ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

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

Wednesday, November 6, 2013
NewsBusters Misleads on Cuccinelli's Defense of Anti-Sodomy Law
Topic: NewsBusters

Ken Shepherd claimed in an Oct. 31 NewsBusters post that the Daily Beast "misled -- and arguably lied -- to readers" by claiming that Virginia attorney general Ken Cuccinelli "tried and failed to reinstate a ban on oral and anal sex in his home state":

Of course that's patently false. What Cuccinelli, the state's attorney general, did do was seek to prosecute an alleged sex offender for attempting to force an underage girl to perform fellatio on him. Cuccinelli argued that the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas did not apply to prosecuting acts of sodomy.


Indeed, as noted in the writ of certiorari -- basically the document you use when you ask the Supreme Court to take up your case -- Cuccinelli's office quoted from the ruling in Lawrence v. Texas that the decision in that case did NOT address sodomy committed by someone of consenting age upon a minor, as was the case in Moose v. MacDonald:


This was a case not about reversing Lawrence v. Texas and the resulting unconstitutionality about the legality of oral and anal sex between consenting adults. This case was about upholding the conviction of a sex offender, something that should not be troubling to anyone, regardless of whether they are liberal, conservative, moderate, or libertarian.
But what's precision and journalistic integrity when you're on a roll bashing a social conservative as anti-consensual oral sex?

Actually, Shepherd is the one who's  not concerned with precision and journalistic integrity.

As Slate's Dalia Lithwick details, Virginia's anti-sodomy law has been found to be unconstitutional under Lawrence v. Texas, and Cuccinelli's appeal was about attempting to uphold by "a call for judges to read statutes to mean what they don’t say":

The sex offender in this case was William MacDonald, a 47-year-old man who solicited oral sex from a 17-year-old woman. (No sex was had). Because 15 is the legal age of consent in Virginia, authorities couldn’t charge MacDonald for statutory rape. Faced with other statutes to choose from, they opted to charge him with soliciting a minor by inducing her to commit sodomy, for which he served a year in prison and must now register as a sex offender.


But even with the tide of legal authority against him, Cuccinelli decided to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that Virginia’s anti-sodomy statute has no constitutional problem, if—as he concedes, and only if—the high court would just interpret the terrifyingly broad sodomy law to apply only to sex involving 16- and 17-year-olds. (Justice Kennedy left the thread of that argument hanging in his majority opinion in Lawrence.) In effect, Cuccinelli’s legal appeal asks the Supreme Court and the lower courts to ignore the clear meaning and intent of the law, to interpret it in a way that advances narrow goals he wants to advance.

Of course, Cuccinelli’s problem at the Supreme Court is that Virginia’s sodomy statute doesn’t mention age, so reading an imaginary age requirement into it is not “interpreting” the statute so much as rewriting it—a freewheeling position normally anathema to Tea Party conservatives like Cuccinelli. Moreover, the Virginia legislature actually tried to rewrite the law to salvage it for narrower purposes after the Lawrence decision, but Cuccinelli helped kill that bill. You can’t really stagger around swinging a huge, unwieldy legal mallet and claiming it’s the only tool you have against pedophilia. Not when you opted to turn down the offer of a scalpel.

The legal position Cuccinelli pushes creates truly bizarre results, which is normally a sign for reviewing courts that something smells funky. Asking a federal court to turn a state anti-sodomy law into an anti-statutory rape law means that if MacDonald had engaged in ordinary intercourse with a 17-year-old girl every day for a month, he would not face a felony conviction or be a sex offender. He’d just be that guy. But his decision to solicit oral sex, even his decision to just phone her and ask for it, under the imaginarily rewritten law, requires both.

Cuccinelli’s proposed revision to Virginia’s sodomy law would also mean that those older than 15 can legally consent to sex, yet, have no right of sexual privacy in actually having sex. Or, to put it differently, Virginia could charge any 16- and 17-year-old with felony sodomy simply because they happened to choose oral or anal sex over vaginal sex.

Shepherd didn't mention any of those important details, of course.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:01 PM EST
WND Likens Valerie Jarrett To A Serial Killer
Topic: WorldNetDaily

A Nov. 5 WorldNetDaily article by Michael Maloof carries the headline "General blames 'Night Stalker' for military purge." Maloof begins the article: "Who, or what, is behind the “purge” of top-level U.S. military officers during the Obama administration, with estimates of the number of senior officers fired during the last five years edging toward 200?"

It turns out that Maloof is talking about Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, whom birther general Paul Vallely blames -- without evidence, of course -- for the dismissal of some senior military officers.

Maloof adds: "London’s Daily Mail newspaper notes that Jarrett’s insider nickname is 'Night Stalker' because of her exclusive, late-night access to the presidential family’s private quarters." But the Daily Mail article cites no "insiders" to back up the claim, stating only that "Jarrett is reportedly called 'the Night Stalker.'"

You might remember that "Night Stalker" is also the name that was given to Richard Ramirez, serial killer and avowed Satanist.

Why are we assuming that WND had Ramirez in mind when promoting this purported nickname for Jarrett and not, say, the 1970s TV series?

Let's go back to a June column by WND editor Joseph Farah. In it, Farah bragged that he was "the guy who bestowed" the "Night Stalker" title on Ramirez when he worked at a Los Angeles newspaper, further bragging that "I actually won an award for that headline."

We would say that Farah should know better if weren't for the apparent fact that Farah knows exactly what he's doing -- trying to associate the Obama White House with one of America's most infamous serial killers.

What kind of man is so amoral, so sick as to do something so depraved? The kind of man who lies about Obama with impunity.

Maloof piles on with his reference to "Who, or what, is behind the 'purge,'" suggesting that he doesn't even think Jarrett is human.

These are sick people.

Posted by Terry K. at 7:16 PM EST
To CNS, Food Stamp Recipients And Government Workers Are No Different

Here's how an unbylined Nov. 5 article begins:

If the turnout in this year’s Virginia gubernatorial election is similar to the turnout in the state’s last two gubernatorial elections in 2005 and 2009, there are likely to be about 1.2 voters picking the state’s next governor for each person in the state collecting food stamps or a government paycheck.

CNS thinks food stamp recipients are no different from government employees? Really?

What, if anything, does that prove? That CNS will go to any ridiculous length to denigrate the government?

We have to wonder. Numerous CNS employees drew government paychecks after their CNS stint. Do Terry Jeffrey and  his staff think these government workers are as parasitical as it considers food stamp recipients to be?

We'd love to hear Jeffrey's answer to that, to find out whether his personal loyalty trumps his ideology.

Posted by Terry K. at 2:42 PM EST
WND's Loudon Fearmongers Like A Hack Over Transgender Students
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Gina Loudon's Nov. 3 WorldNetDaily column is headlined "Let's wage war on D.C. hacks," but the only hackishness we're seeing is from Loudon.

Loudon complains that "Democrats have found success in slandering conservatives as racist, women-hating homophobes." Then she writes this:

I’ve written before about the extremes that Gov. Jerry Brown has gone to here in California. One example is the new law enabling school children to decide their gender on a whim. One day a boy can “feel like a woman” and enter the girl’s locker room. Then, the next day, when he “feels” like a boy again, he can go to go to football practice and use the boy’s locker room again. I have personally spoken to gay Californians who are very uneasy with the direction in which the Democrat supermajority and Gov. Brown have taken the state.

For someone who claims to have a doctorate in psychology, Loudon is shockingly ignorant of what transgenderism is.There's simply no medical evidence that any person would "decide their gender on a whim" and change it from day to day depending on how he or she "feels," as Loudon claims.

In the real world, the California law merely affirms already-existing protections for transgender students, and no incidents of misconduct have been reported in California.

Who's the real hack here? Loudon might want to look in the mirror for the answer.

Posted by Terry K. at 8:45 AM EST
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
NEW ARTICLE: Last of the Redskin Lovers
Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center tries to dismiss the idea that the Washington Redskins name is offensive -- but won't tell its readers that a prominent conservative the MRC has honored supports a name change. Read more >>

Posted by Terry K. at 9:40 PM EST
WND's Massie Revives 'Negress' Smear
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Earlier this year, WorldNetDaily columnist Mychal Massie felt the need to channel his inner Bull Connor and denigrate commentator Jehmu Greene with the "Negress" smear, doing so in three of four consecutive columns. "Negress" is an archaic term dating from the era of segregation, and Massie is clearly using it with the intent to denigrate.

Massie had let it go for a while, but Massie's inner Orval Faubus came bubbling up again in his Oct. 28 column as part of a rant against Fox News' Megyn Kelly:

I have a question for Megyn Kelly, a Fox News program host. Ms. Kelly, why did you rush to call Joe the Plumber a racist on your prime-time show when it is a fact that you gave a complete pass to the avowed racist Negress and ACORN member Jehmu Greene when she openly insulted Tucker Carlson for being a white male who disagreed with her? Or perhaps, Ms. Kelly, you presumed the smarmy Negress Jehmu Greene was actually embracing Mr. Carlson with words of love and kindness when she verbally attacked and insulted him live on camera on your show for what amounted to his being white. And before you disagree, let me remind you that it was your favorite Negress who hurled an insulting volley of racial epithets based solely on Carlson being white.


If, Ms. Kelly, you purpose to expose racism, why don’t you have Mr. Jamiel Shaw, a law-abiding, hard-working father whose wife serves in the U.S. Army, on your show? They can tell you about their son Jamiel Jr. who was murdered in cold blood at their doorsteps by an illegal-alien Mexican. Murdering innocent blacks is how Mexicans in Los Angeles earn their bona fides to become gang members.

Or, Ms. Kelly, would that be too much like really doing your job? Then again, you can have me on your show to debate your favorite Negress, radical racist Jehmu Greene. Oh, and for the record, I am black, and I stand by my comments. I don’t want you to blame another white person for what this American of color said.

What set Massie off is Kelly apparently attributing a column Samuel "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher reposted on his website, titled "America Needs A White Republican President," to him -- understandable, since Wurzelbacher failed to clearly identify the column as originally written by a black conservative.

Kelly's sin of misattribution is nothing compared to Massie's deliberate use of a racially derogatory term. But Massie apparently has too much hatred in his heart to know or care otherwise.

Posted by Terry K. at 6:45 PM EST
MRC, AIM Tout Benghazi 'Witness,' Ignore His Lies
Topic: Accuracy in Media

In an Oct. 28 Media Research Center item, Matthew Balan touts how a segment by Lara Logan on "60 Minutes" about the Benghazi attack featured "an actual eyewitness of the attack":

Logan led with her "misinformation" line, and introduced Morgan Jones, a former member of the British military, who uses that pseudonym for personal safety reasons. Jones was in charge of the unarmed security force inside the walls of the main U.S. compound in Benghazi. He revealed that he snuck inside the hospital where Ambassador Stevens had been taken, and quickly learned about diplomat's death. Jones also outlined his concerns about the armed militia guarding the facility.

Similarly, in an Oct. 31 Accuracy in Media column, Roger Aronoff highlights the Morgan Jones interview:

The segment, which can be viewed online, interviews one “Morgan Jones,” a self-identified Blue Mountain security chief who was at an apartment 15 minutes away when the attack started at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.

Jones raced to the compound, scaled the 12-foot wall, and attempted to enter the compound to assist those inside, but they had already been rescued by a CIA rapid-response team that included the now-deceased Tyrone Woods.

“[The attackers] said, ‘We’re here to kill Americans, not Libyans,’” recounts Jones in an emotional moment. “So they’d give them a good beating, pistol whip them, beat them with their rifle, and let them go.” 

But so far, neither Balan nor Aronoff have told their readers that the account "Morgan Jones" told on "60 Minutes" differs sharply from what he told his then-employer, that he couldn't get anywhere near the Benghazi compound during the attack. The Washington Post reports:

But in a written account that Jones, whose real name was confirmed as Dylan Davies by several officials who worked with him in Benghazi, provided to his employer three days after the attack, he told a different story of his experiences that night.

In Davies’s 2 1/2-page incident report to Blue Mountain, the Britain-based contractor hired by the State Department to handle perimeter security at the compound, he wrote that he spent most of that night at his Benghazi beach-side villa. Although he attempted to get to the compound, he wrote in the report, “we could not get anywhere near . . . as roadblocks had been set up.”

Aronoff, to his credit, did note something Balan didn't: that  Fox News reported that Jones demanded money to tell his story, and that Jones' book is published by Simon & Schuster, which is a division of CBS, which should raise questions about an undisclosed quid pro quo.

Posted by Terry K. at 1:39 PM EST
WND Pushes Last-Minute Attacks In VA Governor Race, Makes Stealth Endorsement
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily is making a last-minute push in the Virginia governor's race, unloading a barrage of stories attacking Democrat Terry McAuliffe while ignoring the scandals of his Republican opponent, Ken Cuccinelli.

Garth Kant has penned a trio of anti-McAuliffe stories in the past day and a half:

One article complains that McAuliffe "has been at the center of major scandals during every step of his career, though he’s never been charged," but doesn't conclude that that's because he hasn't done anything illegal.

Another article recycles the "never been charged" lede of Kant's earlier article and cites a clearly biased source to detail McAuliffe's "latest pair of scandals." As with the earlier article, Kant talks to nobody who offers any rebuttal of the "scandal" claims.

A third article by Kant repeats an undocumented claim by a Republican lawmaker in Virginia who claims he received a "robo-call" by the Democratic Party of Virginia stating that Cuccinelli supports Obamacare.

None of Kant's articles, however, mention the scandal that has embroiled Cuccinelli: Along with current Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, Cuccinelli has received thousands of dollars in donations and personal gifts from a major Republican donor, Johnie Williams. Like McAuliffe, Cuccinelli has apparently done nothing illegal, but Kant apparently doesn't believe his readers need to know the full truth about Cuccinelli.

Perhaps that's an editorial decision that comes straight from the top. On Nov. 4, WND sent out an email containing Kant's first attack on McAuliffe, topped by an endorsement of Cuccinelli from WND editor Joseph Farah:

The hour is late to save our state from the kind of corruption that has infected Washington. Please read the WND story published today that provides a detailed overview of how Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe, currently leading in the race for the governorship over Attorney Ken Cuccinelli in tomorrow’s election, has been involved in scandals since he first entered politics and business.

Tomorrow’s election is vital to the future of the state and the nation. I urge you to vote for Ken Cuccinelli.

Joseph Farah
Editor and Chief Executive Officer

The email does not explain whether this was a paid endorsement or a in-kind contribution to Cuccinelli's campaign. WND rarely does endorsements, and even more rarely sends one out via email that it didn't also publish on the WND website.

The strange nature of this stealth, last-minute endorsement, on top of Kant's barrage of last-minute dirt, brings up the question of whether there is some form of coordination between Cuccinelli's campaign and WND. Perhaps Farah can explain.

Posted by Terry K. at 7:40 AM EST
Monday, November 4, 2013
CNS' Jeffrey Unhappy That ENDA 'Bans Discrimination Against Cross-Dressers'

As far as editor in chief Terry Jeffrey is concerned, the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act is all about cross-dressers. He devotes a Nov. 4 article freaking out about it:

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which will come up for a cloture vote in the Senate today, mandates that employers in the United States permit men to dress as women at work and women to dress as men as long as they otherwise adhere to “reasonable dress or grooming standards.”


Section 8 of the proposed law specifically states that employers must permit workers who either have undergone “gender transition” or are “undergoing” a “gender transition” to dress and groom themselves according to the gender to which they have transitioned or are transitioning.

Jeffrey goes on to complain that "The proposed law does not define what 'gender transition' means."

If all that Jeffrey can muster against ENDA is tired transgender scare tactics, it's a sign of how bankrupt his employer's anti-gay agenda is.

Posted by Terry K. at 9:45 PM EST
WND's Washington: If Imaginary Books Are Counted, Liberals Have Burned More Than The Nazis
Topic: WorldNetDaily

We guess that we can thank WorldNetDaily's Ellis Washington for finally giving up the pretense that he's not likening President Obama and other non-conservatives to Nazis while doing exactly that. That doesn't mean, of course, that such comparisons are factual or even intellectually honest.

Washington serves up another doozy of Godwinism in his Nov. 1 WND column:

The caption in the image above was perhaps written around 1943 and says that, “Ten years ago the Nazis burned these books … but in America we can still read them.” Although this statement tried to distinguish America from Nazi Germany, it is only partially true today. Why? Because while in a de jure (legal) sense America today doesn’t burn books, in a de facto (unofficial) sense through our book publishing industry, our literary agent industry, our media, our education system, our politics, our legal system and throughout culture and society, their exists an existential book burning, happening on a much greater scale by the Democrat Socialist Party, a scale the Nationalist Socialist Party could only dream of 80 years ago under Hitler and the Nazis. In modern times today, leftists creates this book burning atmosphere by deconstructing, perverting and destroying conservative ideas, particularly those out of the Judeo-Christian tradition of intellectual thought … without lighting one match or igniting one torch. Hitler would be pleased!

Only in such an anti-God, anti-intellectual society as America has devolved into during the Age of Progressivism (1860–present) and in the Age of Obama (2009–present) are Heine’s prophetic words tantamount to those of Moses, Isaiah and St. Paul when he wrote, “Where books (ideas) are burned, they will, in the end burn people, too.”

Yes, Washington really is claiming that progressives burn more books than the Nazis if imaginary ones are counted in the total. And, apparently, criticizing a conservative idea is exactly the same thing as setting it on fire.

Somehow, we doubt that Washington feels the same way about conservative criticism of progressive ideas; otherwise, that would make him a walking pile of oily rags and a box of matches.

We can also presume that Washington including "our book publishing industry, our literary agent industry" in his book-burning rant is probably about Washington's inability to get his works published. This overlooks the fact that the not-left-leaning website that publishes his column operates a book division. What does it say that even WND apparently considers Washington unworthy of having his work published in book form? Probably that WND actually has some standards after all.

Posted by Terry K. at 5:15 PM EST
Noel Sheppard Can't Separate Actor From His Role
Topic: NewsBusters

Noel Sheppard, it seems, is unable to differentiate between fantasy and reality. How else to explain his insistence on referring to an actor using the role he played 40 years ago?

A Nov. 1 NewsBusters post by Sheppard carries the headline "Rob Reiner aka Meathead: Hillary Would Be ‘Most Qualified Person Ever to Run for President’." In it,Sheppard whines that Reiner, "aka Meathead in the famed sitcom All in the Family," called Hillary Clinton "the single most qualified person ever to run for President of the United States" if she chooses to do so. Sheppard then rants:

Because Hillary was senator for eight years and Secretary of State for four, she’s the most qualified person EVER to run for president of our country?

More qualified than George Washington who led our troops to victory against the British?

More qualified than Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Independence?

More qualified than John Adams who was a pivotal figure in achieving our independence?

More qualified than Abraham Lincoln? And Franklin Delano Roosevelt? And Ronald Reagan?

Would any of these Hillary supporters be so gushing if she were a man with the exact same qualifications?

Of course not.

Much as these people championed Barack Obama despite his lack of qualifications, Hillary is the left’s current ideal not because of what she’s done, but for what she represents.

No wonder Archie Bunker referred to this idiot as Meathead.

But Sheppard wasn't done confusing the actor with his long-ago role. In a Nov. 2 post, in which he places "Rob Reiner aka Meathead" again in the headline, Sheppard gripes that Reiner, "made famous by his role as Meathead in the legendary sitcom All in the Family," said something else he didn't like.

Sheppard doesn't mention that Reiner's "All in the Family" character had a real name, or that Reiner has produced and directed several hit movies. As far as Sheppard is concerned, the only thing of any note Reiner has ever done is play a character named Meathead.

Of course, Sheppard is a guy who's continually surprised by the non-surprising and just can't stop using anti-Semitic images in his blog posts, so perhaps it's not surprising that his grasp on reality is a bit tenuous.

And that makes Sheppard a bigger meathead than he accuses Reiner of being.

Posted by Terry K. at 1:32 PM EST
Did LAX Shooter Pick Up His Anti-TSA Hatred From WND?
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Authorities are reporting that Paul Ciancia, who killed a Transportation Security Administration agent and shot several other people at Los Angeles International Airport last week, left behind a note in which he "indicated his anger and his malice toward the TSA officers" and stated his intent to kill TSA agents and "instill fear in your traitorous minds."

One has to wonder if Ciancia read WorldNetDaily, because that's the kind of hatred toward the TSA it has been fomenting for years.

In 2010, for example, WND started a campaign to "put a stop to airport humiliation through invasive 'pat-downs' and 'virtual strip searches,'" which WND editor Joseph Farah claimed would "return sanity and decency to our airports":

As the letter being sent to officials in Washington states, under the new screening protocols, passengers are subjected to a virtual “strip search” by being required to undergo a humiliating full-body scan, resulting in the display of a graphic image of their naked body to be scrutinized by a TSA agent.

If they choose to “opt out” of the full-body scan, they are forced instead to undergo the same kind of aggressive pat-down that criminals and drug-dealers get, including direct manual contact with their breasts and genitalia. Children are not exempt.

While such degrading and invasive searches certainly violate passengers’ Fourth Amendment guarantee to be “secure in their persons … against unreasonable searches and seizures,” the generation of naked images of minor passengers arguably amounts to the creation of illegal child pornography.

Here are more examples of WND's anti-TSA rhetoric:

  • Everywhere you look, there it is again – staring you in the face. The four-way traffic cameras at virtually every intersection. Police secretly attaching GPS tracking devices to citizens’ automobiles. Invasive TSA pat-downs and nude X-ray scannings – after first being required to raise your hands as though you were being arrested. [Promotion for Whistleblower magazine, 3/1/12]
  • “For those of you who fly and opt for the ‘pat down,’ you need to demand the TSA thugs change their gloves. I’ve been watching on the news how they operate. People are being searched [with] dirty gloves … gloves that have been in crotches, armpits, touching people who may be ill, people who pick their noses. Do you want those gloves touching you? These thugs are protecting themselves from you. You need to be protected from them." [Martha Donahue, quoted by WND's Bob Unruh, 11/22/10]
  • The punishment for not obeying the federal government is the humiliating experience of having to undergo a sexual assault as TSA thugs grope traveler’s genitalia. There have been repeated instances of little children being sexually molested by TSA agents, the elderly being traumatized and the chronically ill being humiliated. [Joe Sansone, 11/25/10]
  • Take note: This is the same criminal administration that is at war with governors of states who are attempting to prevent illegals from entering this country, while allowing the TSA to violate American citizens. This government has labeled every single American citizen as a suspect in terrorism. Again, the TSA has no lawful authority to put their hands on you. Why? Because it stands contrary to the United States Constitution. [Bradlee Dean, 2/3/12]
  • If recent news reports are any indication, many Americans can’t even trust that TSA’s screeners won’t steal their laptops, money or jewelry. [Chelsea Schilling, 3/3/13]
  • TSA has its rules and Williams has his, and one of mine is to avoid tyrants and idiots. [Walter Williams, 6/18/08]
  • Americans have suffered enough humiliation at the hands of TSA. It is time to repeal the laws that make us subject to these unconstitutional searches just for the privilege of flying on an airplane. [Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, 1/23/12]
  • Building up the TSA and IRS into armies of fear and intimidation and the abolition of privacy are important elements of Obama’s wide war on the republic and America’s citizens. In Obama’s actions, policies and fiats, we see his rejection of constitutional limitations of federal power and a repudiation of the Bill of Rights and Posse Comitatus. [Letter to the editor, 9/5/12]
  • Travelers looking for an explanation for the idiocy of the TSA full-body scans and intimate pat downs are missing the boat if they think TSA employees are a group of voyeurs or just plain stupid. There is a method to the madness. The TSA madness is a logical expression of political correctness carried into the realm of national security. These new TSA practices do not make travelers safer, but they do something more important to the federal bureaucracy. They satisfy the politically correct mandate, “Thou shalt not profile.” [Tom Tancredo, 11/27/10]
  • Does TSA administrator John “Long Dong Silver” Pistole get searched at an airport? How about Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano? FBI Director Robert Mueller? Michelle Obama and the kids? No, of course not. TSA agents are busy X-raying James Caan’s shoes and feeling up nuns. [Ann Coulter, 11/24/10]

After Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller was murder, WND endeavored to draw readers' attention away from its history of anti-Tiller rhetoric. With WND's anti-TSA rhetoric seemingly having similar real-world consequences, look for WND to play the same diversion tactic.

[Image: AP/ABC News]

Posted by Terry K. at 8:19 AM EST
Sunday, November 3, 2013
Newsmax's Kerik Image Rehab Continues, Minus The Whitewashing
Topic: Newsmax

When Bernard Kerik was released from prison in May, Newsmax -- which spent a lot of time on Kerik's image rehabilitation before the former New York City police chief pleaded guilty to charges that sent him to prison for more than three years -- was all ready to reboot the image rehab project.

However, Kerik is using his time on the other side of the criminal justice system to push for sentencing and prison reform. That's adjusting Newsmax's rehab project a little.

A Nov. 1 Newsmax article by Jim Meyers touts Kerik's appearance on the "Today" show as part of Kerik's new crusade:

As New York City police commissioner, Bernard Kerik was ultimately responsible for the incarceration of many criminals.

Now that he has seen the prison system from the inside, having served three years behind bars, he has a new appraisal of the U.S. penal system: "insane."

In his first interview since his release from prison, where he served time for tax evasion and lying to federal authorities, Kerik told NBC’s Matt Lauer on the Today show Friday: "No one in the history of our country has ever been in the system with my background.

"You have to be on the other side of the bars. You have to see what it's like to be a victim of the system. There's no way to do that from the other side.

"If the American people and members of Congress saw what I saw, there would be anger, there would be outrage, and there would be change, because nobody would stand for it."

Since Kerik's prison stint is a key part of his new crusade, Newsmax has little choice but to go along with it, minus the whitewashing it has done in the past:

Commissioner Kerik rose to national prominence following the 9/11 attacks in New York, and in 2004, President George W. Bush nominated him to head the Department of Homeland Security.

Kerik soon withdrew his name from consideration, citing the past employment of an illegal immigrant as a nanny. He later admitted accepting $165,000 worth of free renovations to his apartment from a construction company. In 2009, he pleaded guilty to eight counts, including tax evasion and lying to the White House, and was sentenced to four years in jail.

Kerik was released after three years at a federal prison in Cumberland, Md., and served the remainder of his term under home confinement, which ended last month.

If nothing else, Newsmax has certainly been loyal to Kerik. That loyalty continues with whatever narrative Kerik chooses to push.

Posted by Terry K. at 9:30 PM EST
WND's Denigrating, Factually Inaccurate Attack on ENDA
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Bob Unruh's Nov. 2 WorldNetDaily article on the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act is headlined "It's ba-a-ack! Job protections based on sexual preference." But that's not it's promoted on WND's front page --that one reads "It's back! Job protections based on sexual perversion."

WND denigrates further with the photo accompaning Unruh's article -- an image of a man applying eyeliner:

In addition, Unruh's article is highly biased, largely quoting critics of ENDA, and contains numerous inaccuracies and distortions. Unruh writes:

The federal hate crimes law ultimately was dubbed the “Pedophile Protection Act” by opponents who cited the efforts of Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, to add an amendment stating the “term sexual orientation as used in this act or any amendments to this act does not include pedophilia.”

Majority Democrats refused to accept the amendment.

During the discussion of the hate-crimes plan, Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, a former judge, explained how the rejection by the House of King’s amendment would be read should a pedophile claim protection under the law.

Unruh failed to explain that, as we've previously explained, the "sexual orientation" is already defined by federal statute as applying only to "consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality," thereby excluding pedophiles. Thus, excluding pedophilia in ENDA would be unnecessary and redundant.

Unruh also writes:

WND CEO and Editor Joseph Farah recently pointed out the consequences of hate-crime laws, citing a proposal in San Antonio.

There, the city council considered adopting a “nondiscrimination” provision that would bar any “bias” of any kind.

Farah said that “on the face of it,” the law would bar “anyone from office who has ‘demonstrated a bias’ against someone based on categories that include ‘sexual orientation.’”

In fact, references to prior acts of discrimination were removed from the San Antonio ordinance before passage.

Unruh also writes that ENDA "generated controversy because of concerns it could be used to prosecute Christian pastors and others who preach the biblical condemnation of homosexuality." In fact, ENDA includes broad exemptions for religious organizations and differentiates between personal religious beliefs and anti-gay harrassment.

Unruh has written a biased polemic disguised as a "news" article. It's a long way down from his work at the Associated Press -- but crap like this is what WND is paying him to do.

Posted by Terry K. at 11:08 AM EDT
Saturday, November 2, 2013
NewsBusters Still Pretending Redskins Name Change Is A 'Liberal' Cause
Topic: NewsBusters

Paul Bremmer devotes an Oct. 28 NewsBusters post to bashing New York Times sports columnist Bill Rhoden for saying that a name change for the Washington Redskins "has to start with us in the media," declaring this to be "liberal activist journalism":

Wow. Rhoden actually wants legislation to compel the Redskins, a privately-owned venture, to change their name. That would be government coercion on the level of ObamaCare. But as it stands right now, it’s up to owner Daniel Snyder to change the name, and he has said he doesn’t want to change it.

To those who follow the liberal media, it’s not news that they are fans of political correctness. But it’s a little jarring to hear a journalist talk as if it is the media’s job to force political correctness onto one particular organization, possibly under penalty of law. What happened to just reporting on the facts?


This was not the first time Rhoden mixed sports with liberal activism. Last December, he expressed his wish that the NFL would ban its players from owning guns. In April 2011, he called for the NBA to suspend Kobe Bryant for Game 1 of a playoff series after Bryant mouthed the “gay F-bomb” at a referee.

Following what is apparently Media Research Center policy, Bremmer failed to mention  that one prominent advocate of changing the Redskins name is not a liberal at all -- he's conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer, whom the MRC honored with its “William F. Buckley Jr. Award for Media Excellence” in September.

If we were as careless with the English language as the MRC, we could say that it was censoring this relevant fact.

Why is the MRC so afraid to tell  its readers about Krauthammer's advocacy for changing the Redskins name? Perhaps because it would then have to admit it's not a "liberal" issue.

Posted by Terry K. at 10:22 PM EDT

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

« November 2013 »
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

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Google