MRC-Fox News Appearance Watch Topic: Media Research Center
An appearance by Amy Menefee of the MRC's Business and Media Institute on the June 21 edition of "Fox & Friends Weekend" followed the template in that she appeared solo. The video supplied by NewsBusters includes only statements by Menefee and edits out everything else, making it impossible to determine how closely the rest of the template -- Fox News hosts tossing softball questions to cue up the MRC rep's talking points -- is being followed.
Cliff Kincaid Anti-Obama Frenzy Watch Topic: Accuracy in Media
Cliff Kincaid's latest bit of commie-obsessed anti-Obama frenzy is a June 22 Accuracy in Media column in which he insists that a "patriotic" Barack Obama ad is "false advertising" because it doesn't mention "his childhood mentor, Communist Frank Marshall Davis."
Kincaid repeats his assertion that Davis' "'poetry' is viciously anti-American," citing an April 30 column he wrote. But the only evidence Kincaid provided that Davis' poetry was "anti-American" was a piece in which Davis railed against "sniping Dixie lynchers/In the jungles of Texas and Florida." So it's anti-American to oppose lynching? Does Kincaid think there's not enough lynching these days?
Kincaid also repeats his previous false claim that an Obama-sponsored "extreme pro-U.N." bill in the Senate commits the U.S. to spending $845 billion to fight global poverty, adding, "Obama and his media backers have been whining for months that I have somehow misinterpreted the provisions of his bill. But they have failed to produce a serious rebuttal of the facts I have presented." In fact, as Media Matters detailed -- and to which Kincaid has not specifically responded that we've seen -- the Global Poverty Act would establish no specific funding source, would not commit the United States to any targeted level of spending, nor would it give the U.N. the power to impose a tax on the U.S.
WND vs. Real Journalists, Part 3 Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've noted how WorldNetDaily gave the whitewash treatment to right-wing activist Floyd Brown, failing to mention said right-wing activism and fawningly calling him and his wife "accomplished authors and speakers."
The New York Times, meanwhile, offered a much more honest account of Brown in a June 21 article, noting "his trade of bludgeoning a Democratic candidate for president" and pointing out that he "says it is his calling to tread where the campaign is unwilling to tread in finding malicious gossip on a Democratic nominee."
While WND did a second article on Brown on June 20 noting his gimmicky offer "to stop his political advertising campaign if the Democrat agrees to put himself under the rules of the nation's public finance rules this year," the Times offered hard numbers, noting that Brown's organization, ExposeObama.org, was "showing $40,000 in the bank between two committees at the end of March for its first-quarter filing with the Federal Election Commission," adding, "With most big-money conservative donors remaining cautious, Mr. Brown is focusing more on his political action committees. That could limit his ability to raise large sums. The maximum donation to such entities is $5,000."
A real news organization would tell the full story of Floyd Brown and not just reprint his press releases. WND is not that news organization, for this and otherreasons we've documented.
Aaron Klein Anti-Obama Agenda Watch Topic: WorldNetDaily
Aaron Klein's 38th anti-Obama article for WorldNetDaily is a bit of a muddle. He appears desperate to paint as negatively as possible Barack Obama's statement that America is "no longer just a Christian nation," but he offers no evidence that there's anything incorrect or offensive about the statement, beyond various right-wing critics purporting to be offended by it who also don't say exactly what's supposedly incorrect or offensive about it.
Klein went on to claim that Obama statement "echoed similar statements made by Merrill A. McPeak, Obama's military adviser and national campaign co-chairman. As WND reported, in a 2003 interview with The Oregonian newspaper, McPeak seemed to compare evangelical Christians to the terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah."
Note the weasel word "seemed to." Klein offers no evidence McPeak actually did make such a comparison, only that he seemed to make it.
Klein also curiously fails to mention a relevant fact about Obama's opponent, John McCain: that he did in fact call certain right-wing evangelical preachers "agents of intolerance." Why won't Klein hold McCain responsible for that statement, but is trying to gin up a controversy about remarks that he can't back up as being the offensive claim he asserts them to be?
After all, Klein is the guy who absurdly claimed he doesn't have an anti-Obama agenda. Why doesn't he demonstrate it?
UPDATE: It's worth noting that the only way Obama's statement could be even remotely controversial is if it's misquoted to claim that Obama said that America isn't a Christian nation, rather that America isn't just a Christian nation. That's exactly what the headline for Klein's article does -- "Obama: America is 'no longer Christian." Thus, the headline misrepresents Klein (who quoted Obama correctly) to twist his muddled attack even further into an absolutely false claim.
UPDATE 2: WND perpetuates the false claim with its daily poll question: "Is the United States a Christian nation?"
Farah: Durbin 'Anti-Semitic' for Citing Dante's Inferno Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a June 20 column titled "Dick Durbin's anti-Semitic rant," WorldNetDaily's Joseph Farah had a most bizarre reaction to the Illinois senator defending Michelle Obama by noting that "The hottest ring in hell is reserved for those in politics who attack their opponents' families":
Since writing that column, it has come to my attention the phrase Durbin used has long and strong anti-Semitic connotations and roots.
The phrases "hottest ring in hell" and "the deepest ring of hell" and "the fourth circle of the ninth ring of hell" were 14th century literary inventions by Dante, author of "The Inferno" and "The Divine Comedy."
In the latter work, Dante reserves that deepest ring of hell for Judecca or la Giudecca – or, in plain English, the Jews.
In Dante's native Italian, the name was "Judecca" or "la Giudecca," the common name for the Jewish quarter of European cities from which they were forbidden to leave. Even the word "ghetto" is believed to be a derivation of this word for Jewish quarter.
Did Dick Durbin know this?
Has he used this phrase in the past?
Is it part of his lexicon?
Is Dick Durbin conducting a subtle form of Jew-baiting here?
Farah gets his Dante wrong in a couple major ways. First, he suggests that "The Inferno" and "The Divine Comedy" are separate works; in fact, "The Inferno" is the first section of "The Divine Comedy."
Second, Farah rather bizarrely ascribes anti-Semitic motives to citing "The Inferno." In fact, the ninth circle of hell is reserved for traitors, and scholars (here, here and here) have interpreted "Judecca," the fourth section of the ninth circle as derivative of Judas, not Jews -- other sections are named after Cain, Antenor and Ptolemy -- and is for those who betray their lords and benefactors. There's a hint of Jewish criticism in Dante's use of the name that arguably would not be out of character for a 14th century Christian; author Stephen Haynes writes that Dante portrays Jews as "a people comprised exclusively of saints and traitors" though there is an "absence of explicit anti-Judaism" in "The Inferno."
For Farah to claim or even suggest that Durbin hates Jews because he cited Dante's Inferno is offensive in the extreme, not to mention libelous. You'd think Farah would be sensitive to such things by now.
Kincaid Complains Fox News Isn't Using His Obama Smears Topic: Accuracy in Media
Cliff Kincaid's June 19 Accuracy in Media column is headlined, "Why is Fox News Protecting Obama?" It would more accurately be headlined, "Why Isn't Fox News Using My Obama Smears?"
In it, Kincaid complains that, yes, various Fox News personalities" have "deliberately ignored" his guilt-by-association smears of Barack Obama as a secret communist via his alleged link to purported "Stalinist agent" Frank Marshall Davis. He further complains that "even one prominent 'conservative' news service" won't use his stuff either.
But as we detailed, Kincaid paints only a one-dimensional negative portrait of Davis as a raging commie; as Mike Chasar wrote, Davis was not the card-carrying Communist Kincaid portrays him as and spent the 1930s as an anti-Roosevelt Republican -- presumably a position even Kincaid could sympathize with.
Remember, Kincaid is a guy who lied about the provisions of a bill Obama sponsored to fight global poverty and thinks that views held by fictional characters are the same as views held by Obama. Such anti-Obama monomania makes Kincaid a less-than-reliable source -- which may the answer to Kincaid's question about why Fox News won't use his stuff.
Henry Lamb Needs To Acquaint Himself With TurboTax Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a June 21 WorldNetDaily column arguing against "progressive" taxation, Henry Lamb offers up the following hypothetical:
Here is Mr. Ten-Forty. On the first day of April, he began collecting his bank statements, receipts and his IRS forms. The instruction book is at least four times longer than the U.S. Constitution. Aside from the several pages of forms in the package, he has to download half-a-dozen additional forms. After investing at least 15 hours of frustrating effort, looking for every possible deduction, he discovers that he must pay 28 percent of his income to the government. Had he earned more income, he would have been punished by having to pay an even higher rate.
1) Why is Mr. Ten-Forty waiting until two weeks before taxes are due before starting work on his taxes? Sounds like he's a horrible procrastinator.
2) Has this fellow never heard of TurboTax? Such tax programs automatically search for possible deducations, meaning that the guy doesn't have to expend "at least 15 hours of frustrating effort" doing so.
3) Lamb fails to tell us that if Mr. Ten-Forty is getting taxed at the 28 pecent level, his net taxable income falls between $78,850 and $164,550 (for 2008). In other words, he's not exactly poor, and his actual income is even more than that since he has taken "every possible deduction."
If a guy with that much income insists on doing his taxes by hand and refuses to make use of either an accountant, a tax service like H&R Block or a program like TurboTax -- all of which can advise him on further deductions he can take or other ways he can shield his income from taxation -- he's got worse problems than Lamb presenting him as someone we should feel sorry for.
WND Does Bidding of Anti-Global Warming Group Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily's Bob Unruh repeats his advocacy for the the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine with a June 19 article that once again touts the OISM's anti-global warming petition it claims was "officially endorsed by tens of thousands of other scientists."
As we detailed, the OISM petition collected its signatures over a period of more than a decade and counts signatories with degrees in "sicence" -- Unruh makes sure to quote OISM chief Art Robinson adding that the number also includes "more than 9,000 Americans with Ph.D.s in science and therefore professional educational credentials" -- without making distinctions as to whether those degrees are actually relevant to disciplines related to global warming.
Unruh quotes only Robinson in his article and presents his claims at face value, adding only that "A spokeswoman for the United Nation's Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon declined to respond to WND questions" as if the U.N. chief was the only person qualified to answer Robinson's claims.
Waters Repeats Debunked 'Most Liberal Senator' Claim Topic: Media Research Center
In a June 20 TimesWatch item and NewsBusters post, Clay Waters reacts to a claim in a New York Times article claiming that an Obama campaign is designed to "addresses the problems Mr. Obama needs to address and tacks him back to the center": "'Back to the center?' Was Obama, the most liberal Senator, ever in the center?" Waters adds a link to the National Journal's 2007 vote rankings, which called Obama "most liberal."
In fact, as Media Matters points out (and as we've previously noted), the National Journal ranking is highly subjective, based on 99 votes selected by the magazine's staff -- for instance, a vote to implement the bipartisan 9-11 Commission's homeland security recommendations was considered to be "liberal." By contrast, a separate study based on all 388 non-unanimous Senate votes during 2007 produced a different result, ranking Obama as tied for the 10th most liberal senator.
WND Invokes Godwin's Law Again Topic: WorldNetDaily
It's been a while since WorldNetDaily's Bob Unruh likened likened critics of homeschooling to Nazis. He returns to form in a June 19 WND article in which he points out in the lead paragraph that homeschooling in Germany "has been illegal since Hitler's golden days in 1938."
The ostensible purpose of Unruh's article (beyond throwing the Nazi smear, anyway) is to relay a purported quote of a German judge who allegedly described homeschooling as "comparable to a trucker who repeatedly gets behind the wheel drunk." But Unruh doesn't quote the judge directly; he quotes a German homeschooling advocate as saying that the judge said that. Unruh offers no evidence that he made any attempt to independently verify what the judge actually said.
That also comports with Unruh's and WND's history of one-sided reporting on the issue -- quoting only homeschooling advocates and framing issues to their benefit. Remember, as we've detailed, WND has chosen to condone a family's documented history of child abuse in order to paint them as martyrs to the homeschooling cause.
Threeseparate NewsBusters posts reference Barack Obama's alleged "pledge-breaking" or "flip-flop" on faking federal funds to finance his campaign for the general election.
None mention the fact that John McCain performed his own flip-flop on public financing in the primary. As Media Matters and Josh Marshall point out, McCain joined the public financing for the primary when his campaign was on the ropes -- even apparently taking out a loan to fund his campaign using the promise of federal funds as collateral -- then decided he wanted to pull out after his campaign became successful. McCain has long since exceeded those primary spending limits, and Federal Election Commission chairman David Mason has taken the position that McCain cannot legally withdraw from the public financing system without FEC approval (the FEC is inoperative these days because of a dispute between President Bush and Congress over adding new members).
Isn't McCain's flip-flop relevant to this discussion? NewsBusters doesn't think so.
Will Chastain Hold WND Accountable? Topic: WorldNetDaily
In her June 19 WorldNetDaily column, Jane Chastain encourages her readers to get involved with media activism:
When is the last time you wrote or called a journalist, editor, reporter, news director or producer? Most people never do. They just complain about bias in the media but will not lift a finger or flip the lid on a cell phone to do anything about it.
Most journalists want to be considered "good" journalists. Having spent the lion's share of my professional life in a newsroom, I can tell you that we are extremely sensitive to legitimate criticism. However, we get very little of it.
Many years ago, I read that a television network considers that each caller represents the views of 10,000 viewers, so few will pick up the phone.
When making a call, the important thing to remember is this: Be courteous. Make your complaint or comment short and specific. Whenever possible, include, the date, time, program or article, reporter, etc. and what was wrong, slanted or unbalanced about the piece.
Do your favorite newspapers, journalists and television news broadcasts a favor. Hold them accountable!
All of this, of course, is targeted only at "the liberal bias of the news media." None is targeted at the "news" organization that prints her column; indeed, Chastain praises WND for its misleading "Operation Spike" year-end compilation, adding, "When you hear about an important story that is spiked, you need to jump on it immediately!"
CNS Repeats False Claim on Gore's Electricity Usage Topic: CNSNews.com
A June 19 CNSNews.com article by Randy Hall repeats the Tennessee Center for Policy Research's claim that Al Gore's electricity usage has increased. Hall clearly takes the side of the TCPR:
He fails to identify it as a conservative group, though CNS generally makes an effort to put ideological labels on such groups.
He accepted the TCPR's claims at face value, even though, as Sadly, No! points out, TCPR offers no documentation to support its claims.
Hall does offer a response from a Gore spokesman, but it's buried under 11 paragraphs of attacks, is taken from a newspaper article (Hall, by contrast, talked to the TCPR), and Hall allows the TCPR to respond to Gore's criticism by saying that "the Center stands behind its data" even though, again, the Center has offered no supporting documentation.
Further, Hall didn't check his numbers. He cited a February 2007 CNS article that repeated previous (unsubstantiated) TCPR claims that Gore's home "consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses an entire year." But the numbers in that story contradict the claims TCPR is making now.
In the Feb. 27, 2007, CNS article, Susan Jones reported the TCPR's claim that Gore's home in 2006 "devoured nearly 221,000 kWh -- more than 20 times the national average." But Hall reported that "Gore's mansion ... used 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity" in 2007, which the NCPR said had "increased more than 10 percent."
Last time we checked, 213,210 was less than 221,000. The TCPR is wrong, and CNS needs to issue a correction. (Again, h/t Sadly, No!).
Meanwhile, Newsmax just reprinted the TCPR's press release, false 10 percent increase claim and all.
Every once in a great while, WorldNetDaily will permit criticism of it to grace its pages. It did so a few days ago in the form of a letter to the editor; we'll reprint it here since WND's letters cycle out after a week:
I really appreciate your site and visit it everyday, but I find your bias appalling! As a conservative man, it's this type of constant, subtle bigotry that makes my life a bit more complicated when I have to explain to others why I can be a conservative and a homosexual.
I grew up as a Baptist in southern Oregon, and even I am not stupid enough to think that a homosexual warrants more scorn and attention for torture, etc., than a heterosexual does. Whoever does these disgusting things is the lowest of the low.
I do realize that bashing people (even subtly) who are different than you is good for your business and can keep the web hits and money coming in, but it certainly doesn't make you more spiritual. And guess what. Just because I happen to be homosexual doesn't make me more likely than you to molest or torture. Is that a new revelation for you, or would this not matter because it doesn't fit your religious agenda?
We would point out another difference as well: WND did its own article on the "not straight" couple accused of abuse, while the "straight man" was relegated to an outside link.
Tellingly, WND made no public response to this. Otherwise, it would have to own up to its anti-gay agenda, which it appears to have no intention of doing.