Terry Jeffrey declared in an Oct. 18 CNSNews.com article:
It's official: The Obama administration has now borrowed $3 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.
It took from 1776, when the United States became an independent country, until 1990, the year after the Berlin Wall fell signaling victory in the Cold War, for the federal government to accumulate a total of $3 trillion in debt, according to the Treasury Department. It only took from Jan. 20, 2009, the day President Barack Obama was inaugurated, until Oct. 15, 2010, for the Obama administration to add $3 trillion to the federal debt.
Actually, not so much. As Media Matters details, comparing the amount of debt accumulated in the past two years to that of the first 214 years of the United States is absolutely meaningless, because one dollar today is equal to a lot less than a dollar in 1776, and it represents a drastically smaller share of the economy.
Plus, Jeffrey falsely equivocates the national debt increasing by $3 trillion (which is true) with the Obama administration being responsible for it. It appears that Jeffrey is blaming Obama for all of the FY 2009 deficit, which paid for actions (like TARP and the Bush tax cuts) that occurred under the Bush administration.
WND Misleadingly Defends Art Robinson's Love of Racist Novels Topic: WorldNetDaily
This week has brought a full-court press from WorldNetDaily in support of Art Robinson, a Republican candidate for Congress in Oregon:
David Kupelian wrote that Robinson is a "Ph.D. research scientist of international stature" and "a straight-shooting, problem-solving Reagan conservative who not only loves this country, he understands this country – what makes it work – and is willing to fight the good fight to restore it to greatness and prosperity."
Joseph Farah praised Robinson, who "was my neighbor for a few years," as "a renowned expert on the issue of so-called 'climate change,'" "an expert on the issue of civil defense," and "the kind of determined tax and budget cutter we need to replace the tax-and-spend Peter DeFazios of the world." Farah added, "Robinson's scientific background makes him highly qualified to challenge Obamacare and the myth of the carbon dioxide crisis."
Barry Farber defended Robinson from charges that he is a racist: "OK. I'm from the South. I've experienced racist candidates. But if you call a candidate a racist, you owe me a galaxy of N-words spoken with feeling, open and unsubtle disparagement of black people, cruel jokes and maybe even a flaming cross and a noose. Otherwise, don't bother me."
Farber went on to explain (and downplay) the racism charge:
Can you guess what's behind the charge of Robinson's racism? When Robinson's wife died in 1988, he homeschooled his six children, all of them now Ph.D.s, as is Robinson, veterinarians or well en-route. Robinson also developed a homeschooling curriculum that sold well and enabled all six children to go to college. An ancillary feature of Robinson's homeschooling program is a bibliography of over a hundred suggested books. In one of those books, written and set in the 1800s in Africa, a white person says something like, "These tribal people act like children. I don't think they're very smart."
And that's it! The fact that the hero of that book is a black man fighting slavery apparently did not deter the pro-DeFazio dirt-diggers from declaring "Mission Accomplished."
I wouldn't march even a baby ocelot across a rope bridge that flimsy. Too insulting to the voters' intelligence. But here we are. Robinson the racist! What intensifies the hurt is, I suspect DeFazio and his proxies know Robinson is no racist. And I'm the world's foremost authority on what I suspect.
Kupelian took his own stab at rebutting the charge:
One part of "The Robinson Curriculum" is a recommendation that students read as many as possible of the 99 short, classic historical novels for children penned by celebrated British author G.A. Henty (kind of like the "Hardy Boys" books). Now it happens that in one of these 99 Victorian-era books – all of which Robinson personally reprinted and offered to the public as an adjunct to his homeschooling curriculum – one fictional character makes a two-sentence remark while in Africa that could be considered racially insensitive by today's standards. Because of this, candidate Art Robinson is being labeled a racist.
Yes, I know, it's insane.
In fact, there's a lot more to the charge than Kupelian and Farber are letting on.
The book in question is Henty's "By Sheer Pluck," and here's the offending passage, in which Mr. Goodenough, the mentor of the young lad who's the main character, pontificates upon their arrival in Africa:
“They are just like children,” Mr. Goodenough said. “They are always either laughing or quarrelling. They are good-natured and passionate, indolent, but will work hard for a time; clever up to a certain point, densely stupid beyond. The intelligence of an average negro is about equal to that of a European child of ten years old. A few, a very few, go beyond this, but these are exceptions, just as Shakespeare was an exception to the ordinary intellect of an Englishman. They are fluent talkers, but their ideas are borrowed. They are absolutely without originality, absolutely without inventive power. Living among white men, their imitative faculties enable them to acquire a considerable amount of civilization. Left alone to their own devices they retrograde into a state little above their native savagery.”
While Kupelian downplays the words as being spoken by a "fictional character" (and Farber completely misrepresents the level of offensiveness), they appear to be representative of the late 19th century imperialist and racist attitudes in Henty's books.
A PBS bio of Henty notes that his books "are notable for their hearty imperialism, undisguised racism, and jingoistic patriotism," indicating that they they went out of print for a reason: such attitudes fell out of fashion decades ago.
And far from being "classic historical novels," a scholarly paper on Henty's work points out that they contain a "formulaic structure" and imparted "a discourse embodying the British imperial ideology." Of "By Sheer Pluck," the book containing the above offending passage, the paper states:
However, no such race-crossing is seen in By Sheer Pluck, a novel set in West Africa. On the contrary, "stereotypes about Africans begin to emerge as the setting shifts from England to the west coast of Africa" (Logan, "The Myth" 130-131). When Frank and Mr. Goodenough disembark from the ship on the coast of West Africa, the latter immediately warns the boy that "the negroes of Sierra Leone are the most indolent, the most worthless, and the most insolent in all Africa" (113). (4) This racist view is further reiterated and broadened through the boy hero Frank's observation of a troop of baboons:
in the distance Frank could hear the shouts of some natives, and supposed that the monkeys had been plundering their plantations, and that they were driving them away. The baboons passed without paying any attention to him, but Frank observed that the last of the troop was carrying a little one in one of its forearms. Frank glanced at the baby-monkey and saw that it had round its waist a string of blue beads. As a string of beads is the only attire which a negro child wears until it reaches the age of ten or eleven years old, the truth at once flashed upon Frank that the baboons were carrying off a native baby. (153-154)
The direct implication of this incident is that Henty's hero, even though he is knowledgeable about species, cannot really see a physical difference between a black baby and a monkey. (5) Therefore, the incident stands out as a striking expression of Henty's racialist perception of the Africans. As a result, early in the novel Henty establishes in the minds of his readers where he believes the natives of West Africa stand in the biological evolutionary chain. Furthermore, as statements about the intellectual capabilities and character and moral traits of the Africans come into play, the culturally-constructed racial stereotypes are also added into the picture.
Not surprisingly, the core idea in Mr. Goodenough's statement was in line with a declaration made by the Anthropological Society in 1864 "that black children develop only up to the age of twelve" (Green 233).
Obviously, Henty did not become a racist on his own. In a sense, in his novels, he was responding to the public sensitivity about the Empire, colonisation overseas and the discourses accompanying these concerns. In other words, his novels were both the reflections and the reinforcements of popular assumptions held by the majority of the British people in his own time.
The real question here is what Robinson does with Henty's books in his homeschool curriculum, particularly given that, in Kupelian's words, he encourages students to "read as many as possible." What guidance is given to homeschooling instructors in addressing the offending passage in "By Sheer Pluck" and other similar offending passages that presumably exist in other Henty books. Neither Farber nor Kupelian discuss this
To the contrary: Kupelian touts how Robinson's homeschooling curriculum "apparently works pretty well, as today all six of Art's children either have doctorate degrees or will shortly. One has a chemistry Ph.D., two have doctorates in veterinary medicine and the last three are all in the Oregon State University graduate program working toward their Ph.D.s in nuclear engineering."
Like any good capitalist, Robinson will happily sell you Henty's books (though they are old enough to be in the public domain). The Robinson Books page for the series -- you can buy all 99 for $1,199 in hardcover or $699 in paperback) describes them as featuring "Henty's heroes of honesty, integrity, hard work, courage, diligence, perseverance, personal honor, and strong Christian faith are unsurpassed." No mentionis made of the racism and imperialism that pervade the books.
The fact that Robinson defenders like Kupelian and Farber are working so hard to deflect the racism issue without explaining how Henty's racism and imperialism are dealt with leaves wide open the possibility that it isn't addressed at all. If not, Robinson should be asked why.
It's clear that WND is too far in the tank for Robinson to bother with any genuinely serious investigation of the issue.
MRC Runs Ad for New Book By Savage -- Whom Bozell Previously Denounced Topic: Media Research Center
Michael Savage is one of the very few conservatives the Media Research Center has ever regularly criticized. After Savage engaged in his infamous "get AIDS and die" rant in 2003 on his short-lived MSNBC show, the MRC's Brent Bozell praised MSNBC for firing him (albeit while also complaining that the media "turn a blind eye to liberals in the media who spew the very same hateful venom at conservatives"). Bozell cited Savage in denouncing "shock jocks" who "wish death on members of their audience," called Savage "crazy Right," and reiterated his criticism in a May column by pointing out that "Savage was loudly condemned by conservatives (like yours truly), and MSNBC was congratulated when he was fired, though some of us also pointed out that MSNBC should never have hired this bigot in the first place."
So why is the MRC's NewsBusters site accepting advertising for Savage's new book?
Apparently all is forgiven, and even the most hateful remarks can be glossed over with the passage of time.
WND Touts Video of 'Angel of Death' Morphing Into Obama Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily has already promoted the idea that Barack Obama is the Antichrist. Whywouldn't it take the next logical step?
An Oct. 19 WND article by Bob Unruh promotes an anti-abortion video in which an image of an "Angel of Death" morphs into Obama. Unruh is clearly approving of this denigrating image, weirdly presenting as fact that the video "links President Obama with the 'Angel of Death.'"
While Unruh includes a few comments critical of the video (none of which he links to) by "those who support abortion" -- a false construct -- he's much more interested promoting the "personhood" amendment the video was created to support. Unruh also misleads about Obama's record on abortion, misleadingly claiming that he "oppos[ed] as a state lawmaker even laws that would require doctors to provide medical care to infants who survive abortion attempts."
That Unruh and WND would promote such a video demonstrates just how pathological their hatred of Obama is.
I drove by what used to be a booming car dealership last week and saw nothing but a ghost town thanks to Obama taking over the auto industry and shutting down dissenters. Obama and his lynch mob in Congress have taken over our health care and turned it into something worse than any haunted house could portray. They have sunk our economy deeper than the Titanic, and the amazing thing is he is on the campaign trail for the Titanic crew – still trying to sell tickets for their disaster "cruise."
I'm really surprised that among all his "czars," Obama has not yet appointed anyone to oversee Halloween.
Under an Obama Halloween czar, the following costumes would be banned:
Barack Obama: Clearly the scariest costume on the market, (rivaled only by the Nancy Pelosi mask), has been shown to cause emotional distress in children and adults alike. Test groups reveal that many seeing a "Barack Obama" costume are prone to turn off their lights, lock their doors and rush their personal belongings into safekeeping.
George W. Bush: The Obama administration would also declare this costume illegal because homeowners often give those wearing such a mask at least a double portion of candy. And in the Obama administration, the freedom of disproportionate distribution (even based on merit or achievement) is prohibited. Besides, it makes the current administration look bad, particularly when those children wearing a George Bush costume are also embraced while homeowners repeat the phrase, "I miss you! I miss you!"
All skeletons: also banned because they too closely resemble the results of Obama health care. They fear such reminders could lead to a repeal of the Democrats' socialized medicine.
Any "Star Wars" costumes, which might fuel "the force" and the empire that, Obama himself admits, is striking back.
Bums or hobos: Any children wearing costumes with holes, patches or signs of "poverty" that reflect the Obama double-digit unemployment rate would be arrested on site.
The Wicked Witch of the West: The Federal Elections has received complaints claiming that this costume gives the current speaker of the House an unfair door-to-door campaign advantage.
On the banned candy list:
Pay Day: It is too reminiscent of the free-enterprise system that enables people to actually earn money and keep some of it.
Good and Plenty: Same thing. Banned because it points to the success of capitalism and a happier time most of us can all still recall.
Life Savers: Also banned because it makes people think about the tea-party movement and the Republican challengers. The Obama administration also wants to divert attention away from the fact that we are sinking in their failed socialist policies and the deepest in debt we have ever been.
Tootsie Pops: The candy of the Democratic Party reminding voters of that last election when they were all a "bunch of suckers."
Bazooka Bubble Gum: Chewing it is like an endorsement of the Second Amendment's right to bear arms.
Smarties: These are the people who'll be voting Republican this year, and we can't have that.
Snickers: The sound heard at Obama's campaign speeches still selling socialism as a solution.
Sugar Daddy is permitted, but would be printed with the Obama seal – to be handed out with government cheese. And, finally,
Almond Joy: Because sometimes you vote like a nut, this year we won't.
Under an Obama Halloween, in addition to the permits, children must report all candy intake and leave 96 percent of it at ACORN offices and various union drop-off sites. They will be redistributed to purchase votes in the coming weeks. Any leftover candy will be given to those Obama/Democrat supporters who are unwilling or too lazy to trick or treat for themselves.
If the government schools still have your children believing that Obama is worthy of the praise songs they sing, give them a "taste" of what that really means. After working all night collecting candy, inform them of all the restrictions and income, sales, health-care, "stimulus" and other taxes that will leave them with about three candy corns – two of which you, as parents, are entitled to for "property tax" for their bedroom in your house.
What's at stake in this election can be communicated to your little tots as simply as "candy or no candy." "Trick or Treat." Which do you prefer?
CNS: Obama Fails To Say A Word We Like Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com's obsession with single words that President Obama says or not say continues with an Oct. 19 article by Penny Starr (with Fred Lucas), who writes:
For the second time in little over a month, President Barack Obama stripped the word "Creator" from the Declaration of Independence when giving a speech.
Starr doesn't explain why she and her employer have become so obsessed over single words -- others include "us" and variations on "invest" -- or why CNS did not examine President Bush's words in such precise detail.
Ellis Washington Derangement Syndrome Watch Topic: WorldNetDaily
Remember, to the Democratic Party and RINO Republicans, truth doesn't matter, because to them truth is relative. All that matters to liberals and progressives is Nietzsche's "Will to Power" and control over the people. Like the Islamic doctrine Taqiyya, which sanctions deceit to further Islam, to progressives the end justifies the means; therefore, lying, stealing, killing and perverting the Constitution and science is acceptable to utopian socialists as long as they "change the world."
Liberalism isn't new. It's been called by different names over time. Note some of the sophistic ideas liberal Democrats and progressives have used to control and denigrate society over the past 250 years:
The Age of Enlightenment (humanism, atheism, skepticism)
Karl Marx (socialism, communism)
Charles Darwin (evolution, eugenics, separation of Christianity and science)
Jeremy Bentham, John Austin (advent of positive law, end of natural law)
Sigmund Freud, Alfred Kinsey, Benjamin Spock (sexual promiscuity, family deconstruction)
Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Obama (welfare state)
Walter Lippmann, Herbert Croly, John Dewey, H.G. Wells, Margaret Sanger, George Bernard Shaw (education propaganda, progressivism, moral relativism)
Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao (state socialism, totalitarianism)
Rachel Carson ("Silent Spring" ), Ira Einhorn, Al Gore, Van Jones ("Green New Deal")
New Article: WorldNetDaily Condones Child Abuse -- Again Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a near-repeat of an incident two years ago, WND is much more interested in having a poster boy for its right-wing agenda than investigating the abuse charges he faces. Read more >>
Kinsolving: Gay Military Recruits Are Disease-Ridden 'Buggers' Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily’s backlash against a judge’s order to stop enforcement of the military’s ban on gay and lesbian troops in the military continues with an October 19 column by WND White House correspondent Les Kinsolving.
Kinsolving denounces the idea that the judge would “force the acceptance of openly announced buggers into the barracks,” writes that it is a “very dangerous and disease-ridden judicial decision,” and adds: “The recruitment of self-announced homosexuals would also cause a major medical problem given the sexual orientation's high rates of AIDS and syphilis.”
Kinsolving ignores the fact that comprehensive medical testing is typically a part of any pre-deployment health screening process in the military. Screening guidelines and policies can be found here. Moreover, U.S. military regulations require continued testing of all active-duty personnel every two years for HIV, and experts in nations that have lifted their bans on open service by gay men and lesbians have said that the rate of HIV infection among the troops has not increased.
Kinsolving goes on to ask his readers to “imagine a Marine Corps general – whose combat record includes numerous battle honors for extraordinary courage -- issuing the following orders” on segregation of homosexual and heterosexual inmates. He doesn’t explain what one’s combat record has to do with following orders that exist only in Kinsolving’s imagination. He also asserts, “Forcing any heterosexual midshipman to room with any self-announced homosexual midshipman would be an appalling denial of basic rights.”
As you might suspect from the above, Kinsolving has a longtimeobsession with homosexuality, repeatedly denouncing what he calls the “Sodomy Lobby.” But his employer is just as anti-gay as he is, so he fits in just fine.
The Flip-Flop Is Complete: Newsmax Endorses Rick Scott Topic: Newsmax
Remember Newsmax's trashing of Rick Scott in the Florida gubernatorial Republican primary in order to benefit its preferred candidate, Bill McCollum? Never mind.
Newsmax has pulled a complete about-face, gotten back to toeing the Republican line, and endorsed Scott. In an Oct. 19 editorial, Newsmax stated that the "Republican voters spoke — and they chose businessman Scott," asserting that "the outcome of this governor's election will have a direct impact on the 2012 presidential race. For the Republicans to defeat President Obama, it is crucial for the GOP to hold on to the Florida governorship in 2010."
That's not the most enthusiastic endorsement we've seen, making it all too clear that it's all about getting a Republican -- any Republican -- elected and not out of principle.
Newsmax notes that Scott is " former CEO of the Columbia/HCA hospital chain," but the reference ends there. What did Newsmax say about Scott's tenure there when it endorsed McCollum?
On the campaign trail, Scott has refused to answer in-depth questions about his role at Columbia/HCA, the hospital chain he founded and where he served as CEO until the 1990s.
After an FBI investigation, Scott’s company pleaded guilty to criminal charges of overbilling the government in the biggest Medicare fraud case in U.S. history, and paid a record $1.7 billion in fines, penalties, and damages.
Scott says he never knew about the fraud, nor was he ever personally charged. But he was forced out of the company after nabbing a $310 million golden parachute.
As Fox News commentator Dick Morris says, only two things about Scott can be concluded: Either he was incompetent and knew nothing of the massive fraud under way at his own company, or he was indeed complicit in the crime. Either way, he should be disqualified from being governor of the state of Florida.
But the Scott saga gets worse.
The healthcare company that Scott co-founded after leaving Columbia/HCA, Solantic — a chain of emergency clinics located in Florida — has been embroiled in 10 legal actions in the past decade, two of them involving Scott personally. One includes a lawsuit from a doctor who says Solantic fraudulently misused his medical license.
Newsmax wants people to forget all about that now. Indeed, the Scott endorsement is careful to mention none of that, instead focusing on the alleged transgressions of Scott's Democratic opponent, Alex Sink.
Newsmax telegraphed that it was sending Scott's unsavory past down the memory hole in its initial attack on Sink. With the editorial, Newsmax's revisionism is in full swing.
Clueless? Hardly. "Diabolical" would be more apt. It has never been Obama's intention to restore economic damage (that he helped to create), provide security, promote the common good, or uphold and defend the Constitution. His intention is to maintain the con as long as possible, that he might maneuver himself into position for an effective coup de grâce.
Obama may not realize his "glorious vision," but as the point man for a revolution that has been 100 years in the making, he has no compelling reason to abandon the agenda now. When he employed the phrase "fundamentally transforming America" two years ago, that's precisely what he meant. He has no intention of going quietly.
I was hammered two years ago when I wrote a satirical piece titled "The hip-hop president." I was called every name in the book. E-mails for weeks were so X-rated that I would not allow anyone to read them. Yet FLOTUS is allowed to separate races as she did in her interview with Tom Joyner in Chicago and no one says a word. Can you imagine if our last president's wife had said the same thing? The outcry from the left and the poverty pimps like Sharpton and Jackson would have been astounding.
This mid-term election will be viewed as every election, "The most crucial of our lifetime." However, this time that may be more true than we think.
There is no doubt in my mind the first couple is changing America in a way a majority of Americans not only oppose but find offensive and dangerous. Many suggest the only hope for America after the first two years of Mr. Obama holding "power" is to stop him in Congress.
Pat Boone Takes Obama Out of Context -- Again Topic: WorldNetDaily
Pat Boone, it seems, is incapable of telling the truth about President Obama.
Just a few days after our comprehensive item detailing the depth of Boone's hatred of the president -- in which we noted that Boone regularly takes Obama's words out of context to distort their meaning -- Boone does it again.
In his Oct. 16 column, published at WorldNetDaily, Boone writes that we should "take a few deep breaths, a few quiet and reflective moments and consider some quotes from men who have steered our Ship of State in various ways and times, and decide – for ourselves, individually – which concept should influence our votes." But Boone stacks the deck by using many of the same old out-of-context quotes he has peddled before.
Boone uses the Obama quote "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation" out of context; the full Obama quote is: "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation – at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."
Boone tries to reiterate his bogus point by repeating a similar Obama quote, "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation." The full Obama quote is: "we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
Boone also quotes Obama saying, "The Constitution is a flawed document." We could find a direct quotation of that, but Obama has expressed similar sentiment that, of course, Boone has ripped from its full context. In a 2001 radio interview, Obama said the Constitution "reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day," that flaw being that "[t]he Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity that was of concern to the framers." But Obama also asserted that the Constitution is "a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now."
Obama is not the only person whom Boone falsely portrays. He also quotes former White House communications director Anita Dunn as saying, "… [T]wo of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa … two people that I turn to most to [make the point] … you're going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before."
The ellipses give away Boone's misleading game. In fact, Dunn cited "two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa -- not often coupled with each together, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you're going to make choices." She went on to cite Mao's response to skeptics who pointed out that their party was facing steep disadvantages while fighting the Nationalist Chinese: "You fight your war, and I'll fight mine." After asking the audience to "think about that for a second," she said, "You know, you don't have to accept the definition of how to do things, and you don't have to follow other people's choices and paths, OK? It is about your choices and your path." Likewise, Dunn cited Mother Teresa's response to a young person who wanted to work at her orphanage in Calcutta: "Go find your own Calcutta." Dunn then reiterated: "Go find your own Calcutta. Fight your own path. Go find the thing that is unique to you, the challenge that is actually yours, not somebody else's challenge."
It's sad that Boone has chosen to be such a dishonest writer.
MRC's Poor Goes A-Heathering Against Meghan McCain Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center loves to Heather anyone deemed insufficiently adherent to the right-wing party line, and they've found their latest victim in Meghan McCain.
This time the perpetrator is MRC Business & Media Institute staff writer Jeff Poor, who re-tweeted a message by another conservative stating, "I swear, if Meghan McCain gets any dumber she'll be drooling on her boobs." Poor added: "Haha."
(This, interestingly, is relatively mild compared to some of his fellow right-wingers' sexist attacks against her.)
What did McCain do to engender such hostility? She appeared on ABC's "This Week" and said that Christine O'Donnell is "seen as a nutjob" who is "making a mockery of running for public office." That's pretty much it.
The MRC's Brent Baker, meanwhile, avoided direct Heathering, instead complaining that a later ABC News report mentioning McCain's appearance didn't express "angst" that McCain was "insulting Christine O’Donnell."
UPDATE: The MRC's chief Heatherer, Tim Graham, tweets a reference to "Meghan 'Bratz' McCain." Really, Tim?
What Happened to the MRC's Protest Video? Topic: Media Research Center
So we got a tip that a video of the Media Rsearch Center's hastily organized "Tell the Truth" protest in New York on Sunday was posted on its video site, Eyeblast.tv. But clicking on the link that was supplied to us brings an interesting message: "This video has been taken down for inappropriate content."
Huh? Why would the MRC declare that a video of its own rally was "inappropriate"? Perhaps because it wasn't all that well attended.
New York radio station WNYC reported that the rally was attended by mere "dozens"who engaged in chants of "Tell the truth!"
WNYC also quotes the MRC's Brent Bozell asserting, "This the most grassroots operation that I've ever seen in my lifetime. And the suggestion that this is an astroturf, nationally organized organization is completely false." Yes, what could be more "grassroots" than an organization that has taken millions of dollars from the likes of Richard Mellon Scaife and who spent part of a $2 million stake putting on this little protest?
The MRC is curiously silent about the protest in the rest of its empire -- we couldn't find anything on its front page, at NewsBusters, at CNSNews.com or anywhere else on Eyeblast. The only evidence that something might have happened on Sunday is a picture on Bozell's Facebook page of him pretending to have applied for a job at the New York Times, one of the protest targets. It doesn't mention anything about the protest itself.
If the MRC is so afraid to promote its big little protest, why blow the money to hold it in the first place?