War on Christmas' Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center apparently decided it wanted in on some of that sweet (if bogus) "War on Christmas" action.
Thus, we have a Dec. 11 MRC Culture & Media Institute "special report" by Paul Wilson titled "Taking Christ out of Christmas." And he does all of the usual whining and self-victimization you'd expect:
Secularist Grinches have long sought to obscure “the reason for the season.” But censorship of Christianity is increasingly a media mission for all seasons; Christians are pressured to hide their public faith under baskets. From the media-driven assault on Christian restaurant Chick-fil-A to increasingly snide commentary masquerading as journalism, the media are increasingly pushing for a public retreat from religion.
And it’s working, at least according to one study. In October, Pew reported that a fifth of the American public, and a third of adults under 30, have no religious affiliation. And 88 percent of those people aren’t interested in belonging to a church.
The media, government, and schools, pushed by secularist groups, aim to litigate, browbeat, and photo-shop Christianity out of the public sphere. Christmas remains their most high-profile target, but increasingly, it’s an all-weather campaign.
As we all know, the MRC's "special reports" tend to be less than special, and that's the case here. Not only does he try to baselessly link isolated incidents, he even drags in criticism of Chick-fil-a because its president "spoke in favor of traditional marriage." Actually, Chick-fil-a has done a lot more than that, but Wilson won't tell you about it.
We'll outsource the rest of our criticism to Jon Stewart.