ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

ConWebWatch: home | archive/search | about | primer | shop

Thursday, March 12, 2015
WND's Farah Obsessively Speculates Whether Obama Will Leave Office In 2017
Topic: WorldNetDaily

President Obama is living rent-free inside Joseph Farah's head.

That's been true for years. of course -- how else could he use his WorldNetDaily to perpetuate false birther conspiracies? -- but it has become especially apparent over the past week, in which Farah has written not one, not two, but three columns devoted to speculating whether Obama will voluntarily leave office when his term ends in January 2017.

Farah kicked off his baseless frenzy of speculation in his March 5 WND column, declaring that Obama "respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power" and, thus, might refuse to leave the White House when his term ends. Farah huffed; "Again, do I think Obama will leave office in January 2017? Yes I do. But, with a track record like this – and, actually much worse – should we simply take it for granted?"

Farah followed up in his March 8 column, upset that Right Wing Watch highlighted his earlier column but proud that his buddy Rush Limbaugh enthustiastically endorsed his speculation. He continued to rant:

There’s simply no organized opposition to Obama’s illegal, criminal actions and behavior. He’s getting away with all of it. There are no serious repercussions. No political price. No major media opposition. Few judicial rulings that worry him. Not one political, religious or social institution that is holding him accountable – least of all the Republican Party.

A handful of vocal critics on the Internet and talk radio point out his violations of the law, American tradition, the concept of constitutionally limited government with a system of checks and balance, not to mention decency and basic morality. But there is no operating political mechanism to stop him from doing anything and everything he wants to do.

Yet Farah wasn't done speculating. His March 10 column invented an excuse why Obama would want to stay -- free vacations:

How many vacations have you taken in the last six years?

Have you taken six?

I doubt most Americans have been able to do that. For families, it might be even tougher.

Do you know how many Barack Obama has taken?

38.

That’s right. That’s more than six vacations per year – all expenses paid by you the taxpayer. And these are not your routine week-at-the-beach excursions. These would almost all be vacations of a lifetime for even very wealthy Americans. He and the first family, God love them, are living it up on your dime.

[...]

No doubt Obama will be in a position to make lots of money after the presidency, whenever he decides to end it. But it’s hard to imagine him enjoying six all-expense-paid vacations every year at his venue of choice. Not too many people live that kind of life – even with the “endowments” recent past presidents often get from their oil baron friends in the Middle East.

Do you think Obama’s about to give that up and move out of the White House to make room for Hillary Clinton?

I don’t know. The more I think about it, the less convinced I am.

Farah seems to have overlooked the fact that as of the same point in their presidencies, George W. Bush had taken more than three times as many vacation days as Obama has. Yet we don't recall Farah ever complaining about the amount of vacation time Bush took.

Yep, Obama's living rent-free in Farah's head. And it must kill Farah to know that -- after all, he destroyed what little journalistic reputation WND had with his obsessive drive to personally destroy the president.

Yet after all this time and the destruction of his own reputation, Farah just can't evict the president from his head. Sad, isn't it?


Posted by Terry K. at 1:06 AM EDT
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
CNS' Starr Apparently Thinks Researchers Use Rats Off The Street
Topic: CNSNews.com

A March 6 CNSNews.com article by Penny Starr is about a biotech firm that "transplants organs from aborted babies into lab rats with the goal of growing them for use in patients who need organ transplants." But look at the photo accompanying Starr's article:

Yes, that's a picture of street rats rummaging through a garbage bag. Apparently Starr thinks those are the kind of rats researchers use.

Actually, laboratory rats are notably different from wild street rats, if Wikipedia is to be believed; scientists have bred many strains or "lines" of rats specifically for experimentation.

So, no, Ms. Starr, rats in the street are not running wild with organs from aborted babies on them, however much you and other anti-abortion activists believe in your heart that is true.

Also, note that CNS is once again misusing Associated Press content by sticking this completely unrelated photo on this story. CNS has a habit of rewriting AP headlines to make them more biased.


Posted by Terry K. at 8:10 PM EDT
WND's Klein Serves As Netanyahu Press Aide, Censors His Campaign Problems
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Aaron Klein is continuing his unpaid role (near as we can tell) as a public-relations agent for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's re-election campaign in a March 9 WorldNetDaily article:

In an interview with Hebrew media over the weekend that received no English-language news media attention, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of what he called a foreign-funded election plot to mobilize Israeli Arab voters in a bid to replace him at next week’s polls.

WND exposed the purported scheme last month in an article documenting a State Department-financed nonprofit based in Israel is currently engaged in a major effort to get young Arab citizens to the voting booths in the upcoming Israeli elections.

Israeli election trends have long demonstrated that Arab citizen’s vote overwhelmingly for left-wing and Arab parties. Any increase in the Arab vote would clearly come at the expense of the Likud Party and other right-wing parties.

Can't have Israeli citizens exercise their voting rights if they're voting for the wrong candidate, can we?

Klein goes on to repeat his claim that an anti-Netanyahu campaign "a consulting firm whose senior leadership is comprised mostly of former top staffers for President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign," ignoring the fact that American conservative political strategists have been routinely hired by Netanyahu's campaign.

While Klein does his biased duty in protecting Netanyahu, he has shown no interest this far in reporting the problems Netanyahu and his party are having in this campaign. As Bloomberg reports:

  • Powerful former Mossad director Meir Dagan said that Netanyahu's conduct of the conflict with the Palestinians would lead Israel to being either a binational or an apartheid state.
  • A Likud campaign commercial showing "people in a self-help group, all there due to Netanyahu's policies" included supposedly lazy workers and a Hamas terrorist. Bloomberg noted: "In a country with deep socialist roots, the nasty portrayal of lazy workers was edgy enough. But depicting a Hamas terrorist in the same group as laborers went way too far."
  • A leaked document allegedly indicating that Netanyahu had agreed in principle to return to the 1967 lines in a deal with the Palestinians, something he has said publicly he would never do.

And if Klein has anything to do with it, he will never report on negative developments for Netanyahu unless he can somehow put a positive spin on it.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:03 PM EDT
Compare and Contrast
Topic: WorldNetDaily

You can hang him from a tree, but they'll never sign with me. There will never be a ni**** at SAE.

-- Chant by Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity members at University of Oklahoma, March 7 video

Jim Crow died in 1964. 

-- Mychal Massie, March 9 WorldNetDaily column

Massie also writes:

Once again the specter of race has reared it ugly head displaying five undeniable truths: 1) blacks love to be victims; 2) whites, regardless of their intentions or motivations, will always be accused of harboring deep-seated prejudice toward blacks; 3) only blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals and Muslims are permitted to be proud of what they are; 4) whites do not enjoy freedom of speech unless it is politically correct and liberal; and 5) numbers 1 through 4 are always true.

Massie forgets another undeniable truth: Black conservatives like him have special privilege to say things would be considered racist if said by a white person, but he has not demanded similar treatment.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:06 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 1:08 AM EDT
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
CNS Portrays Extremist Pastors As 'Conservative Black Leaders'
Topic: CNSNews.com

CNSNews.com is devoting another article to its homophobic obsession with the cherry-picked, out-of-context reference President Obama made to gays during last weekend's speech in Selma, Alabama. In it, Lauretta Brown obtains reaction from what she claims are "conservative black leaders" to the reference, giving no indication she provided the correct and complete context of the statement to them.

So who are these "conservative black leaders"  that Brown thinks are worthy of perpetuating this manufactured controversy?

-- Bishop E.W. Jackson is a notorious homophobe, declaring that gays are “very sick people psychologically, mentally and emotionally” and asserting that God will punish America for advancing marriage equality. and Obama-hater. He's also a rabid Obama-hater, stating last month that Obama may be mentally ill.

-- Jesse Lee Peterson is a Sean Hannity-backed pastor and WorldNetDaily columnist who has issues with women. He's also a rabid Obama-hater who once claimed that the president is "committed to spreading evil."

In his comments to CNS, Peterson went even farther off the Obama-hating rails by likening Obama to a Ku Klux Klan leader. No, really:

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson of BOND (The Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny) was similarly critical of the president’s speech.

“There was no hope in that rally,” Peterson said. “Just think about this: 50 years later we have a black president in the United States of America. This country has done more than any other country to make amends for slavery in this country and yet there was no appreciation of that. There was no praise of America, thanking America for what it had done. It was as though it was still 1955.”

“It was disgusting, it was evil, it was wrong,” said Peterson.

“That rally was a klan’s rally, was no different than the KKK, it was a hate rally, a hateful rally,” said Peterson.

The third "leader" Brown quoted, C.L. Bryant, has complained that Obama isn't a real black American and his election is a "slap in the face" to those who are.

These are who Brown and CNS consider "conservative black leaders." Actual conservative black leaders should be insulted.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:27 PM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 9:35 PM EDT
WND's Geller Flings Poo At Jon Stewart
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Pamela Geller's March 8 WorldNetDaily column is ostensibly about how hw poo emoticon somehow reflects liberal society. But then Geller goes on a poo-flinging tirade of her own against Jon Stewart:

Sharing their disdain for America is Jon Stewart, to whom they should have given the “Most Disgusting Jew on the Planet Award.” No contest. After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ground-breaking speech to Congress last week, Stewart scoffed at the many standing ovations Netanyahu received as the “longest bl-wjob a Jewish man has ever received.”

This vicious traitor, smug and self-righteous, has long been working for the other side under the guise of comedy. Vile. Jon Stewart defines self-loathing Jew. But that’s not enough. He means to take us down with him.

He is leaving Comedy Central, thankfully. But don’t get too happy; they’ll turn the show over to another leftist radical. When does Dennis Miller or someone like that get an HBO or Comedy Central gig? The cultural landscape is under siege by these killers.

Geller apparently missed the fact that Miller did, in fact, have an HBO show for eight years.

Between this, her defense of cop-killing "sovereign citizens" and slurring a rabbi as a "kapo" simply for disagreeing with her hate, Geller is a one-woman excrement-flinging factory.


Posted by Terry K. at 2:36 PM EDT
MRC's Graham Twists Evidence To Perpetuate 'Liberal Media' Conspiracy
Topic: Media Research Center

Here's the genius of the Media Research Center's anti-media agenda: Any evidence that disproves their claims of "liberal bias" can be portrayed as evidence of bias.

On March 8, the MRC's Tim Graham helped feed right-wing speculation that the New York Times deliberately cropped former President George W. Bush and his wife out of a photo of a march in Selma, Alabama.

This manufactured outrage was enough for Times public editor Margaret Sullivan to investigate. Her finding: The Times itself never cropped the photo; the photographer stated that in the photo he took, "Bush is super-overexposed because he was in the sun and Obama and the others are in the shade" and that the photo is a bad photo technically.

How did Graham respond to this reasoned investigation? By reframing it as more evidence of the conspiracy:

The paper didn’t alter a photograph. But the Bushes were “cropped” out – metaphorically. Their presence didn’t have “impact.”

[...]

Obviously, conservatives disagree there’s “no evidence of politics” here. Announcing the photo the Times used “has impact” is code for “makes Obama look good on a notable day in U.S. racial history.”

By contrast, consider the Times on January 12, 2015. They had two large color photos with “impact” on the front page from the unity march after the Charlie Hedbo murders by Islamists. Obviously, there was no Obama in that picture to “crop” out. But the front-page news account by Liz Alderman never used the name “Obama” and waited to mention Attorney General Eric Holder being in Paris until paragraph eight.

In fact, a review of front pages from that Monday through Friday showed no focus on Obama on the Times front page that week. This story ended up on page A-12: “White House Acknowledges Error in Not Sending a Top Official to March in Paris.”

Everything the Times decides is “news” seems very carefully reviewed for its “impact” on Obama.

See? Lack of proof of any actual cropping becomes proof of "metaphorical" cropping. Any evidence that disproves Graham's conspiracy can be twisted to mean the opposite.

Even if the Times had run that bad photo with the Bushes in it, Graham would have, in all likelihood, complained that the Times ran a poor image of the Bushes to make them look bad.

The Times just can't win -- which, presumably, is the way Graham and the MRC like it.


Posted by Terry K. at 11:58 AM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:59 AM EDT
Monday, March 9, 2015
Molotov Mitchell Is Jacked That Obama Dies In New Movie
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily's Molotov Mitchell is already on record as advocating the "abolition of homosexuality." Now he's on record cheering the abolition of President Obama.

Mitchell's March 3 WND video is a review of the new film "Kinsgman: The Secret Service." He's especially giddy that Obama dies in the film, proudly proclaiming that the film is "the first Hollywood film to kill Barack Obama, on-screen no less."

You can hear the joy in Mitchell's voice as he describes how in the film, Obama's head "pop[s] like a pinata to the triumphant sounds of 'Ode to Joy.'" Ol' Molotov serves up his own low-res version of said head-popping:

Mitchell then intones: "He tries to kill America, and dies for it."

Mitchell concludes by delcaring that "other than 'The Interview,' this is the only film this year where you get to see a real-life dictator's head blow up."

Mitchell's unabashed fervor for Obama's fake death could easily translate to fervor for his actual death. Something tells me ol' Molotov should be expecting a visit from the nice fellows at the Secret Service pretty soon.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:17 PM EDT
Updated: Monday, March 9, 2015 9:18 PM EDT
CNS-Mark Levin Lovefest Watch
Topic: CNSNews.com

It's been a while since we checked in with CNS' obsession with promoting every little pearl of wisdom that falls from Mark Levin's mouth, but yes, they're still at it:

Levin: Federal Gov’t Shutdown ‘Horror Story Possibilities’ Nothing But ‘A Lie’

Mark Levin: ‘Do You Think Obama's a Christian? I Don't Think He Is'

Levin to Obama: ‘Thousands of Anne Franks’ Brutalized by Islamo-Nazis'

Mark Levin: 'Our Rights Do Come From God'

Mark Levin: Obama ‘Is Building the Iranian Islamo-nazi Caliphate’

Since this is stenography and not reporting, there's no attempt to fact-check anything Levin says -- apparently, if he says it, it's axoimatically true.

There's also no mention of the fact that CNS' parent, the Media Research Center, has a business deal with Levin in which they cross-promote each other. It's also not disclosed whether all these fawning Levin posts are part of that promotion deal.


Posted by Terry K. at 7:39 PM EDT
WND Misleads About Proposed Armor-Piercing Ammo Ban
Topic: WorldNetDaily

As could be expected from WorldNetDaily, its reporting on a proposed federal ban of one type of armor-piercing ammuntion is filled with misinformation.

A Feb. 16 WND article by Leo Hohmann contradicts itself by lamenting the proposed ban of the "so-called 'armor-piercing'" rounds, then admits a couple paragraphs later that "it was a given that rounds from any high-powered hunting rifle could penetrate the soft armor worn by officers," including the "green tip" M855 round proposed to be banned because of the existence of newly created handguns that can fire such rounds.

Hohmann also quotes the National Rifle Association attacking the proposed ban because "the M855 ball should have never been classified as “armor piercing” to begin with." But he doesn't mention that the NRA itself has banned the use of the M855 round at some of its own shooting ranges.

In a March 3 article, Cheryl Chumley writes that the M855 round is "popular among AR-15 enthusiasts and sporting types – especially among big game hunters, who like the powerful 'armor-piercing' capability of the shot." She didn't mention that big-game animals do not typically wear armor.

In a March 4 WND article, Hohmann characterized the M855 round as "the ammunition for the popular AR-15 rifle." In fact, 168 other types of ammo that can be used in the rifles would remain legal.

Hohmann also try to downplay the bullet's lethality by repeating claims that no police officer "has been taken down by a criminal using an AR-15 handgun." But Hohmann does not offer a sporting justification for the AR-15 handgun.

Look for WND to keep the controversy -- and the misinformation -- alive.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:21 PM EDT
Sunday, March 8, 2015
CNS Obsesses Over Single Line Referencing Gays In Obama's Selma Speech
Topic: CNSNews.com

CNSNews.com's story on President Obama's speech in Selma, Alabama, for the 50th anniversary of the famous civil rights march there isn't even a story, really -- it's just a lazy, unbylined copy-and-paste of a few paragraphs of the speech from the White House website, plucked out of context from the much longer speech.

Why did CNS do this? Because Obama said something CNS didn't like: he failed to denigrate gays. Or, as the completely context-free headline screams, "Obama: 'We’re The Gay Americans Whose Blood Ran in the Streets of San Francisco’."

So offended was CNS that it put this out-of-context speech excerpt and its even more out-of-context headline as the lead story of its website today, accompanied with a picture of an arrogant-looking Obama (because that's the impression of him CNS wants its readers to have).

CNS is has been ramping up its anti-gay agenda in recent months, and this article shows how it's happening.

Posted by Terry K. at 10:48 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, March 8, 2015 10:54 PM EDT
WND's Farah Remains A Birther Dead-Ender
Topic: WorldNetDaily

In a March 6 WorldNetDaily column in which he claims tofind great meaning that "President Barack Obama" can be anagrammed into “an Arab-backed imposter” (which seems to contradict his longtime assertion that he doesn't recognize Obama as his president), Joseph Farah writes this:

Just for the record, WND has been making the case that Obama is and always has been an “imposter.” He’s simply not constitutionally eligible for the presidency. But he not only fooled America once, he fooled us twice. You know what they say about that. Shame on us.

Farah doesn't explain what reasoning he uses to come to the conclusion that Obama is "simply not constitutionally eligible for the presidency." He may be using his own website, which has steadfastly refused to report how WND's birther conspiracies have been repeatedly discredited.

At the risk of boring ourselves to death since we already did this about four years ago, let's look at the evidence that destroys Farah's claim, shall we?

As WND itself has conceded, the constitutional requirement that the president be a "natural born citizen" has never been explicitly defined by any federal court. Birthers have repeatedly invoked Emmerich de Vattel "The Law of Nations" as a defense of the idea that the Founders intended for "natural born" to mean born of two parents who are citizens, but that interpretation relies on translations that came after the Constitution was ratified.

Birthers (like WND's Aaron Klein) have also cited the 1874 Supreme Court case Minor v. Happersett as defining "natural born citizen." But that decision involved a woman who was suing for the right to vote, not presidential eligibility; the woman's status as a "natural born citizen" was not the issue; and the court ruling discusses only two types of citizens, "natural born" and "naturalized." The more direct precedent is the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, in which the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in America was a U.S. citizen.

Others claim that a 2008 Senate resolution declaring John McCain to be a "natural born" citizen, in Klein's words, "seems to define the term as one who is born to two U.S. citizens." The Senate may have done so regarding McCain's citizenship, but it also did not establish two citizen parents as the only possible way to be defined as a "natural born" citizen.

The birther conspiracy that Obama's long-form birth certificate is a forgery has also been discredited. The purported "modifications" birthers claim exist in the PDF scan of the birth certificate released by the White House have been easily reproduced through scanning the document into a Xerox scanner.

Further, as former Cold Case Posse member Brian Reilly revealed, the state of Hawaii's verification of Obama's birth certificate showing him to be born in Hawaii should have effective ended the witch hunt, had posse chief Mike Zullo not disregarded it.

So, yeah, Farah is lying about Obama once again. Why are we not surprised?

(P.S. We've contacted Farah to obtain the evidence he's using to back up his claim that Obama's not eligible to be president. We'll update this post if he responds.)


Posted by Terry K. at 9:20 PM EST
Saturday, March 7, 2015
CNS Unemployment Numbers Distortion Watch
Topic: CNSNews.com

After a month in which it was forced to report good news on the unemployment front because it apparently couldn't find sufficiently negative numbers to cherry-pick like it usually does, CNSNews.com is back to its old routine with February's numbers in a pair of articles by Ali Meyer:

56,023,000: Record Number of Women Not in Labor Force

62.8%: Labor Force Participation Has Hovered Near 37-Year-Low for 11 Months

Meyer doesn't mention in either article that 295,000 jobs were created in February and the overall unemployment rate rell to 5.5 percent.


Posted by Terry K. at 11:20 PM EST
Obama Derangement Syndrome, Supersize WorldNetDaily Edition
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Even with the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in full swing here in the Washington, D.C., area, the imminent arrival of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak before Congress, amid continued snubs and insults from our “Muslim in chief” and his minions, like National Security Adviser Susan Rice and her equally anti-Judeo Christian cohort Secretary of State John Kerry, Republican presidential candidates and the conservative media generally continue to play a politically correct game of dodging the real issue concerning the rise in terrorism worldwide.

-- Larry Klayman, Feb. 27 WorldNetDaily column

Of course Obama hates America!

For crying out loud, explain his words and behavior with any other characterization!

He grew up under the mentorship of Frank Marshall Davis, a committed, card-carrying member of the Communist Party.

He was well-connected with other radical leftists throughout his life.

A credible postman is in a WND video explaining how he met Obama outside the Chicago home of the parents of Bill Ayers, the Weather Underground domestic terrorist, while he was attending Columbia University as a “foreign student.” He described the Ayers family as his patrons and that he was going to become president of the United States.

-- Joseph Farah, Feb. 27 WND column

I’m sorry, but no one has explained to me how the skin color of elected officials influences how we should judge the rationality and the effectiveness of their words and actions.

It’s clear that Barack Obama, as well as all elected and appointed blacks, are essentially untouchable. That is absurd.

Barack Obama is a flawed human being, as we all are, but his position of power in our government makes him a legitimate target of criticism for his governing tactics.

But no, because he is biracial – white mother, black father.

But even that is ignored. He is black, we are told, so shut up.

-- Barbara Simpson, March 1 WND column

There is no question about whether President Obama – along with Secretary of State John Kerry and the editorial pages of many newspapers – has a particular dislike of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But there is another question: Why?

And the answer is due to an important rule of life that too few people are aware of:

Those who do not confront evil resent those who do.

-- Dennis Prager, March 2 WND column

The Obama White House is in full war mode against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of our best ally in the Middle East, for accepting House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to speak before Congress, while it mollycoddles that region’s most dangerous nation, Iran.

No one crosses Obama without facing his wrath. No one dares. He is the president.

-- David Limbaugh, March 2 WND column

If Mr. Obama has an itchy banning finger, he should ban racist and tax cheat Al Not-So-Sharpton from access to the White House. He should ban the practice or promotion of Shariah law in America by claiming it is an act of sedition.

-- Ted Nugent, March 4 WND column

Two glaring factors finally bring the depth of corruption and treachery of these establishment Republicans into sharp focus;:one is the alacrity with which they skirted the issue of Barack Hussein Obama’s ineligibility to hold the office of president and the widespread criminal fraud attendant to his candidacy. Worse, they having completely ignored the blatant and mounting criminal actions of his administration. These speak to their roles as accessories after the fact, if not direct accomplices.

It is apparent that the GOP leadership – the only legal and practicable impediment to this administration – intend to let Obama shepherd America straight to hell without lifting a finger to stop him, no matter what he does.

In my view, the “no matter what he does” part has a profound and increasingly frightening ring to it.

-- Erik Rush, March 4 WND column

Obviously, those who believe that even the lies that Obama has told about Benghazi, the IRS targeting of conservatives and Obamacare, were well-intentioned will defend his patriotism, just as those who take him at his word accept his claims to being a Christian.

On the other hand, those of us who have not had our brains washed, rinsed and blow-dried, do not accept that which is blatantly false. How can someone who has spoken incessantly about America’s sins, apologizing for our history and insulting our allies – going so far as to exile the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office – be regarded as a patriot?

[...]

Unfortunately, millions of blacks trooped out to vote for one of their own, even though, considering that his mother was white and his biological father was an Arab, he was about as black as I am. But, luckily for him, he looked black, which explained why millions of white voters who would normally never have even considered voting for such an unqualified lout, felt compelled to prove they weren’t racists by voting for the guy who could at least pass for black.

And in doing so, they exposed their own racism by ignoring Martin Luther King’s injunction to judge a man by his character and not by the color of his skin.

-- Burt Prelutsky, March 5 WND column

Question: Why are Americans so certain there will be a presidential election in 2016 and that Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017?

Answer: Because it’s the law and because it’s American tradition.

However, we currently have a man in the White House who respects neither the law nor the American tradition of peaceful changes of power.

[...]

So with all of this history – and much more, in fact – why do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?

I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why.

-- Joseph Farah, March 5 WND column


Posted by Terry K. at 9:45 AM EST
Friday, March 6, 2015
Ruddy's O'Reilly Defense Pays Off With Fox News Endorsement
Topic: Newsmax

Remember Christopher Ruddy's enthusiastic defense of Bill O'Reilly in the face of his exaggerations and falsehoods? Well, it paid off in the publicity department.

Jim Meyers happily writes in a March 4 Newsmax article:

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly offered up praise for Newsmax on his show Tuesday night, calling our website's fact-based reporting "refreshing."

"Last night we had a segment on how nasty the upcoming presidential campaign is likely to be because of the defamatory websites," O'Reilly told viewers.

"Well, there are some exceptions to the sewer. Check out Newsmax.com. It had some very interesting political analysis. Chris Ruddy and the guys actually try to gather facts, which is refreshing.

"That's the tip of the day."

Meyers does admit that "O'Reilly was no doubt subtly responding" to Ruddy's defense of him. But if O'Reilly didn't mention he was endorsing Newsmax because it defended him, doesn't that actually further the idea that O'Reilly is dishonest?

O'Reilly's endorsement would also seem to contradict Fox News' stance against Newsmax, which operates that TV news channel that directly competes with Fox. Last week, Fox attacked Ruddy for being friends with Bill Clinton and donating to his foundation.

But O'Reilly effectively negated that attack with his endorsement, which is all that matters to Newsmax.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:58 AM EST

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Buy through this Amazon link and support ConWebWatch!

Support This Site

« March 2015 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Google