In an Oct. 30 FrontPageMag article taking Christopher Hitchens to task for endorsing Barack Obama and criticizing Sarah Palin, David Horowitz repeats numerous false claims about Obama.
-- Horowitz references "Syrian criminal Tony Reszko [sic], who gave him his house." Rezko did not "give" Obama his house; he purchased the vacant lot next door, the sale of which was a condition of Obama being able to purchase the house.
-- Horowitz writes: "It was in [William] Ayers’ living room that Obama launched his campaign for Alice Palmer’s left-wing seat." In fact, Obama formally announced launched his campaign at a Ramada Inn, and numerous home gatherings, like the one at Ayers' home, were held around the same time.
-- Horowitz writes, "it was Ayers himself who hired Obama to spend the $50 million Ayers had raised to finance an army of anti-American radicals drawn from ACORN and other nihilistic groups to recruit Chicago school children to their political causes." In fact, "Ayers himself" played no apparent role in hiring Obama as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Further, actual educators have said that the CAC's work actually "reflected ... mainstream thinking among education reformers," not the views of "nihilistic groups."
-- Horowitz writes: "When his benefactor Alice Palmer changed her mind about passing him her senate seat, he refused to give it back. When she and two other black candidates attempted to challenge him in the primaries, he went to court to prevent them from running at all. He preferred to disenfranchise their supporters than win in an election." In fact, Obama challenged the petition signatures to put Palmer and the other opponents on the ballot -- a common procedure used to combat electoral fraud, which is supposed to be a big deal to people like Horowitz when ACORN is allegedly engaging in it.
When he isn't lying about Obama, Horowitz is engaging in a lengthy anti-Obama screed. But if Horowitz can't get basic facts right, why trust him on his ranting?
WND: Obama Is Manchurian Candidate Topic: WorldNetDaily
Earlier this year, David Kupelian set the tone for WorldNetDaily's rabid, falsehood-laden anti-Obama jihad by endorsing John McCain. Kupelian is back, declaring in an Oct. 30 column that Barack Obama really is the Manchurian candidate:
Barack Obama was programmed for years by his atheist, Muslim father, by the communist sex pervert Frank Marshall Davis, by con man Tony Rezko, by domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and others – most of all by black liberation theology screamer Jeremiah Wright. Obama's resume is largely manufactured. There is a total blackout on his college years. His campaign obscures what he did as a "community organizer." All his radical associations are denied or minimized. His miserable legislative record (voting "present" over 100 times to avoid taking a stand), his lack of achievement, his radical views and so on – all have been laundered through the magic of public relations into the near-sacred saga of "The One" who has been sent to serve, and to save, America.
America has a choice Tuesday between a genuine war hero and a genuine Manchurian candidate.
The funny thing is, just a few years back, WND was promoting the idea that McCain was the Manchurian candidate.
An August 2001 WND column by Samuel Blumenfeld bashed "Republican liberal" McCain for contemplating an mavericky "Bull Moose" approach that would harm the Republican Party. Noting McCain's "sudden metamorphosis from conservative to liberal," Blumenfeld stated that "It is highly probable that McCain learned at least as much about the Marxist class struggle while undergoing forced communist indoctrination during his five years at Hanoi as any American student learns at a liberal state university." After citing a Camille Paglia column suggesting that McCain might be a Manchurian candidate, Blumenfeld writes:
The implication is that McCain subliminally absorbed communist doctrine as a result of his five-year captivity. If that is the case, then he ought to subject himself to deprogramming. The strength and vehemence of his liberal convictions, the fact that he considers himself to be a war criminal, would indicate that he very profoundly absorbed the communist critique of the American system. Is it possible that the communists have perfected a time-release form of indoctrination? That would account for the sudden switch in ideology at a very crucial period – a campaign for the presidency. Leaving speculation aside, however, we don't need conjecture to face this hard fact: The last thing America needs in the White House is a self-admitted war criminal.
As we've documented, virtually all criticism of McCain on WND's news pages disappeared when McCain became the de facto Republican nominee back in February. Thus, you won't see Kupelian referencing a column by Jack Wheeler WND published before McCain clinched the Republican nomination, in which he called McCain "psychologically unstable" and a "nutcase wack job," then asserted that McCain "collaborat[ed] with his Communist captors" while a POW -- not even to denounce it. Nor will Kupelian reference Blumenfeld's column calling McCain the Manchurian candidate.
Why? Probably because he hates Obama too much to remind their readers that he, despite all his blather about McCain being a "genuine war hero," secretly hates McCain too.
Newsmax keeps up the scary anti-Obama headlines with an Oct. 29 article by Nat Helms blaring, "Obama Presidency an Illegal Immigrant’s Dream."
Helms features someone named Mickey McCarter, whom he called an "immigration expert." No, he's not; according to his bio at HSToday, "the leading media provider of information to the homeland security community," McCarter is the newsletter's "Senior Washington Correspondent," who claims "more than a decade of experience in reporting on military affairs and information technology" and "shifted into reporting on homeland security matters after witnessing the aftermath of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon on 9/11." No special expertise in "immigration" is mentioned.
Kincaid Expands His Conspiracy Topic: Accuracy in Media
We've previously noted that Cliff Kincaid is building a conspiracy theory that the global financial crisis was created by George Soros in order to elect Barack Obama. He expands on it in an Oct. 28 Accuracy in Media column by adding Hank Paulson to the conspiracy:
The crisis was man-made. It is a fact that President Bush’s Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who worked for a Democratic firm, Goldman Sachs, and has very close ties to Communist China, is the one who convinced Bush to demand hundreds of billions of bailout dollars from Congress.
This is when McCain began falling in the polls.
But don't worry -- Soros is still playing a role in the big conspiracy:
One wonders if the Democrats controlling Congress will want to investigate or even aggressively question the multi-billionaire. It is significant, as I noted in a January column, that Soros pours millions of dollars into the Democratic Party, its front groups and candidates. But his agenda goes far beyond making himself rich. He provides funding for causes ranging from marijuana legalization to rights for immigrants, criminals, and prostitutes.
The same column I wrote noted that the Wall Street Journal in January had reported that hedge fund operator John Paulson received a visit from Soros, who is also a public supporter of and contributor to the Obama campaign, after Paulson had made about $4 billion betting on a housing market collapse. Soros wanted to know how he had done it. But Soros wouldn’t talk to the Journal about his meeting with Paulson. Why?
Soros gets away with a “no-comment” because he pours money into journalism organizations, including the Center for Investigative Reporting, the Fund for Investigative Journalism, and Investigative Reporters & Editors, thereby guaranteeing that they won’t investigate how and where he gets his money. Isn’t this convenient?
Not quite as wacky or disturbing as Kincaid's sexual obsession with Obama and Frank Marshall Davis, but still vaguely entertaining to watch.
Is Corsi Taking Cues From Andy Martin? Topic: WorldNetDaily
Is Jerome Corsi, currently traipsing around Hawaii, following in the footsteps of Andy Martin? That's what Martin says:
Jerome Corsi began his book with a citation to my original work on Barack Obama. Now Corsi has filed a copycat request for Barack Obama's original birth certificate, after I filed a lawsuit in Honolulu seeking the same document. Why didn’t Corsi seek Obama's birth certificate before he wrote his book, not months afterwards?
It looks like I started something.
A couple of weeks ago Corsi was in Kenya saying Obama was born there. Now he is in Hawai'i accepting my theory that Obama was born in Hawai'i. Corsi can't seem to make up his mind between Kenya and Hawai'i. Maybe he is waiting for me to tell him the facts. Perhaps he knows better than to believe his own b.s. Corsi knows whom to believe: me. He might even buy my book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask.
Mr. Corsi's breathless disclosure of newspaper announcements from 1961 is also old news. We have had those for months. Why is Corsi undercutting his "Kenya" theory? Or is it "We all believe Andy, because Andy is the only real investigator in this parade?"
Remember, WND believes Martin is a credible source -- Aaron Klein affirmatively cited Martin to attack Obama. Those of us in the reality-based community, meanwhile, know that Martin is an anti-Semitic nutjob, and even Fox News has apologized for booking Martin onto Sean Hannity's weekly Obama smear-fest (though, strangely, Hannity himself has not).
Martin, by the way, also believes that Obama's father is Frank Marshall Davis. When will Corsi be reporting that? Well, he's close: an Oct. 30 article claims that Obama and Davis sold drugs together, citing yet another of those anonymous, unsubstantiated yet somehow "credible" sources.
Newsmax Cites Discredited Columnist to Bash Obama Topic: Newsmax
An Oct. 29 Newsmax article by Jim Meyers cites "Iranian-born commentator Amir Taheri" claiming in a New York Post column that Barack Obama's "'Islamic roots' have won him a place in many Arabs' hearts."
But Meyers does not note Taheri's history of false and misleading claims. As we've detailed, Taheri in 2006 asserted that Iran had passed a law requiring Jews and Christians to wear badges identifying themselves as such -- a claim later retracted. Earlier this month, Taheri claimed that Obama "tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence" until after the election -- also not true.
And as Richard Bartholomew reports, the Forbes website removed an article by Taheri suggesting that Obama is "the 'promised warrior' coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world."
Klein Finally Reports Khalidi's Link to McCain Topic: WorldNetDaily
Shocker -- Aaron Klein attempts to tell more than one side of a story!
In an Oct. 29 WorldNetDaily article -- in what may be his very first article critical of John McCain after dozens upon dozens attacking Barack Obama -- Klein actually reported that, like Obama, McCain sat on a board that gave money to an organization tied to Rashid Khalidi, the Center for Palestine Research and Studies, as first reported by the Huffington Post (to which Klein provides no link). As we pointed out (which perhaps shamed Klein into doing this article), Klein has for months made a big deal out of the organization whose board Obama sat on giving money to a Khalidi organization.
But after a couple paragraphs of balance, Klein quickly insisted there was a difference:
Unreported by the Huffington Post is that the CPRS, with which Khalidi was for a time moderately involved, is pro-Western and can be characterized as pro-Israel.
Its work has been condemned by the Palestinian leadership and by local terror groups as "Zionist propaganda."
In contrast, the Khalidi organization Obama helped fund as a board member for a nonprofit, alongside domestic terrorist William Ayers, has taken a flagrantly anti-Israel line. Khalidi's Arab American Action Network has hosted scores of Israel-bashing events, including at least one reportedly attended by Obama.
What follows is Klein's boilerplate bashing of Khalidi and Obama.
Klein describes Khalidi's work with the CPRS as being "for a time moderately involved," but he later writes that Khalidi was one of "seven Palestinian activists" who founded the group -- which indicates Khalidi's involvement was more than"moderate."
By contrast, Klein offers no comparable gauge of involvement with the other Khalidi-linked group in question, the Arab American Action Network. Klein recites the group's to "empower Chicago-area Arab immigrants and Arab Americans through the combined strategies of community organizing, advocacy, education and social services, leadership development, and forging productive relationships with other communities," but rather than describe how it does that, he cherry-picks the allegedly "anti-Israel" events but offers no evidence there are "scores" of them, as he claimed.
Klein also stated that "The AAAN website currently states the entire site is under construction," but we found it just fine -- and found what the group does that Klein won't tell his readers about. Among them:
English as a Second Language
Domestic Violence Program
Summer Youth Camp
In other words, Klein's depiction of the group as solely "anti-Israel" is highly misleading.
Klein suggests that the Khalidi connection taints Obama but not McCain, but he doesn't explain why. After all, it's the same man, is it not? If Khalidi was a bad man working for one group, why isn't he a bad man working for the other?
Klein has shown a shred of integrity by finally reporting something negative about his (and his employer's) chosen presidential candidate -- though he would have shown more integrity had he reported it months ago, when he was obsessed by Khalidi's connection to Obama. Now, will Klein go all the way and report to his readers McCain's endorsement by Al Qaeda? Or is he trying to concoct a way to spin that too?
Farah Attacks Obama Over Ayers, But Mum on Liddy Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah writes in his Oct. 29 WorldNetDaily column:
[Barack Obama] says he was only 8 years old when [William] Ayers performed his "despicable" deeds. As I pointed out, that's not true. However, suppose it was?
Obama was also 8 years old when another American performed despicable deeds. His name was Charles Manson. Would it be a legitimate excuse – a worthy rationalization – if Obama had maintained a working political alliance with Manson for five years? Would it be acceptable for Obama to say, "Gee, I didn't know about his history. I was only 8 years old at the time"?
I don't think so.
Meanwhile, Joseph Farah was a youngster -- perhaps even 8 years old -- when domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy was breaking into buildings and plotting to murder and bomb innocent people. And Farah was an adult when Liddy told his listeners how to kill federal agents.
Yet, as we've documented, Liddy has a close relationship with Farah and WorldNetDaily -- heck, Farah even guest-hosted Liddy's radio show a couple weeks ago.
Farah surely knows about Liddy's history of felonious crime and violence. Yet Farah has not spoken a word about why he pals around with a domestic terrorist.
As long as Farah continues to hang with Liddy -- who is just as much, if not more, of a domestic terrorist as Ayers -- Farah has no moral standing to criticize Obama.
Ponte Adds Obama Smears to His Obama Lies Topic: Newsmax
Lowell Ponte's repeatedmisleadingclaims about Barack Obama's relationship with ACORN apparently aren't taking hold, so he's using his Oct. 29 Newsmax column to resort to that old standby, the personal smear:
Barack Obama's ideology of “redistribution of the wealth” can be called socialism, Marxism, fascism or welfare-state liberalism. But whatever label you give it, add the words irrational and sinful.
Mr. Obama describes himself as a Christian, but what he advocates violates at least two of the Bible’s 10 Commandments — the ones covering stealing, and coveting anything belonging to your neighbor.
Ponte is, of course, still spreading lies about Obama, this time claiming that "Mr. Obama has vowed not to renew President George W. Bush's tax cuts set to expire in 2010. This would impose a $2 trillion tax increase that will batter American families earning as little as $42,000 per year." In fact, Obama has repeatedly said he would repeal the Bush tax cuts only for "the wealthiest Americans."
NewsBusters' Sheffield to Pump Up Wash. Examiner's Bias Topic: Washington Examiner
NewsBusters executive editor Matthew Sheffield announced that he has been named managing editor of the Washington Examiner's website. The press release on Sheffield's appointment that he posted at NewsBusters describing his background is notable by its omission of the fact that all of the ventures he has been involved with are all linked to conservative activism. In fact, the word "conservative" appears nowhere in the press release, though it's crucial to his employment history.
The Examiner already swings to the right with an exclusively conservative editorial page under Mark Tapscott and the hiring of former Washington Times reporters such as Bill Sammon, Rowan Scarborough and Susan Ferrechio to helm its political coverage. Another conservative activist, Mary Katherine Ham, formerly of Townhall.com, already works as the Examiner's online editor. (We've detailed some of this.)
It looks like the Examiner is on its way to becoming the new Washington Times, in that its right-wing bias colors everything, including osensibly "fair and balanced" news coverage.
Does Washington really need another slavishly right-wing newspaper operated by a billionaire with bottomless pockets to fund it? And does the Internet really need another slavishly right-wing website?
NewsBusters to CNN: Don't Report Sexist News (If It's About Palin) Topic: NewsBusters
In an Oct. 28 NewsBusters post, Matthew Balan wrote: "CNN anchor Campbell Brown criticized the sexism of the 'diva' comment about Sarah Palin from a supposed anonymous McCain campaign adviser on Monday’s Election Center program, despite how it was her own network that highlighted this remark." He continued:
At the end of her commentary, which led the Election Center program, the CNN anchor attacked the supposed hypocrisy of the McCain campaign and criticized the unnamed McCain campaign official for using the "diva" term: "So, now, for the McCain campaign to be attacking its own candidate in the most overtly sexist way, calling her a ‘diva,’ -- it is beyond ridiculous. Whoever this anonymous adviser is should be ashamed, or, at the very least, have the courage to say it on the record." Since Brown didn’t say anything critical about how her network ran with the comment during her commentary, despite its anonymous nature, one would guess that she isn’t ashamed of CNN’s action in this matter. Isn’t that a bit hypocritical?
Is Balan really arguing that CNN should not have reported what that McCain campaign official said about Palin -- even though it's eminently newsworthy -- just because it could be considered sexist?
Would Balan raise the same "sexist" argument if, say, an "unnamed Obama campaign official" called Hillary Clinton a "diva"? We suspect not.
Newsmax Complains of Negative Palin Coverage, Ignores Own Negative Obama Coverage Topic: Newsmax
An Oct. 28 Newsmax article by David Patten asserts that "the press" is "out to get Sarah Palin." His evidence? Carefully selected headlines from the Associated Press indicating "negative news reports about her."
But a look at Patten's carefully chosen headlines show that he appears to have mistaken factual for "negative." It's absolutely true that, as one headline stated, "GOP Spent $150,000 in Donations on Palin's Look." ANd we don't understand why Patten considers headlines such as "Palin Says Obama's Policies Could Lead to Crises" and "Palin Answers Several Questions from Reporters" and "McCain Says Obama Didn't Call Palin a Pig" are "negative.
Patten, of course, neglects to mention that Newsmax is fully participating in the anti-Obama frenzy of its ConWeb bretheren. Some sample headlines from Newsmax articles in the past few days:
From an Oct. 28 Newsmax article by Jim Meyers, reporting on Michael Savage's endorsement of John McCain:
“I have put my own ego aside and I have to say what’s best for America.
“I’ll take my chances with the old war horse and even with Sarah Palin, who I’m not really a big fan of, by the way, over this naked Marxist revolutionary, because I don’t want to see what the next Pol Pot’s liable to do to the world.”
Pol Pot was the communist leader of Cambodia during the 1970s, and along with his Khmer Rouge followers was responsible by some estimates for 1.7 million deaths in the Southeast Asian nation.
Did Savage really liken Obama to Pol Pot? That's what Meyers seems to have written. We don't listen to Savage's show, so it's hard to tell otherwise. Then again, Savage has a longhistory of smearingObama.
“Hardball” host Chris Matthews showed the ignorance of the mainstream media during his Oct. 20 show. He asked a guest: “Is socialist a bad word, a naughty word?” Of course it is. Ordinary Americans know that answer. Only media types do not.