Obama is like a child TV star who rose to fame because he eloquently delivered a cute catchphrase ("Hope and Change" as opposed to "Hey, Mikey! He likes it!"), but now finds himself an adolescent in a grown-up world and faced with the task of actually manning up to the responsibilities of a new job for which he applied. Yet, instead of stepping up to the plate, Obama is relying merely on his celebrity status to coast through the sometimes ceremonial and often dire decisions a chief executive must make.
What is MassResistance, the anti-gay group WorldNetDaily frequently cites to further its anti-gay agenda, most recently in attacking Kevin Jennings? Well, turns out it's on the SPLC's list of hate groups, and its leaders hold some, shall we say, less-than-orthodox views on homosexuals.
Just Plain Ol' Derangement Syndrome, With a Side of Eliminationist Rhetoric Topic: WorldNetDaily
Craige McMillan begins his Dec. 10 WorldNetDaily column by writing about his "diarrhetic dog," a condition he eventually learned was caused by a "deer that ate something that didn't agree with them" which, in turn, "produced the greater delicacy for doggie dining."
You don't need a psychic to know where this is going, do you?
This "town deer" herd of politicians are jumping our fences and pooping all over our yards with their legislative delicacies. The bulk of their output tends to resemble that of diarrheic deer, perhaps because the politicians are particularly fond of dining with parasitic lobbyists and the accompanying "wink, wink, nod, nod" bribery (otherwise known as campaign contributions). Let's face it: Our pathetic little backyards can only support a very limited amount of their legislative output.
One wonders, for instance, how Harry Reid justifies his existence for the folks in Nevada (and the rest of the nation) while he's so busy trying to shove abortion down our throats and at the same time shaft us with the "public option" in state medicine, which will be every bit as much of an "option" as refusing a sobriety test when the state trooper calls to get your car towed out of the ditch some dark night.
One also wonders how San Francisco's crazy aunt escaped the padded cell in the Pelosi family basement, and now feels entitled to jump into the nation's backyards and doctor's offices, where she can dictate treatment, financing, set up death panels to govern grandma and grandpa's remaining time on Social Security, and otherwise s--- all over the rest of us with her legislative diatribes.
This, of course, can only conclude in a flourish of eliminationist rhetoric:
Out here in flyover country, those of us in receipt of this legislative largesse are in general agreement that the solution to our "deer" problem is a town deer hunt. This would cull the inbreeding before it overwhelms us, restore genetic diversity to the herd, and weed out those with a propensity to deposit their diarrhea in our backyards. In short, it would restore the town deer herd to a more natural, wild state, where they can use their native talents and ability to thrive – somewhere else.
So you want to kill Pelosi and Reid, is that it, Craige?
In August, Gary Kreep -- who seems to have become WorldNetDaily's go-to birther lawyer after the increasinglyshoddy legal work of Orly Taitz apparently became too much for even WND to ignore (it hasn't mentioned her in more than a month) -- launched DefendGlenn.com, designed to attack Color of CHange, the organization that spearheaded an advertiser boycott for Glenn Beck's Fox News show. Right out of the gate, Kreep's website made numerous false claims about Color of Change.
But Color of Change is getting the last laugh, reporting that after threatening Kreep and Co. with a lawsuit, DefendGlenn.com has posted a retraction on its website, which must remain posted for seven weeks:
DefendGlenn.com on several occasions inaccurately reported that Color of Change called President Bush a "racist". We have confirmed that Color of Change did not, in fact, call George Bush a "racist" on its website and although we picked up that allegation from another website (NewsMax.com), that allegation is false and we apologize to Color of Change for this error.
We also accused Color of Change of lying regarding it's claims that certain advertisers agreed to stop advertising on Glenn Beck. While our previous comments were partially correct on the matter concerning the claims of Color of Change regarding the initial 20 advertisers, upon review, it appears that the accusation of lying was inaccurate. In at least one instance, DefendGlenn.com and Color of Change were given diametrically opposing statements by the same advertiser, and, in other instances, the statements given by the advertisers were consistent, but open to interpretation. It is now our understanding that Color of Change accurately reported on it's web site and in its press releases precisely what each of the advertisers told it. DefendGlenn.com also accurately reported on its website precisely what each advertiser told it. We apologize to Color of Change for erroneously accusing them of lying and have removed all such allegations from our website.
We have also alleged that Kayne West claimed that George Bush 'gave troops permission to go down (to New Orleans) and shoot us (black people) after Hurricane Katrina' and that Color of Change endorsed that hateful statement by selling T shirts that said "Kanye Was Right". We have since learned that Mr. West was apparently referring to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco's authorization for troops to fire on the people of New Orleans during Katrina and not President Bush never gave such an order. A representative of Color of Change has informed us that the t shirts they are selling refer instead to Kanye West's much more widely publicized comment that George Bush "doesn't care about black people." We accept their representation in this regard and apologize for any misunderstanding that this has caused.
We wondered about Kreep's assertion its claim that Color of Change called Bush racist came from Newsmax. Sure enough, a Aug. 23 Newsmax article carries the headline, "Anti-Beck Group Labeled George Bush 'Racist'." The only evidence provided to support the claim is that Color of Change sold a T-shirt stating, "Kanye Was Right." But Kanye West didn't call Bush a racist either; he did say that "George Bush doesn’t care about black people," which does not translate to "racist," let alone Color of Change calling Bush "racist."
Looks like DefendGlenn.com isn't the only group that owes Color of Change an apology. (We've added a screenshot of the false headline at the end of this post for posterity's sake.)
Kreep, by the way, is also representing WND in its efforts to get press credentials from the United Nations despite refusing to recognize the U.N.'s legitimacy and wanting to see it destroyed. Given WND's protection racket for for the increasingly unhinged Taitz, don't expect WND readers to ever learn about Kreep's misdeeds.
Jerome Corsi, Bad Climate Scientist Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've previously detailed how WorldNetDaily's Jerome Corsi is a horrible economist. Well, he's found another field of study to suck at -- climate science.
Here's the lead paragraph of a Dec. 8 WND article by Corsi:
The mainstream media is reporting the World Meteorological Organization's assessment of global average temperatures asserting this decade is "the warmest on record," without mentioning the WMO data actually documents the United States and Canada experienced cooler-than-average conditions since 2000.
Corsi seems not to be aware that the United States and Canada do not solely comprise the planet Earth. It's utterly irrelevant that it was cooler than average in North America because, it appears the rest of the planet was warmer than average -- thus, the global temperature average being the warmest on record.
Corsi also touts a claim by "Mojib Latif, a climate physicist at the Liebniz Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of Kiel in Germany" that he "produced evidence predicting two decades of natural global cooling." But Corsi fails to note, as othershave, that what Latif was offering was a hypothetical scenario, not a prediction, and further, Latif wasn't arguing against the existence of global warming but, rather, pointing out that there could be a decade or two of cooler temperatures that would not, in the aggregate, disprove global warming.
AIM Falsely Smears Kevin Jennings Topic: Accuracy in Media
A Dec. 10 Accuracy in Media blog post by Allie Duzett is a falsehood-ridden piece smearing Obama administration official Kevin Jennings as a "pedophile" who is "teaching 14-year-old boys the dangerous sexual practice of 'fisting,' and discussing with them the particulars of oral sex."
Our colleagues at Media Matters have keeping a sharp eye on NewsBusters lately:
-- Jamison Foser catches Noel Sheppard advancing the false suggestion that a single snowstorm somehow disproves global warming.
-- Simon Maloy notes that Lachlan Markay is defending pollsters for showing Obama's approval ratings dropping, despite NewsBusters' long history of attacking polls because they don't mesh with conservative ideology.
UPDATE: Media Matters also notes that the MRC's Brent Baker, in a Dec. 10 NewsBusters post, is essentially endorsing criminal behavior by pretending that the theft of the East Anglia University Climatic Research Unit's emails was merely "laudatory whistle-blowing" and not a crime.
WorldNetDaily's Jerome Corsi has been pedding a trifecta of guilt-by-association this week, with a three-day series attacking Obama adminsitration "science czar" John Holdren by digging up the views of his "guru," geochemist Harrison Brown, as allegedly expressed in a 1954 book he wrote.
On Dec. 7, Corsi claimed that Brown "called for a global increase in carbon dioxide, precisely because of its perceived greenhouse gas effects." On Dec. 8, Corsi painted Brown as a eugenicist. And on Dec. 9, Corsi asserted that Bron "advocated world government in the 1950s to impose mandatory controls over population growth, carried out, if necessary, through sterilization and forced abortions."
Corsi can't claim that Holdren holds these views, but he sure tries. He complains that Holdren, in a 1986 book honoring Brown that he edited, does not "separate himself from Brown's enthusiastic endorsement of eugenics," and he asserts that Holdren once "argued involuntary birth-control measures, including forced sterilization, may be necessary and morally acceptable under extreme conditions, such as widespread famine brought about by 'climate change.'"
That last claim -- extrapolated from a lie WND previously spread about Holdren -- is misleading; as PolitiFact points out, in the book from which the claim is drawn, Holdren and his co-author "make clear that they did not support coercive means of population control. Certainly, nowhere in the book do the authors advocate for forced abortions." PolitiFact adds: "We think it's irresponsible to pluck a few lines from a 1,000-page, 30-year-old textbook, and then present them out of context."
WND Thugs Attack Jennings Again Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've detailed how WorldNetDaily has told lies and misleading claims about Obama administration official Kevin Jennings. The journalistically shoddy hate-fest conttinues with a Dec. 9 article by Bob Unruh repeating even more false and misleading claims.
Unruh accused Jennings of "knowing in advance the 'gross and disgusting' subjects that would be covered at a seminar on sex for teenagers." Unruh's basis for theclaim is an assertion by the anti-gay group MassResistance. But neither Unruhnor MassResistance offer any solid evidence that Jennings, in fact, knew of the "fisting" subject matter discussed at a 2000 conference sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, which Jennings headed at the time. All that is offered is a vague statement from the person leading the offending presentation (who did not work for GLSEN) claiming that "we were working in an area that in certain places was considered really controversial."
Unruh fails to mention that at the time of the original uproar over the conference, Jennings criticized the content of the offending presentation, and that the seminar's organizers resigned or were fired from their jobs as as result.
Unruh also repeats a previous smear regarding "subject material in books recommended by GLSEN for school children" that purportedly promotes "early sexualization of children." Unruh didn't mention, as he has failed to do before, that GLSEN explicitly states that the recommended books "contain mature themes" and 'We recommend that adults selecting books for youth review content for suitability."
Unruh has been trying to revive old falsehoods as well. A Dec. 7 article asserted that Jennings "failed to protect the 'safety' of a homosexual student he once counseled." As we've detailed, the student in question was above the age of consent at the time of the counseling, and the student has since stated that he had "no sexual contact with anybody at the time."
It's too bad that a reporter and a "news" organization are wortking in concert to hide facts and falsely smear someone merely becasue they don't his views or that of the man he's working for.
Through the WorldNetDaily Looking Glass Topic: WorldNetDaily
A December 4 New York Times article on White House social secretary Desirée Rogers reported that the Obama administration had apparently considered a "non-religious Christmas" celebration in the White House as a way to reach out to other faiths and that, according to the Times, there was a debate about whether to display the traditional nativity scene. In the end, the article added, "tradition won out; the executive mansion is now decorated for the Christmas holiday, and the crèche is in its usual East Room spot."
Run that story through WorldNetDaily's looking glass -- heavily distorted by right-wing partisanship and sheer, near-pathological hatred of Barack Obama -- and you get a December 8 WND article by Chelsea Schilling, headlined "Obama's latest target: Ousting baby Jesus" and carrying this lede:
The Obama administration sought to ban baby Jesus from the executive mansion as part of its plans for a "non-religious Christmas," according to a participant at a White House luncheon.
Briefly considering not erecting a nativity scene means you "sought to ban baby Jesus"? Really?
Does the WorldNetDaily store sell these looking glasses so the rest of us can take part in this same mind-bending distortion? Or is the experience open only to those who hate Obama with a burning passion like Joseph Farah and Co. do?
Porter Misleads in Attack on Gore Topic: WorldNetDaily
In her Dec. 8 WorldNetDaily column, serialhater Janet Porter asserts that Al Gore said in his documentary "An Inconvenient Truth that "The polar ice caps will melt sending 20-plus-foot flood waves into coastal cities worldwide." Porter added: "The problem with Gore's theory, as explained by another guest on my F2A program yesterday, is something called the 'Archimedes Principle: when a less dense solid like ice melts in a liquid like water, the liquid level drops.'"
But Gore didn't claim what Porter claims he did. He was speaking specifically about ice shelfs in Antarctica and Greenland, which sit on land. If they were to melt or slide off the land into the sea, they would indeed contribute to rising sea levels since they would be an addition to the sea and not merely displacing ice with water.
All of which makes Porter's "little science experiment" regarding melting ice cubes in a water glass rather meaningless since, to replicate what Gore was actually talking about, she would have to add more ice cubes to her glass.
MRC's Double Standard on Conspiracy Theories Topic: Media Research Center
The MRC's Culture & Media Institute has as its motto "Advancing Truth and Virtue in the Public Square." But it's now saying that truth and virtue can be ignored if you have a decent conspiracy.
A Dec. 2 CMI article by Jeff Poor defends Glenn Beck's frequent spinning of conspiracy theories, in this case about the breach of security that let a couple into a White House state dinner without an invitation:
The problem, Beck warned, is that if the media fail to do their job, it could lead to the start of a conspiracy theory – which some on the left loathe, like the whole Obama/birth certificate conspiracy theory.
“But this is how a conspiracy theory grows, because we're not – we don't have honesty, we don't have facts,” Beck said. “The situation doesn't – where is the common sense in this? How do we stop conspiracy theories? We do not bury our heads in the sand, and the media demands answers. It's called the Internet. People will come up with these if you in the media don't do your job. I mean, it can all go away if you're honest, you give us answers and facts and it makes common sense.”
Beck offered up his own theory behind what happened – that someone got the couple into the event and didn’t own up to the responsibility for it.
“I mean, here's what I think happened. These two guys were in line, they were having problems getting in, they weren't on anybody's list. And somebody walked by, I don't know who, and they said, ‘Oh, no, let me in. They're with me.’ The Secret Service – knowing the Secret Service – they went, ‘Oh, no, I don't think so.’ [But the other person said] ‘I've got responsibility and authority, let them in.’ It turned out bad. It's now a big deal. And that person didn't take responsibility. That seems most likely to me.”
So, it appears that Poor agrees with Beck's theory that if information about something (involving Democrats, anyway) is not forth coming to your satisfaction, it's perfectly OK to simply make up stuff about it and present it as a grand, evil conspiracy.
That, of course, conflicts with the MRC's previous criticism of conspiracy theories, at least when they're promoted by people they don't agree with. For instance:
Both the 2006 and 2007 MRC Best of Notable Quotables contain a "Tin Foil Hat Award for Crazy Conspiracy Theories" category.
A 2006 MRC press release bashed MRC's "Today" for "floating a conspiracy theory that the GOP is manipulating gas prices to influence the election -- a ludicrous idea for which NBC has no evidence and no facts and yet makes the theory into 'news' in its Oct. 25 broadcast."
A Sept. 21 TimesWatch item by Clay Waters claimed that New York Times book editor Sam Tanenhus, "who decries conspiracism on the right, indulged in his own when he declared of the 2000 election between Bush and Al Gore: '... the conservatives on the Supreme Court stopped the democratic process, put their guy into office.'"
No concern was expressed that these conspiracy theories were popping up because the media didn't do its job.
The MRC will occasionally be moved to shoot down a conspiracy theory -- or promote its own -- when doing so suits its interests. An example of it doing both is a 1998 report by Tim Graham defending the honor of right-wing moneybags Richard Mellon Scaife over his role in the "vast right-wing conspiracy" against the Clinton administration. It wasn't a conspiracy, Graham asserted, because the "Scaife foundations’ donations are hardly secret, with their IRS forms posted on the Internet." Further, Graham complained, "investigative journalism (much of it wildly incorrect) charging some highly implausible and terrible conspiracies committed by Republican Presidents was funded by liberal foundations without those elements ever being lumped into a 'vast left-wing conspiracy' by national media outlets." Though we suspect the MRC would have been happy to do so.
What Graham didn't disclose: The MRC was (and is) being funded by Scaife foundations. One of them, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, donated $150,000 to the MRC in 1998, and another, the Carthage Foundation, donated $10,000 to the MRC in 1997.
Examiner Columnist Repeats Wildly Inflated Tea Party Protest Count Topic: Washington Examiner
In her December 8 Washington Examinercolumn, Barbara Hollingsworth writes of the tea party movement:
The growing grass-roots movement will indeed destroy the political careers of many politicians who fail to heed the warning it delivered Sept. 12, when 1.7 million angry voters (according to a crowd estimate by Zac Moilanen of Indiana University) descended on Washington to say they were totally fed up with bailouts and stimulus packages, and want the country to return to its constitutional, limited-government roots.
But as Media Matters has detailed, Moilanen's estimate is somewhat less than authoritative. Moilanen, an undergrad studying East Asian Languages and Cultures at Indiana, cited such not-quite-unimpeachable sources as a Free Republic post and a message board to arrive at his crowd estimate.
In fact, the crowd size was much, much lower. Even Fox News -- a big promoter of the 9/12 rally -- concedes it was only in the "tens of thousands."