Keyes Tries to Decouple Citizenship, Eligibility Wings of Birtherism Topic: WorldNetDaily
Alan Keyes writes in his April 2 WorldNetDaily column:
Obama pairs those concerned that he is a socialist with others, who he says (speaking with purposely deceitful inaccuracy) "question whether he is a citizen." Yet when accurately stated and understood, the real issue is not whether he is a citizen, but whether, in accordance with the terms of the U.S. Constitution, he is or ever could be president of the United States.
Keyes thus joins his WND boss, JosephFarah, in deceitfully trying to change the language of birtherism by trying to decouple citizenship from eligibility. The problem, of course, is that claims that Obama is not an American citizen remain central to the issue, even in WND's own reporting.
It seems that by attempting to change the birther nomenclature Keyes, like Farah, is apparently conceding that Obama was born in the U.S.
Like Farah, Keyes has a little empire going, of which birtherism is a part -- on the front page of his Loyal to Liberty website, Keyes touts his appearance in WND's (falsehood-laden) birther video. Does Keyes have the integrity to tell the truth about what he truly believes, or will he hold back lest his empire get thrown into financial jeopardy?
In spite of all the mean, though true, things I say about Obama, I can't help feeling sorry for him. After all, his Kenyan father deserted him when he was just a baby. Then, because that had worked out so well, Obama's ditzy mother then married a Muslim and moved to Indonesia. Eventually, Obama and his mother were deserted by his stepfather, which led to Obama's mother dumping 10-year-old Obama on his white grandparents in Hawaii. It was there that young Barack took up basketball, marijuana and cocaine, while seeking out radicals, revolutionaries and Communists as pals and mentors.
The truth is, with that kind of dysfunctional background, Barack Obama could easily have turned out to be a serial killer. Still, one can't help thinking that if only he had, today he'd probably be in prison, instead of the Oval Office, and none of us would have to worry about what awful thing he's going to do next.
But if BHO truly has his mind set on establishing a dictatorship – and it is my personal belief that he does – it's too risky for him to wait for a runaway inflation as an excuse to call a state of emergency. He knows that as long as there is a semblance of a free market in place, producers will continue to push back against the economy-killing effects of his policies.
Thus, he needs another excuse to declare a state of emergency. In previous articles, I've mentioned a nuke exchange between Iran and Israel as one possibility. Another is civil unrest due to unemployment rates that could reach 25 percent or more in the not-too-distant future.
These and others still remain possibilities, but last week Glenn Beck came up with one that may be even more likely. Beck believes that Obama will continue to keep the accelerator pressed to the floor – amnesty for illegal immigrants, a cap-and-trade bill that will eliminate the U.S. as a global business competitor, and more – thus enraging an already angry public to the point of revolution.
In other words, purposely foment "civil unrest" rather than wait for something like unemployment or runaway inflation to make it happen. As Beck puts it, just continue to poke people in the eye, then use their predictable and justifiable backlash as an excuse to establish dictatorial powers.
I thought about this issue while attending the recent tea party outside the Capitol building in Washington. As I crossed Independence Avenue, I noted a somber-looking guard holding a Rambo-style weapon in his hands. I have no idea what it was, but there's no question in my mind that just one pull of the trigger could have rearranged the body parts of a large number of tea-party people.
Yep, I believe Glenn Beck might be on to something. But if the American public refuses to take the bait and doesn't resort to violence, BHO will have to go to Plan B to have an excuse to declare a state of emergency.
Having said all this, don't despair. No one, including myself, can predict the future with certainty. In a rapidly changing world, nothing is certain - which is why I don't make predictions; I just lay odds. And here are my odds based on what I know and see today:
The chances of a declared state of emergency and ensuing dictatorship prior to the 2010 elections: 25 percent
The chances of a declared state of emergency and ensuing dictatorship prior to the 2012 elections: 50 percent
The chances of the Republicans cutting back on major entitlements if they regain power in the 2010 elections: zero
The chances of the Republicans cutting back on major entitlements if they win the presidency and an overwhelming majority in Congress in 2012: 5 percent
Of course, I could be wrong about all this ... but what if I'm right?
More Anonymous Attacks From Aaron Klein Topic: WorldNetDaily
A March 31 WorldNetDaily article keeps up Aaron Klein's long record of hiding behind anonymous sources to attack President Obama, this time claiming that "The Obama administration has encouraged "resistance" by Palestinians to protest Israel's presence in eastern Jerusalem" but citing only "a senior Palestinian Authority official" who spoke "on condition of anonymity."
CNS Attack on Obama Overtaken By Events Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com thought they had it all worked out.
When it tried but failed to get an answer from the White House about whether President Obama would stop to view flooding in Rhode Island during a trip to Massachusetts for a Democratic fundraiser, it posted an April 1 article by Penny Starr and Fred Lucas in an attempt to paint Obama as insensitive:
President Barack Obama was scheduled to fly past flood-ravaged Rhode Island aboard Air Force One twice on Thursday as he traveled to Maine to give an afternoon speech lauding his health care bill, then to Boston for an evening fundraiser for the Democratic Party, and then back to Washington, D.C. late Thursday night.
Spokespersons for the Obama administration did not respond to CNSNews.com’s questions about the disaster, including why the president didn’t visit R.I., if he planned to do so in the near future and whether he could survey any of the extensive destruction caused by what the state’s governor is calling the worse flooding in 200 years.
Neither White House spokesman Nick Shapiro nor White House press office staffer Mora Mack responded to the questions asked via repeated e-mails.
In his speech in Maine, Obama did not mention the hardship faced by many of Rhode Island’s 1 million residents, but he did claim his health care law will help “struggling” small business owners “here in Maine and across America.”
Their smear, it turns out, was a bit rushed. When Obama did, in fact, visit Rhode Island, CNS hurriedly added an editor's note to the article:
(Editor's note: Businessweek.com reported at 5:34PM EDT that President Obama had made an unannounced visit to Framingham, Mass., to discuss the flooding in New England with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.)
Oops. Perhaps CNS shouldn't be so eager to smear.
Then again, CNS was able to keep another smear alive. Another April 1 article by Starr complained that FEMA administrator Craig Fugate "was in sunny Orlando, Fla., giving a speech" instead of going to Rhode Island. Starr did not explain what Fugate should be doing in Rhode Island, or why he must go to Rhode Island to do it instead of directing any needed federal operations from Florida.
Erik Rush Derangement Syndrome Watch Topic: WorldNetDaily
Although he wasn't of the raggedy variety, Barack Obama's black nationalist-cum-Marxist worldview and his overview of America was the same as those urban communists I encountered in my youth, those of the same stripe as Van Jones and William Ayers. They -- like countless other uber-leftists who were insinuating themselves into the power structure at that time -- despised more or less everything about America, save for the opportunities it presented them personally. Obama, like his academic mentors and peers, pursued his education with an eye on power, taking advantage of metastasizing liberal ideals and newly initiated preferential policies.
In the "perfect storm" of a press saturated with insipid leftists, popular disgust with a politically enfeebled, free-spending Republican president, and a benefactor with almost bottomless pockets (in financier George Soros), this nebbish was able to capture the presidency. Surreal, but true.
I have previously discussed the phenomenon of the left having advanced a distorted vision of black Americans -- what I refer to as negrophilia -- which contributed to Obama's election to no mean degree. Add to this the depth of ignorance in which black Americans continue to be mired, wherein they continue to believe that opportunists like Sharpton and Obama are their benefactors, while conservatives and Republicans are demons from the foulest depths of hell. Millions remain unaware that one of the platforms upon which the Republican Party was formed and first ran was the abolition of slavery, and that the GOP also promoted the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which the Democrats filibustered. After its passage, segregationists in the Democratic Party co-opted the civil rights agenda and enrolled black Americans in the culture of dependency, ostensibly as "restitution" for their suffering.
When the left insinuated itself into the Democratic Party, they had a perfect model for the entitlement culture already in place, which they have attempted to expand to as many Americans as possible. Since the Civil Rights Movement, Democrats have propagandized and hampered black Americans, plying their leaders with a seat at the table, while they keep blacks stretched over a barrel with their cheeks spread.
One might say that the slave owners hijacked the Underground Railroad.
Now, black Americans are prepared to protect their oppressors and fight all comers in their defense, tooth and nail, blissfully unaware that their friends are their enemies, and their enemies would be their friends.
We're Inciting Civil Unrest! Topic: Capital Research Center
The Capital Research Center's Matthew Vadum takes to NewsReal to drop this bit of BREAKING NEWS:
Of course, the left, and in particular the George Soros-led character assassins at Media Matters for America (I mean you, Jamison Foser, Eric Boehlert, and Terry Krepel) are largely responsible for the civil unrest that is growing across America. Anyone who supported ObamaCare is responsible for the tide of discontent that now threatens to tear the nation apart.
And take notice, MoveOn, Jamison, Eric, and Terry, that the American people will not silenced.
This was posted March 31, so Vadum apparently does not mean this as an April fool.
Before we take credit for being "largely responsible for the civil unrest that is growing across America," it's worth noting that I have one other thing in common with Messrs. Foser and Boehlert besides being Media Matters employees: We have all calledVadumout on his embarrassing, falsehood-laden rants.
Isn't it interesting that Vadum thinks people who have caught him saying stupid things are somehow more dangerous to the country than people who are, you know, actually committing civil unrest?
WND, CNS Tout AAPS Lawsuit, Hide Group's Extremism Topic: CNSNews.com
Both WorldNetDaily and CNSNews.com have promoted the lawsuit filed by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons against the federal government to overturn the health care reform law. Not only do WND and CNS fail to mention AAPS' right-wing political leanings, they also ignore its more controversial and extremist views, from Vince Foster conspiracies to defending a doctor who prescribed massive amounts of painkillers to patients, who would then abuse or resell the pills.
Further, the doctor who sent around a racist image depicting President Obama as a witch doctor to his fellow "tea party" activists, David McKalip, is a prominent AAPS supporter.
A March 29 WorldNetDaily article keeps up his increasingly inaccurate witch hunt against Obama administration officials by smearing Donald Berwick, Obama's reported pick to run Medicare and Medicaid, as someone who "has argued for a 'radical transfer of power' in the health industry and claimed patients' quality of care in the U.S. medical system is currently measured by the 'color of their skin.'"
Somehow, Klein couldn't find room to tell his readers the full truth about Berwick and his claim -- that life expectancy is, in fact, lower for blacks in the U.S. than for whites, and that even Republican Sen. Tom Coburn thinks Berwick is "more than qualified" for the position.
Klein is just one of the many reasons WND is little more than a journalistic joke.
Meanwhile... Topic: NewsBusters
Media Matters' Simon Maloy uncovers a fine bit of absurdity at NewsBusters: a post by Dan Gainor declaring depictions of tea partiers as "anti-government" to be among "The Five Craziest Attacks on Tea Parties," even though fellow NewsBuster Ken Shepard conceded just two days earlier that tea parties have an "anti-government sentiment."
CNS Columnists Mislead on Abortion Topic: CNSNews.com
Rita Diller writes in a march 29 CNSNews.com column:
Perhaps the largest pot of gold awaiting Planned Parenthood under Obamacare is the $7 billion that has been earmarked for the Community Health Centers program for primary health care, which specifically includes gynecological and obstetrics care. This money appears in the bill without restrictions on the use of the money for abortion.
It is not restricted by the Hyde Amendment, since the Hyde Amendment applies only to funds flowing through the annual Health and Human Services appropriations bill.
That's not true. In fact, community health centers do not perform abortions, the Department of Health and Human Services already bans the use of CHC funding for abortions, and the National Association of Community Health Centers agrees that the Hyde Amendment applies to CHC funding.
A March 30 CNS column by Helen Avare asserted that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made a "frank admission to the New York Times" that she had always assumed that Roe v. Wade was intended to "set up Medicaid funding for abortion” for “populations that we don’t want to have too many of.'"
That's not quite true either -- the full context of the quote shows that Ginsburg actually attributed that sentiment to others.
Molotov Wrong on Uganda Anti-Gay Law -- Again Topic: WorldNetDaily
Just in time for our new article, Molotov Mitchell takes another stab at explaining the proposed anti-gay law in Uganda -- and hides the facts again.
In his March 31 WorldNetDaily video, Mitchell asserts that there is "a deliberate disinfo campaign" claiming that "Ugandans want nothing short of gay genocide." He said he "decided to look deeper":
This isn't my opinion, this isn't Rick Warren's opinion, this isn't even MSNBC's monolithic gay opinion. This is what's in the bill.
Uganda's anti-gay bill formally extends the death penalty to homosexuals who commit pre-existing capital crimes. They are as follows: 1) pedophilia or sexual abuse of the handicapped; 2) knowing that you are HIV-positive yet continuing to spread it to others; and 3) using positions of authority to coerce others into performing sexual acts. That is it. That's as far as the genocide goes.
You can argue about other aspects of the bill, but you cannot argue that this is a death sentence for being gay. Unless, of course, your version of gay involves intentionally spreading HIV, raping the handicapped and using political clout to cover it up. And you know who you are.
Molotov is wrong.
As we detailed when Accuracy in Media's Cliff Kincaid tried to push this same story, the bill as it currently stands provides for the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality," which is defined not only as the definitions Mitchell cited but also being a "serial offender," which the bill defines as "a person who has previous convictions of the offence of homosexuality or related offences." In other words, if you were convicted of previous homosexual behavior -- or even one of the "related offences" such as "failure to disclose" homosexual acts or "conspiracy to engage in homosexuality" -- and were convicted of it again, you could be put to death.
Mitchell also name-checks Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa as someone who has "called" him "the other night" to complain about how "old colonialization had once again raised its ugly head." Ssempa may be even more anti-gay than Mr. Abolition of Homosexuality himself: Apparently, he runs around Uganda showing gay porn in chiurches in order to whip up anti-gay sentiment, like the anti-gay bill.
Ol' Molotov hasn't stooped to that level -- yet. But Ssempa may have given him some ideas.
WND's New Favorite Far-Right Israeli Extremist Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've detailed how WorldNetDaily's Aaron Klein has cozied up toward far-right Israeli extremists, regularly whitewashing their violent history. It appears that Klein is now farming out that job of whitewashing to other WND reporters.
A March 30 WND article by Drew Zahn (who, unlike Klein, is not based in Jerusalem) details a campaign "calling for the immediate destruction of the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock on the city's disputed Temple Mount," which would "pave the way for construction of the Third (Jewish) Temple." Zahn ascribes no ideology to the peoplepromoting the campaign, describing them and their group, Our Land of Israel, only as "activists."
Zahn lifted quotes for his story out of a Jerusalem Post article, including those of Baruch Marzel, who, again, Zahn describes only as an "activist." But Marzel is much more than an activist -- he's a far-right extremist who sounds like another one of Klein's buddies.
According to Wikipedia, Marzel is a former spokesman for Kach organization for ten years and claims to have been the "right hand man" of Kach founder and far-right extremist Meir Kahane. Another Kach member, Baruch Goldstein, perpetrated the 1994 massacre of 29 Muslims inside Hebron's Tomb of the Patriarchs. Marzel was named head of Kach's secretariat after Kahane was assassinated.
Marzel currently heads the far-right Jewish National Front party in Israel. Marzel has a long criminal record, which includes assaults on Palestinians, an Israeli police officer and a Israeli left-wing activist. Marzel has also reportedly advocated violence towards homosexuals in Israel, calling for a religious war against them during a radio interview. He has also sent letters to Jewish women asking them not to marry their non-Jewish boyfriends.
But Zahn and WND don't think you need to know such things -- just as Klein doesn't want you to know the violent extremism of his far-right Jewish buddies like Mike Guzofsky.
Bozell Defends Hannity, Stops Heathering David Frum Topic: Media Research Center
Brent Bozell seems to be going the Sarah Palin route by publishing his missives on his Facebook page.
Bozell's March 31 Facebook statement -- republished at NewsBusters -- is a defense of Sean Hannity over accusations that the group he financially supports, Freedom Alliance, is misusing money:
I have looked at the charges being brought against him. David Frum published an excellent analysis of these charges and concluded, as did I, that they were utterly bogus. That, of course, won't stop the Left. They are now taking these bogus charges and calling for IRS investigations.
Sean Hannity has raised millions of dollars to support the families of fallen heroes. He's criss-crossed the country countless times not just raising this money, but raising awareness for this noble cause. He's done it all for free. And more: He's donated, I'm told, hundreds of thousands of dollars personally to this cause.
It's time for conservatives to rally around this man. He is being attacked personally not just because he's trying to do something good for our military, but because he's got a message to tell America in this book, and the Left wants him stopped -- by any means necessary. We cannot allow them to succeed with this campaign of character assassination.
Bozell leaves out a couple details -- namely, that the accusations against Hannity's group originated not on "the Left" but on the right, from blogger Debbie Schlussel.
Bozell's defense follows a similar one by MRC division CNSNews.com, which identified Schlussel as the source of the accusations but not that Schlussel is a fellow right-winger.
Also, the David Frum whose website hosts the "excellent analysis" Bozell is citing is the same David Frum whom Bozell's Media Research Center has repeatedlyattacked for not being conservative enough. After the 2008 election, Bozell wrote an entire column complaining that the New York Times gave a forum to people, including Frum, to criticize National Review for an alleged decline in "erudition" following the death of William F. Buckley:
But the star of Arango’s piece was David Frum, who clearly and very publicly disagreed with the Sarah Palin nomination (and surprise! CBS News found him very interesting and invited him to come on “The Early Show” and declare the Palin pick a “huge mistake.”) He told the Times “a little more distance” from NR “can help everybody do a better job of keeping their temper.” Arango offered readers no example of Frum’s erudition against Palin, and no example of Frum critics losing their temper in print.
Because Frum's website published something Bozell can make hay with, does this mean the MRC's Heathering of Frum will stop? We shall see.
WND Repeats False Smear of Krugman Topic: WorldNetDaily
A March 30 WorldNetDaily article by Bob Unruh asserts: "Liberal economic commentator Paul Krugman says the so-called 'death panels' established by President Obama's trillion dollar nationalized health-care plan will end up saving 'a lot of money' for the government."
Unruh is lying.
Unruh writes that Krugman made his statement on ABC's "This Week" after "[a]nother panelist interjected, 'Death panels would save money.'" Unruh curiously doesn't identify who it is -- the show's guest host, Jake Tapper. It's also clear from the video accompanying Unruh's article that Tapper is making that remark in a tongue-in-cheek manner, since it drew laughs from the rest of the panel -- something Unruh fails to note.
At no point does Krugman concede that the advisory panels set up by the health care reform bill are "death panels," and as Media Matters points out, Krugman has repeatedly denounced such a claim as "lies" and a "complete fabrication."
We'd demand a correction, but WND apparently has a standing policy not to correct falsehoods it publishes about people and organizations whose ideology the oppose unless they sue WND first, and even then there will likely be a long, drawn-out, expensive legal battle before WND concedes its error and publishes the correction.
New Article: Molotov Mitchell's Gay-Bashing Follies Topic: WorldNetDaily
The WorldNetDaily videographer thinks he still has gay friends after endorsing the proposed anti-gay Uganda law that would kill people for being gay and declaring an anti-gay beauty queen to be a "hot homophobe." Read more >>