NewsBusters Upset (Again) That A Republican Got Fact-Checked Topic: NewsBusters
The Media Research Center has never been a stickler for context -- when it comes to claims about liberals, anyway. By contrast, it demands proper context when it comes to conservatives.
We see that again in an Oct. 19 NewsBusters post by Randy Hall, who's upset that PolitiFact Ohio put a claim made by a Republican candidate in its proper context.
What happened is that PolitiFact Ohio rated as "mostly false" a claim by Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel that his Democratic opponent, incumbent Sherrod Brown, "missed over 350 official votes" as a congressman. PolitiFact points out that the claim ignores the facts that the number of missed votes is a small number compared to the more than 10,000 or so votes Brown did take part in, and that most of those missed votes were due to injuries suffered in a car accident.
But Hall doesn't care about context -- he insists that the claim is "true" and that PolitiFact Ohio is engaging in "media bias" by telling the full truth about Mandel's claim. He goes on to repeat claims by a Mandel spokesman that "Brown's missed-vote ratio is higher than the median rate for all members of Congress, which is 2.5 percent, while Brown's rate is 3 percent."
Hall also ranted that "PolitiFact Ohio has often trumpeted information and statistics that favor Brown over Mandel, such as stating that the Democratic candidate supposedly tells the truth two-thirds of the time while the Republican lies two-thirds of the time," adding that "fact-checking is rapidly becoming just another way for liberals to vent their venom regarding Republican candidates." In reality, right-wingers like Hall and his fellow NewsBusters have engaged in a war on fact-checkers simply for having the audacity to fact-check what Republicans say.
Hall seems rather desperate to take refuge in a misleading claim. It's just another example of how the MRC really doesn't want anyone to tell the truth about Republicans.
While the examples of President Obama’s kingly indulgences are numerous, only a few need be mentioned for foundation, i.e. executive orders as law (part of his overt “We Can’t Wait” program admittedly designed to cut out Congress), voiding entire statutes via decree (e.g. U.S. naturalization code and the work-requirement provisions of the landmark 1997 Welfare Reform Act), making war without legislative authorization (which Abraham Lincoln understood to be the “worst of all kingly oppressions”), making agreements with other nations absent popular ratification and assent (Law of the Sea Treaty and his many unsanctioned foreign policy experiments with Islamic states), illegally transferring the power of Congress to unelected and unvetted “czars,” assassinating and indefinitely detaining American citizens without due process, and finally, taxing the people without legal pretext (arguably the abortion mandate, the individual mandate and the various fees introduced by this president). Other earlier offenses include, but are not limited to, threatening banks with “pitchforks,” firing the heads of private companies and dictating their wages, requiring that a company create a slush fund for his czars to distribute to the masses, etc.
Looking back at the facts that were/are undeniable regarding now-President Obama’s pre-presidential life, nothing leading up to the election of 2008 would have given anyone the reality on which to base an argument as to why Barack Obama was up to the task of fixing the problems that existed within the world’s largest economy, managing the most powerful military ever known to man or successfully dealing with a host of other concerns that were and in most cases still are of great importance to many in our society. To formulate a decision based solely on the grounds of fundamental logic would have told anyone that an individual who possessed no academic legacy, had authored no significant piece of legislation at the state or federal level, functioned at the rudimentary task of “community organizer” in his not-too-distant past, while having strong ties to known terrorists such as Bill Ayers and America-hating characters such as Jeremiah Wright, could not aptly perform the duties that would be demanded.
Yet, while considering the many facts that should have made this man an almost laughable candidate, against all logic he was elected our 44th president. So why, or more importantly how, has a man who has draped himself in mediocrity his entire existence risen perhaps to the pinnacle of mankind?
Communists hate democracy. Obama is with them on that. What has he done to eradicate the widespread voting fraud – nearly all of it perpetrated by “Democrats” – that is now endemic? Let us hope that when the splendid sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., has finished investigating the Mickey Mouse “birth certificate” on the crime scene that is the White House website he will turn his gallant, unpaid cold-case posse on the voter fraud some say gave Obama the White House.
The title of my latest book, “Barack Obama, You’re Fired! (And Don’t Bother Asking for a Letter of Recommendation),” is more than an example of wishful thinking. I am convinced that this year, Christmas will fall on Nov. 6 when Santa Claus, recognizing who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, will do the right thing and fill our Christmas stocking with Mitt Romney and a Republican Senate.
In 2008, the majority was wooed by a youthful, good-looking, energetic, slick-talking newcomer who spoke in broad generalities. I received a letter from a female friend who (obviously) does not read my columns, in which she included a picture of herself proudly wearing an Obama T-shirt. When I asked her why she voted for Obama she said, “I’m for ‘hope and change.’” When I asked her what kind of change, she responded, “I don’t know. I’m not political.” Oooh!
Now, I was incorrect about my outlandish prediction that Obama would retire rather than face the possibility of only his second-ever electoral defeat. But I was correct to notice his lack of interest in winning a second term. Throughout what has passed for his campaign, Obama’s detachment has been so readily apparent that even the mainstream media have finally noticed it. He clearly wants nothing more than to move gracefully on to the next stage of his career, which will consist of traveling around the world being paid to hear how wonderful he is, only this time without the pressure of actually having to do anything.
The body count piles up under Obama’s pro-jihadist policy. The attack on our embassy was an act of war. The slaughter of our ambassador and three diplomats in Libya was an act of war. But instead of taking decisive action against our enemies, the president blamed America. The president blamed the Constitution. Obama blamed the First Amendment.
The more he fails … the more he fails. This is high treason. The enemedia exalts treason as patriotism, while demonizing freedom-lovers and patriots. America, it is past midnight.
I doubt very much if Obama will ever allow me to interview him – or even ask one tough question. After all, who am I? I’m only a guy running the first and largest independent news source on the Internet, with an audience of 8 million. I’m only a guy who before launching WND 15 years ago, when he was a freshman state senator from Illinois, was running daily newspapers in major metro markets, having spent 25 years doing everything one can do in the media world.
So I will ask my rhetorical question right here.
“Barack Obama: You appeared recently on a Comedy Central show and said repeatedly that the cold-blooded murders of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Ty Woods in a Libyan terrorist attack was ‘not optimal.’ Your administration, in a program called ‘Fast and Furious,’ announced in the White House with some fanfare, sold automatic weapons and other firearms to Mexican drug lords resulting in the deaths of possibly hundreds of Mexican citizens and several U.S. citizens, including two law enforcement officials. As a state senator in Illinois you sponsored legislation that would deprive babies that survived abortion attempts any lifesaving medical treatment or nourishment – leading to their slow agonizing deaths. With a record like that, can you stand before God and the American people and tell us honestly that you place a high value on human life?”
I don’t expect an answer – not even from Obama’s snotty, little, self-righteous, know-nothing spokesmen.
If Barack Obama wins re-election, any questions about capitalism will, of course, become moot. Given that he would not have to be concerned about winning another election, his second term would bring about a rapid end to what is left of the American Empire. He would simply ignore both Congress and the Constitution even more than in the past and seamlessly implement a de facto dictatorship.
That, in turn, would plunge us into a collectivist dark ages that would extinguish initiative, entrepreneurial activity and wealth creation. The only “solution” would be to have the Fed increase its efforts to ramp up the money supply in order to cover the rapidly increasing deficits, with the resulting runaway inflation being the perfect excuse to declare a state of emergency and suspend future elections.
MRC Way Too Excited About NewsBusters Hitting 1 Million Facebook Likes Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center issued a press release on Oct. 25 with the headline "Another Nail In The Liberal Media's Coffin." What could possibly be so earth-shattering?
The MRC blog NewsBusters hitting 1 million likes on Facebook.
Now, this really that big of a deal, because it's far outstripped by other, more popular people and things. Eminem, for instance, has 60 million Facebook likes, and Coca-Cola has 47 million.
But the MRC doesn't count anything outside its right-wing bubble:
With more than 1,000,000 fans, NewsBusters now finds itself in elite company, joining FoxNews.com, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as one of few conservative media outlets to reach a seven figure fandom on the world’s largest social network. Of that group, NewsBusters often has the highest total fan engagement as measured by Facebook’s “talking about this” count.
And even then, NewsBusters is not quite in the same company. Fox News has 2.6 million likes, and Beck has 2.1 million. Limbaugh's Facebook page is actually close, with 1.1 million likes.
But no fit of MRC hyperbole can go without a self-aggrandizing quote from Brent Bozell:
“This incredible achievement is a clear reflection of the American public’s growing awareness of liberal media bias, and is a testament to the hard work of MRC analysts and bloggers.
“The American people know that the liberal media are trying to rig this election for Barack Obama, and NewsBusters has become an invaluable tool in circumventing the corrupt liberal media who simply refuse to Tell the Truth. I would like to thank our fans for their support of NewsBusters and the MRC’s mission to bring balance and responsibility to the news media by documenting and exposing liberal media bias.”
WND's Erik Rush Thinks Obama Wanted Ambassador Dead Topic: WorldNetDaily
Believe it or not, marking Free Speech Week by advocating the execution of reporters who don't hate Obama enough is not the only crazy thing WorldNetDaily columnist Erik Rush has written this week.
In an Oct. 24 tweet, Rush wrote: "Why didn't @BarackObama act in #Benghazi if he had early intel? Any1 considered that he wanted Stevens out of the way?"
Rush links to a Washington Times column by Frank Gaffney in which he ludicrously suggests that Obama was "gun-walking arms to jihadists."
Between this and the attack on journalists, we have to wonder if James Garrow, executive director of Pink Pagoda Girls -- where Rush is the "Vice-President Administration and Strategic Alliances" -- thinks Rush's hateful and conspiratorial rantings reflect well on his organization.
NewsBusters' Double Standard on Reporting Insults Topic: NewsBusters
In an Oct. 25 NewsBusters post, Matt Hadro frets that CNN "still hasn't covered" how "a Democratic Senate candidate insulted CNN's Candy Crowley by joking to a male debate moderator 'You're prettier than her.'"
Funny, we can't seem to find anywhere on NewsBusters -- or any other Media Research Center-operated outlet -- any mention of Ann Coulter viciously insulting President Obama by calling him "the retard."
Coulter's website is linked on NewsBusters' front page, and NewsBusters publishes Coulter's columns.
Coulter's insult is one that even right-wingers like Michelle Malkin (also an MRC-published columnist) have denounced, but the MRC can't be moved to even mention it, let alone criticize it. It's an act of moral cowardice on par with the MRC's refusal to criticize Rush Limbaugh for calling Sandra Fluke a "slut."
Given the Media Research Center's jihad against Crowley and the other debate moderators, you'd think Hadro wouldn't have any problem with her being insulted.
It’s becoming increasingly clear, just days before Barack Obama’s bid for re-election, that America still doesn’t know much about the man who has lived in the White House for the last four years.
In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s challenge to Obama to release his college and passport records in exchange for a $5 million donation to Obama’s charities, here’s another secret from Obama’s life of mystery and make-believe.
Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a “nose job.”
In other words, it's not a "secret" -- Gilbert is just wildly speculating, just like he did in his discredited film "Dreams From My Real Father."
Gilbert, if you'll recall, is the guy who used the same method of scouring blurry, blown-up photo to determine that a ring Obama wears says "There is no god except Allah" -- a claim that even birthers were moved to discredit.
When Corsi continues to trust so demonstrably untrustworthy, it makes WND untrustworthy as well. Joseph Farah still hasn't realized that.
NEW ARTICLE: Moderator Wars Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center tried to discredit presidential debate moderator with specious charges of "liberal bias." When that failed, it resorted to ugly personal attacks against the female moderators. Read more >>
WND's Erik Rush: Try (And Presumably Execute) Journalists for Being Too Pro-Obama Topic: WorldNetDaily
Erik Rush uses his Oct. 24 WorldNetDaily column to mark Free Speech Week ... by advocating the trial and punishment, "no matter how severe," of journalists for "treason" for doing things like pointing out that President Obama did not go on an "apology tour."
MRC's Graham Has A 'Gay Agenda' Freakout Topic: NewsBusters
In an Oct. 21 NewsBusters post, Tim Graham has a fit over a Washington Post "puff piece" about Ellen DeGeneres winning the Kennedy Center's Mark Twain Award. Why? Because it suggested that DeGeneres' talk show doesn't have a "gay agenda." Graham ranted in response:
As usual, you have the distinct impression that liberals have a reaction for the social-conservative viewpoint: they want it punched in the face. The Post certainly won't give it more than two words of insult. Their denial that there's anything called a "gay agenda" is a denial of reality, and a denial of everything lobbies like GLAAD or the Human Rights Campaign are doing in America.
Needless to say, Graham never describes what this "gay agenda" is. The only example of how this supposed "gay agenda" can be found in DeGeneres' talk show is an anecdote about how she" put on a couple of little red-headed boys, and one said he favored the president, because "Barack Obama said that men and men can marry each other and woman and woman can marry each other and I think that’s right."
That's it. One example out of 11 years of shows. But apparently, according to Graham, the mere fact that DeGeneres is gay is enough evidence of a sinister "gay agenda."
WND, Newsmax Pretend Trump's 'Bombshell' Isn't A Dud Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily drooled at the prospect of what might be in the special announcement Donald Trump made on Oct. 24. It devoted an article prior to his announcement by repeating an unsubstantiated story that "Michelle and Barack Obama once seriously considered getting a divorce," followed by Trump's claim that "none of the speculation about the subject of the announcement was correct."
Well, Trump's big announcement turned out to be a self-promoting dud -- he vowed to donate $5 million to the charity of President Obama's choice if Obama would release his college transcripts.
But WND still needed to pretend like Trump's offer was anything but a fizzle. So Bob Unruh penned an article headlined "Kaboom! Trump drops Obama bombshell" that avoids mentioning Trump's actual proposal anywhere in the headline or the subhead and was mostly a updated cut-and-paste of the earlier article.
Meanwhile, Newsmax -- which has promoted Trump's presidential ambitions and tried to partner with him to host a Republican presidential debate -- played the same game of make-believe. An Oct. 24 article by Martin Gould treated Trump's dud with gravitas, even adding, "The Obama campaign had no immediate comment on Trump's video."
Too 'Feisty' For Bozell -- Or Too Female? Topic: Media Research Center
Brent Bozell's Oct. 24 column is headlined "Say No to Feisty Liberal Moderators," but it's clear that he has only certain feisty moderators in mind.
Bozell wrote that "old PBS hand Jim Lehrer let the candidates debate, and for that he was savaged by liberals for 'losing control' of the evening. He also wrote that "liberal CBS anchorman Bob Schieffer did it right. He moderated without asserting his own political opinions. Indeed, if this was all you had as a compass, you'd never know where he leaned." (That, of course ignores the fact that Schieffer has a personal relationship with George W. Bush, whose debate Schieffer moderated in 2004 -- a relationship the MRC has thus far not mentioned to its readers lest that conflict with its lucrative "liberal media bias" storyline.)
Bozell then said that Schieffer and Lehrer were "a welcome change from the Raddatz and Crowley libfests." He continued:
In the second debate, ABC's Martha Raddatz demanded fiscal specifics (and then complained she wasn't getting them) from Paul Ryan, but refused to demand the same from Joe Biden. By the end of the evening, she was interrupting so much it seemed like she was interrupting Biden interrupting Ryan.
In the third debate, CNN's Candy Crowley outraged viewers at home by selecting questions from clearly left-wing "undecided voters." She then compounded the error by enabling Barack Obama in his Libya lies. Liberal in the media rallied around Crowley like she'd scored the winning touchdown.
Welcoming a feisty moderator sounds like a terrible idea — at least as long as the Republicans keep lining up a unanimous cast of four media liberals to do the moderating.
Welcoming a feisty female moderator sounds doubly terrible to Bozell.
We're sure it's just a coincidence that the two debate moderators Bozell found too "feisty" were both female. Make of that what you will.
WND's Farah: Pray For An End To The 'Obama Tribulation' Topic: WorldNetDaily
The tribulation Obama wrought on the nation did, indeed, produce perseverance – and that perseverance renewed character in many and that character gave us hope.
I already knew the hope of salvation in Jesus (Yeshua). But the hope I have today for America is that the tribulation we’ve been experiencing under Obama is coming to an end.
I pray fervently for my fellow Americans, that they have developed the character and the hope for a better America to bring the Obama tribulation to a quick end.
No, not this year is the author of “None of the Above” urging Americans to sit this one out – nor even to vote for a third-party candidate who will only hurt our chances of showing Obama to the exit door of the White House.
If Americans have any chance of restoring “liberty and justice for all” to this nation, there is only one option – vote for Mitt Romney.
He’s not likely to be the political messiah we would like. My hope is his election will simply buy us the time we need to ensure the Obama tribulation does not become more than we can bear.
Newsmax Does Post-Debate Romney-Fluffing Topic: Newsmax
Right on cue, Newsmax's David Patten -- a loyal right-wing apparatchik -- quickly moved after the Oct. 22 presidential debate into full Romney-fluffing mode with an article headlined "Pundits Proclaim: Romney Passes ‘Commander-in-Chief Test’." Patten began in a cheerleading fashion:
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney may have exchanged a tactical defeat for a strategic victory in Monday’s foreign policy debate, losing on points to the president by most accounts but scoring a solid performance that left major pundits declaring he had passed “the commander in chief test” in resounding fashion.
Of course, all of the "pundits" Patten quotes -- Judith Miller, David Gergen and Doug Schoen -- are conservative-leaning. Patten misleadingly describes Schoen as a "Democratic pollster" despite the fact that he's making his living these days in part by bashing President Obama.
WND's Obama-Iran Claim Backed Up ... By 'Whitey Tape' Charlatan Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've been detailing how WorldNetDaily has been trying to take credit for the New York Times' reporting about alleged proposed one-on-one talks between the U.S. and Iran, even though WND's Reza Kahlili made unproven, unsubstantiated claims that went far beyond what the Times reported.
Now, WND is trying to get others to back up Kahlili. its first choice, though, is a bad one.
An Oct. 23 WND article touts how "A former CIA analyst says a WND report that revealed Iranian sources confirming a deal between the Obama administration and a representative of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over that nation’s nuclear program means the issue could not be used to “bludgeon” challenger Mitt Romney." It continues:
Larry Johnson, an ex-CIA analyst, said yesterday during an interview on the John Batchelor Show the revelation has pulled the rug from underneath any Obama campaign plans to take advantage of the situation.
“”There are two types of leaks in Washington,” he said. “One is when the official part of the administration gets it out there in order to help drive the story. The other is when someone who’s inside the administration who’s privy to what’s going on leaks it in order to derail it.
“I think this is a case of the latter. I don’t doubt Reza’s reporting at all. I think it’s quite accurate. What this ended up doing was derailing Obama’s attempt to try to take the high ground…”
If Larry Johnson's name sounds familiar, it should. He's best known for feverishly promoting the existence of what is infamously known as the "whitey tape" -- a supposed recording of Michelle Obama railing against "whitey." Just one problem: No such tape has ever surfaced. Johnson has peddled strange explanations about why the purported tape has never been released, always absolving himself.
We can presume that neither Batchelor nor Kahlili -- who was a guest along with Johnon on Batchelor's show -- asked Johnson about this alleged tape during his appearance. After all, that would have discredited Johnson and, by association, Kahlili -- and we can presume that right-winger Batchelor was not about to do that.
Meanwhile, a new follow-up article by Kahlili quotes more anonymous, unverifiable sources making related claims. Kahlili claimed that his "highly placed" source says that "after the WND revelation of the secret meeting, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was incensed." Kahlili added in yet another attempt to take credit for the Times' reporting: "The Iranian supreme leader demanded the Americans explain about the leak, which prompted the White House to leak a soft version of the story to the New York Times and deny the facts."
What facts? Kahlili has provided nothing that can be independently verified, and he has a history of making crackpot claims. WND has given its readers no reason whatsoever to trust anything Kahlili says.
Kahlili also has provided no evidence linking anything he has written to the Times' report, so he should really be less of an egomaniac about this.
In short: Unless Kahlili can deliver something beyond anonymous, unverifiable sources, he can't -- and shouldn't -- be trusted.
Fact-Checking the Fact-Challenged Seton Motley Topic: NewsBusters
Seton Motley has a growing reputation for falsely smearing General Motors in his NewsBusters post, and he continues to live up to it.
In an Oct. 18 NewsBusters post, Motley ironically attacks former auto czar Steven Rattner for allegeldy having "a bit of a problem telling the truth." Of course, it's Motley who actually has that problem.
He attacks GM for selling the electric Chevy Volt at discount prices -- even though that's standard business practice for dealing with slow-selling inventory.
Motley goes on to attack Rattner for wanting to eliminate previous practice of maintaining "over-bloated inventories on dealers’ lots," then links to newspaper articles citing high inventories of GM pickup trucks.
But Motley fails to explain why pickup inventories are elevated: As these industrywebsites note, the GM plants that make trucks are being shut down for several weeks in order to retool the assembly lines for a redesigned model, and production was increased prior to the shutdown in order to make sure dealers didn't run out of trucks while the plants were shut down.
Motley serves up even more huffy disingenuousness in an Oct. 23 post, in which he ranted: "Good thing President Obama separated us from our $85 billion - allegedly to “create or save” jobs. Mostly foreign jobs, but.... And as we’ve seen with Ford, no government bailout money was necessary to preserve a gi-normous member of the American auto industry."
Actually, that $85 billion wasn't given to GM alone -- it was also given to Chrysler and other auto parts suppliers. Much of that money has been paid back, and how much the bailout ultimately costs -- probably less than $25 billion -- depends on how much the government can get for its remaining stake in GM.
And while Ford did not take any bailout money, the company benefited from it. Ford CEO Alan Mulally told Fox News last month that without the bailout, a failed GM and Chrysler "could have taken down the industry and th U.S. economy from a recession to a depression," and that the entire auto industry "would have been in real trouble."
So: More dishonesty from Seton Motley. Anyone surprised?