Wow, indeed. CNS published those articles andthreeothers from CPAC -- all of which were fawning accounts of the speeches they covered, and none of which mentioned the anything bad. Like, for instance, JasonMattera's racially tinged, sneering attack on President Obama.
Newsmax Thinks John Gibson Is Still on Fox News Topic: Newsmax
A Feb. 18 Newsmax article by Dave Eberhart on an interview with John Gibson describes him as a "Fox News anchor" and "host of Fox News's 'The Big Story." In fact, "The Big Story" was canceled in March 2008.
Meanwhile, in the accompanying video, Kathleen Parker got it right, correctly describing Gibson as a "Fox News Radio host and former Fox News anchor."
A Feb. 17 CNSNews.com article by Karen Schuberg is thelatest to attack Obama adviser Harry Knox, this time asserting that Knox "has a record of making anti-Catholic statements."
But the statements by Knox that Schuberg provides, while repeatedly critical of the Catholic Church's stance of homosexuality, are hardly "anti-Catholic." They focus on a specific issue, and Knox is not quoted as denigrating the mission and tenets of the church outside of how it pertains to homosexuality.
By the same standard, Accuracy in Media's Cliff Kincaid -- who has been bashing Catholics for being too liberal -- is "anti-Cahtolic."
And so is Dennis Miller, who ridiculed the ashes on Vice President Joe Biden's forehead for Ash Wednesday on "The O'Reilly Factor."
Somehow, we suspect that CNS won't be dedicating an article to Miller's and Kincaid's "anti-Catholic statements."
On top of that, Schuberg failed to disclose to her readers that her boss, Brent Bozell, has signed a letter demanding that "anti-Catholic bigot" Knox lose his job.
Kupelian's New Book On Its Way Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily started promoting WND managing editor David Kupelian's new book "How Evil Works" this week, kicking off with an appearance by him on Sean Hannity's radio show. Interestingly, it's not published by WND -- he found a "real" publisher for it, the Threshold Editions imprint of Simon & Schuster (run by Mary Matalin).
It appears to be a sequel to Kupelian's last book, "The Marketing of Evil," which, as we pointed out at the time, essentially blamed everything he doesn't like on '60s hippies in general and the Clintons in particular. The book contains factual errors (such as treating anti-Kinsey activist Judith Reisman as credible), and he appeared to have partnered with the right-wing legal group Alliance Defense Fund to hype a lawsuit that tangentally involved the book in order to boost sales.
"How Evil Works" appears to be more of the same. The list of subjects in the book includes:
What's really going on in Washington, D.C., today? (The Marxist strategy of manufacturing and exploiting crises is the central operating principle of the Obama presidency.)
How does terrorism really work? (It's intended not just to frighten and intimidate, but to reprogram our beliefs, per the Stockholm Syndrome.)
Why are big lies more believable than little ones? (Everyone tells little white lies, but not big, bold, audacious ones, and so they assume others wouldn't either – an assumption world-class liars use to their great advantage. More importantly, big lies possess an inherent power to upset us – triggering a key control mechanism.)
Why do we treat mental-emotional-spiritual problems like rage and depression with drugs? (We've been seduced by secular medical "experts" who tell us what all egos love to hear: "It's not your fault.")
Regarding that last subject: We're guessing he plans to rehash the case of Andrea Yates, who killed her five children. As we detailed in 2007, when he first wrote about it, he blamed Yates' condition on the antidepressants she was taking, failing to mention the fact that she and her husband were under the sway of a fundamentalist Christian minister, under whose influence Yates home-schooled the children and who harshly judged mothers he considered to be too permissive with their children, claiming that if the mother was going to hell, her children would too.
We'll try to get a hold of the book and see if Kupelian's incomplete, factually challenged analysis still stands.
WND Ignores Double Standard In Attack on Brennan Topic: WorldNetDaily
A Feb. 16 WorldNetDaily article cites "calls for President Obama's homeland-security adviser John Brennan to step down " following "Brennan's recent appearance at a New York University assembly and his comments that having a percentage of terrorists released by the U.S. return to terrorist attacks 'isn't that bad,' since the recidivism rate for inmates in the U.S. prison system is higher."
New Article: A Blizzard of Bamboozlement Topic: NewsBusters
Noel Sheppard and the boys at NewsBusters seize on back-to-back snowstorms in Washington to push their discredited claim that there's no such thing as global warming. Read more >>
AIM To Honor Inaccuracy at CPAC Topic: Accuracy in Media
A Feb. 16 Accuracy in Media press release announces that AIM will give "Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Awards" to Andrew Breitbart and Marc Morano during the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference. That's hilarious, because neither Breitbart nor Morano are known for their accuracy.
NewsBusters Covers for Palin's Hypocrisy Topic: NewsBusters
Kyle Drennen runs to the defense of Sarah Palin and Fox News in a Feb. 16 NewsBusters post, dismissing suggestions that Palin should quit her job as a Fox News contributor in order to follow through on her criticism of Fox Broadcasting's "Family Guy" for having "tangentially mocked her son with Down Syndrome."
Drennen does so by making this stunning statement: "Of course, Fox News has no connection to the Fox broadcast channel or any of its entertainment programming."
Drennen and NewsBusters are echoing Palin's hypocrisy on the issue by criticizing "Family Guy" while giving Rush Limbaugh a pass on using the word "retard" because it was satirical. As we noted, Noel Sheppard attacked Stephen Colbert for following Limbaugh's satire exception -- but not Limbaugh himself.
And, yes, Sheppard freakedout about the "Family Guy" joke but continued to remain silent about Limbaugh. But then, protecting Limbaugh no matter what offensive thing he says is simply what the MRC does.
CNS Ignores Teleworking In Bashing Snowed-Out Federal Workers Topic: CNSNews.com
A Feb. 16 CNSNews.com article by Penny Starr asserts that "When the federal government closed for four days and two hours last week because of snow and ice in the Washington area, U.S. taxpayers still had to shell out an estimated $425 million to $670 million in wages and benefits to those workers."
Starr makes no mention of the fact that approximately one-third of federal workers in the Washington area logged on to federal servers from home, meaning that, contrary to Starr's suggestion, some work was indeed getting done during the snowstorms.
Meanwhile ... Topic: WorldNetDaily
Over at Media Matters, we examine how WorldNetDaily columnist Jill Stanek has gotten blogging gigs at NewsBusters and Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism despite 1) admitting she knows little about media analysis and 2) her long history of misleading and inflammatory statements (like essentially condoning the murder of George Tiller).
A Feb. 14 Accuracy in Media blog post by Don Irvine highlights Obama White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan's pointing out that the recidivism rate for released detainees from Guantanamo is lower than that of those released from U.S. prisons. He adds, "So exactly what is a bad recidivism rate for terrorists that want to blow up planes and kill Americans?"
We don't recall Irvine being upset when Bush secretary of state Condoleezza Rice similarly compared the rates of recidivism among enemy combatants with those of American criminals back in 2005.
Imagine radical Islam with a nuclear weapon operating in a post-American world.
Most importantly — what a time for America to have such a weakling in the White House.
But his weakness is waking people up. Remember the movie “Awakenings”? Oliver Sacks, played by Robin Williams and semi-fictionalized as Malcolm Sayer in the movie, discovers the amazing effects of the drug L-dopa. It awakened people who had been catatonic for decades.
Watching the tea party convention, reviewing the latest polls, and being fortunate enough to have witnessed the Scott Brown win and the gubernatorial Democratic losses a couple of months back, it dawned on me that Obama is to the American people what L-dopa was to Oliver Sacks’ patients.
Obama, with all his jihad-enabling, is waking up the American people. President L-dopa.
WND Slowly Backing Away From Vaccine-Autism Link Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've detailed how WorldNetDaily has long promoted the idea of a link between vaccines and autism. It's now ever-so-slowly creeping away from the claim as it becomes increasingly discredited.
When the medical journal Lancet retracted a couple weeks ago a study it had published in 1998 linking the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to autism, WND didn't report on it in one of its own articles but linked to another website's story on it. That was surprisingly followed up by a Feb. 11 column by Phil Elmore that's an all-out assault on the false link:
There exists in our society the pervasive myth that childhood vaccinations can somehow visit autism on your child. The very notion is upsetting and disturbing. It is, however, entirely and fundamentally without merit – misinformation that is breathtaking in its falsehood and outrageous in its audacity. "Big Pharma" has become a scapegoat for legions of distraught parents who, quite understandably, want some external, even malevolent force to blame for an affliction we still do not understand very well.
The purpose of vaccines is to encourage a "herd immunity" that creates a hostile climate for a given disease. Releasing into a vaccinated population a sub-population of unvaccinated individuals helps those diseases take root once more. Once established, they are more likely to mutate, endangering the entire community.
The irresponsible parents who harm their own children – and their neighbors' kids – through this negligence will continue to do so regardless of the truth. We must conclude they care more about their opinions than they do about facts.
This was followed by a letter to the editor (which disappear after a week) criticizing Elmore for noting the truth:
Phil Elmore's article on vaccines having no relation to autism is not convincing.
He seems to elate in ridicule while conceding an argument, as if he were actually winning it. For example, he concedes the entire point when he agrees that "vaccines have risks."
The fact is that it may not be moral to take risks in order to avoid other risks. It is a bit like playing God. I suspect this fact won't move Mr. Elmore, but it will probably move most WND readers, who probably prefer Christianity over Technolatry.
To be more empirical, the risk of pertussis is to me far less frightening than the risk of filling my babies with pharmaceutical junk, including but not limited to Thimerosal. I'm no expert on medicine, but I know enough about the modern medical climate (abortion, homosexual agenda, embryonic harvesting, contraception, fertility excesses) to realize that they have no moral compass.
No, Phil, I will not risk my kids' health anymore by taking vaccines. Or, let me put it this way: I'll take the natural risks rather than the unnatural risks.
Does WND have the guts to fully confront the issue by doing an original article on the Lancet retraction and not spin it as about deniers trying to explain it away? We shall see.
We've long expected that WorldNetDaily would not report any negative information about Orly Taitz unless it could figure out a way to spin it in her favor -- after all, she has ordered WND not to be mean to her.
Bob Unruh figured out a way to do it in regarding a couple piece of negative information, a $20,000 fine levied against her and the possibility of sanctions against her in the California bar. In a Feb. 13 article, Unruh portrays Taitz as the victim , uncritically repeating her claims that the fine and possible sanctions create a "hardship" for her.
In order to portray Taitz as the victim, Unruh has to omit certain facts -- like why she faces the fine and possible sanctions. Again, Unruh uncritically portrays Taitz's version of events, that "she's facing a $20,000 penalty imposed by Judge Clay D. Land in the Rhodes case and possible action by the California Bar Association, to which Land forwarded his highly critical order" -- but never explains what that criticism was, even though he had done so to a certain extent in an article last October.
To refresh Unruh's memory: Land stated that Taitz had repeatedly exhibited unprofessional behavior, from forcing her birther agenda in court to filing frivolous motions to making personal attacks against opposing parties, as well as Land.
Unruh also omits the fact that Taitz has had at least twoother complaints filed against her in the California bar. Nor does he mention the accusations that she attempted to suborn perjury in a separate case.
For good measure, Unruh also peddles a lie by referencing "the estimated $1.7 million Obama has spent on court cases to prevent any of the documentation of his life to be revealed to the public." In fact, as we've previously noted, while that money was paid to a law firm through Obama for America, WND has never provided any evidence that all of the money was "spent on court cases to prevent any of the documentation of his life to be revealed to the public."