News Machine

Even the children:

Ha ha.

First we take Manhattan ….Leonard Cohen (and so we shall)

Give the woman credit — liberals are seldom this candid about their impulse toward totalitarianism. Usually it takes a bit of prodding before you’ll hear that voice of the guard in the gulag.

Lizz Winstead, co-founder of The Daily Show and alumna of the late, hardly lamented Air America Radio, revealed her pathological side while appearing on Ed Schultz’s radio show yesterday, as described by Brian Maloney over at The Radio Equalizer —

WINSTEAD: Ed, I’ve always wished that somebody would invent, maybe you and I could go into business and do this, if somebody would invent, you know those shock collars that you put on the dog? (Schultz laughs) That when they bark they get jarred? If we could make one that actually fact-checked and we just put it around Glenn Beck’s neck and when he spoke (pause), or just fake tears, if it could detect when tears were actually crocodile tears, and then you just get electrocuted by the water and jarred, like, that would be awesome! Force him to wear it.

"Always" wished for that, have you, Lizz?

Two words come to mind — Nurse Ratched. Any relation?

So who’s Todd Palin palling around with up there in Alaska these days?

Todd and Sarah won’t give interviews to the “lamestream” media, but they’ll make time to meet with white supremacist blogger Robert Stacy McCain: Hey, Who’s the Man? : The Other McCain.

Robert Stacy McCain was recently seen at LGF when he used the racial slur “beaners” to describe Mexicans, and is well known for numerous other overtly racist statements, such as:

“[T]he media now force interracial images into the public mind and a number of perfectly rational people react to these images with an altogether natural revulsion. The white person who does not mind transacting business with a black bank clerk may yet be averse to accepting the clerk as his sister-in-law, and THIS IS NOT RACISM, no matter what Madison Avenue, Hollywood and Washington tell us.”

McCain has also described Abraham Lincoln as a war criminal:

WANTED for WAR CRIMES: Abraham Lincoln

* Violation of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
* Unconstitutional suppression of civil liberties in Ohio and other states
* Suspension of the writ of habeas corpus
* Disbanding the legislature of Maryland
* Aggression against the Southern Confederacy

… and defended the Confederate system of slavery as “cordial and affectionate.”

Even many slaveholders such as Thomas Jefferson recognized that by stigmatizing labor, slavery encouraged sloth in both master and slave. Though most 19th-century white Americans, North and South, subscribed to racial theories that consigned blacks to an inferior status as “hewers of wood and drawers of water,” it is incorrect to say that slavery was a system based upon racial hatred. Indeed, both white and black Southerners of the era have left us testimony to the cordial and affectionate relations which generally existed between the races in the Old South.

These quotes are from Robert Stacy McCain’s Usenet posts, as documented here: Meet Robert Stacy McCain, Neo-Confederate Wacko Extraordinaire.

There’s much more information on McCain, including his connections to white nationalist groups like American Renaissance and neo-Nazis like Bill White, in these posts:
Robert Stacy McCain’s Angry Departure From the Washington Times
The Other ‘Other McCain’
Robert Stacy McCain’s Latest Excuse

Now this sleazy racist has finally managed to ingratiate himself into the Palin family inner circle. Here he is posing on one of Todd Palin’s snowmobiles:

ABC’s Claire Shipman waxed ecstatic over Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday’s Good Morning America, as she reported on Mrs. Clinton’s efforts in the Middle Eastern peace process. Shipman exclaimed how the Secretary had a "distinct, quite public moment of triumph" in her meetings with leaders from both sides, and noted how Clinton has become an "international political celebrity."

Anchor George Stephanopoulos, former communications director for President Bill Clinton, introduced the correspondent’s report, which aired 44 minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour. Stephanopoulos noted past administrations’ failure "to broker a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians" and then proclaimed how it was Mrs. Clinton’s "turn to try to make diplomatic history." Shipman began by highlighting how Hillary "remains one of the most popular members of the administration" and how she was now "squarely center stage" with the possibility of bringing "something different to this Middle East process."

After using her "moment of triumph" line, the ABC correspondent emphasized how Secretary Clinton was apparently "hard on the trail of a dream that has eluded so many before her, and those who know her well say she brings a special touch to wooing both sides back to the table." She also underlined Clinton’s reported modus operandi in the peace process: "It’s a trademark recipe of pragmatism and discipline over ego- no high-profile shuttle diplomacy for her, for example."

Shipman used three sound bites from the liberal Brooking Institution’s Michael O’Hanlon, and one from former Clinton administration official and current Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs P. J. Crowley, to heap praise on Mrs. Clinton. After O’Hanlon highlighted how the Secretary apparently "chose to really marshal her resources and guard them jealously, and wait for the right moment," the correspondent added her own lauds: "The other asset she wields: a bit of female EQ, and an astute political instinct."

The high point of the gushing language over the senior diplomat came near the end of the report:

SHIPMAN: It doesn’t hurt, of course, that over the years, she’s perfected her ability to shift gears in an instant. Hard-working Hillary, suddenly transforms once again into international political celebrity.

O’HANLON: She’s a multi-dimensional public figure. She’s part global rock star, part everybody’s friend, because she goes by Hillary more than Secretary Clinton.

Shipman even remarked about the Secretary’s new hairdo: "Her hair is even back in the headlines. She’s getting rave reviews on her longer, cool, new do."

Earlier this year, on the June 9 edition of GMA, ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas credited Mrs. Clinton for the primary victories of Republican women candidates: "So many women saying- doing so well, and many saying perhaps Hillary Clinton helped by running for president. All these other women about to possibly take office, high office, in those states."

The full transcript of Claire Shipman’s report from Friday’s Good Morning America:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Henry Kissinger got the two sides of the Middle East conflict to stop fighting for a time. Jimmy Carter forged the Camp David agreements. But every administration since then has tried and failed to broker a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Now, it’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s turn to try to make diplomatic history. And Claire Shipman joins us from Washington with more. Hey, Claire.

CLAIRE SHIPMAN: Hey, George. This is a big moment for Hillary Clinton. Her poll numbers show she remains one of the most popular members of the administration, but she’s tended to avoid the spotlight. Now, she’s back, squarely center stage, and we took a look at how she may bring something different to this Middle East process.

SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON: Want us to stand here?

SHIPMAN (voice-over): For a secretary of state whose style has been very much head down, nose to the grindstone, it was a distinct, quite public moment of triumph.

CLINTON: I fervently believe that the two men sitting on either side of me- that you are the leaders who can make this long-cherished dream a reality.

SHIPMAN: Peace talks back on track, she’s hard on the trail of a dream that has eluded so many before her, and those who know her well say she brings a special touch to wooing both sides back to the table.

ISRAEL PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: The people of Israel, and I, as their prime minister, are prepared to walk this road.

PALESTINIAN PRESIDENT MAHMOUD ABBAS (through translator): The road is clear, in front of us, in order to reach peace.

SHIPMAN: It’s a trademark recipe of pragmatism and discipline over ego- no high-profile shuttle diplomacy for her, for example.

MICHAEL O’HANLON, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: Secretary Clinton, unlike some of her predecessors and unlike some previous presidents, chose to really marshal her resources and guard them jealously, and wait for the right moment.

SHIPMAN: The other asset she wields: a bit of female EQ, and an astute political instinct.

P. J. CROWLEY, STATE DEPARTMENT: She’s been in the arena. She’s been bruised- you know, in that arena. And this gives her a credibility that helps relate to leaders.

SHIPMAN: And it doesn’t hurt, of course, that over the years, she’s perfected her ability to shift gears in an instant. Hard-working Hillary, suddenly transforms once again into international political celebrity.

O’HANLON: She’s a multi-dimensional public figure. She’s part global rock star, part everybody’s friend, because she goes by Hillary more than Secretary Clinton.

SHIPMAN: And her hair is even back in the headlines. She’s getting rave reviews on her longer, cool, new do.

CLINTON: And now, it’s time to get to work.

SHIPMAN (live): Well, George, not the hair again- but, of course, ultimately, she will be judged not by her appearance, but by results in this process. There is a lot of hard work to be done. The two sides are hoping to talk to each other as frequently as every week, and Hillary Clinton is hoping to have another high-profile meeting in the Middle East as early as September, but we’ll see.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And they’re facing a real deadline at the end of September on whether or not to continue- to start building those settlements again.

SHIPMAN: Exactly, and a lot of people worry that that could put this process, so new, in jeopardy again.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay. Claire Shipman, thanks a lot. 

The massive revolving door between the mainstream media and the Obama administration has spun once again, this time as former White House budget director Peter Orszag signs on as a New York Times op/ed columnist.

Orszag is the eighteenth individual (that we know of) to transition between the White House and the mainstream press. He will surely not be the last. That amazingly high number again underscores the ideological similarities between members of the Obama administration and members of the press.

The New York Times Co. broke the news in a press release today:

"We welcome Peter Orszag’s expertise and insight to our Op-Ed lineup," said Andrew Rosenthal, editorial page editor of The New York Times. "As a Washington insider and one of the most recognizable names in economics, his writing will provide a unique perspective on the national landscape."

Mr. Orszag is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. As President Barack Obama’s first budget director, he worked on the 2009 stimulus package and helped craft the health care legislation passed in 2010. He was an outspoken proponent of the idea that reducing health care costs would be key to maintaining the federal budget and preparing for the country’s economic future.

Presumably, the Times feels that Orszag can be a fair judge of economics - a field in which he is certainly proficient. Orszag’s partisan affiliations don’t seem to bother the Gray Lady.

That was a benefit of the doubt the paper would not afford to some Republican pols-turned-pundits. Take Karl Rove, for instance. After he took a gig with Fox News, the Times stated in a headline, "Rove as a pundit raises suspicions".

"Rove’s new role as a media star marks another step in the evolution of mainstream journalism," wrote Times reporters Jim Rutenberg and Jacques Steinberg, "where opinion, ’straight news’ reporting and unmistakable spin increasingly mingle, especially on television."

The Times has either adapted to this new reality, or was really only terribly concerned when Republicans spun the revolving door. We’ll leave that for you to decide.

Here we go again. The New York branch of Fox News shrieks: Mosque Investor Was Terror Contributor.

Except that, uh, he wasn’t.

An Egyptian who’s contributing some money to Park51 once donated money to the Holy Land Foundation — before 9/11, years before the charity was known to be connected to Hamas, because he thought he was donating money for an orphanage. Like thousands of other people did.

Out of this information, Fox gets the headline that he was a “terror contributor.” And of course, the usual idiot’s chorus of anti-Muslim bigot blogs is all over it.

Ugh. This has become a flat out witch hunt now. Everyone who donates money to the Park51 project is going to have their entire past dug up, distorted, and used against them.

Back in June, Atlas exposed the Islamic supremacism in the streets of France: Muslims illegally Occupying Streets of Paris to Pray, Muslim militia blocks the streets.

I wrote in that post:

This is not your parents' France. The Muslims take over the Paris streets for Friday prayers. They block off roads, put their rugs out on the sidewalk as well as the street, deprive shop owners of business for two and a half hours, and deprive residents of the street from entering or leaving their apartments for that time. Look how aggressive they get with the camera man. (Note: no women.)

More footage of the Muslims taking over the streets of Paris in prayer.

In Time Magazine Managing Editor Rick Stengel’s mind, it’s really "sad" that the wall between Israel and the West Bank - intended to keep murderous terrorists in the Palestinian territory - has been a success. Stengel apparently considers Isreali deaths worthwhile if they lead to more productive peace talks.

In a "Morning Joe" segment yesterday titled "Why Israel doesn’t care about peace" - after the upcoming Time cover story - Stengel posited that the lack of violence in Isreal is responsible for that country’s supposed reluctance to reach a peace deal. Stengel stated (video below the fold - h/t Jim Hoft):

They haven’t had a car bombing in two and a half years. And the sad truth really is that the wall with the West Bank has actually worked. I mean, most Israelis in the course of their lives don’t come into contact with any Palestinians at all. The wall is functioning. And the Gaza strip is so small and so isolated they feel that those folks, the Hamas folks are not that big of a threat…

I mean, the Israelis feel like, you know what? The status quo isn’t so bad and we don’t mind is there is no peace at all.

So the truth is sad, presumably, because the deaths of innocent Israelis would be a worthwhile price to pay for the progression of Middle East peace talks, by Stengel’s account. That is what Stengel is saying: the wall has succeeded, but at the price of impeding the peace talks. He says that fact is sad, meaning no wall, or a less effective wall would be preferable. More Israelis would die from car bombings, but at least the peace talks would move forward.

Stengel believes it would be preferable for more Israelis to be killed by Palestinain terrorists, if it meant that those murderers would get Israeli leaders to the negotiating table. Good to know.

This is not a commentator saying this, mind you. This is the managing editor of Time magazine opining that more Israeli deaths would be preferable to the status quo. If this does not convince you that the mainstream media is decidedly anti-Israel, nothing will.

The contention that Israel is less interested in peace talks because it does not have much to fear from the belligerent territory to its west is a valid concern, and does not require one to weigh in on the Israeli/Palestinian issue. But Stengel made a value judgment on that statement, claiming that more Israeli deaths (how many more he didn’t specify) are an acceptable sacrifice.

That speaks volumes about Time’s ability to weigh in objectively on the issue.

Ignoring the current political reality for wishful thinking of bygone days, Politico’s Richard Cohen wrote a nice bluff piece today for Democrat anti-life CO Rep. Diana DeGette, strongly pushing a bill to force taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research. Such legislation would render mute the August 23 federal court ruling that escr violates federal law by killing that law.

Cohen has either not seen or is ignoring (would bet it’s the latter) the August 27 Rasmussen poll that showed a stunning reversal of American thought on paying for escr.

While 17 mos. ago a slight majority (52%) supported President Obama’s now-enjoined executive order authorizing public-funded escr, 57% today oppose it. Now, only 1/3 of America (exactly: 33%) support what DeGette is pushing.

I’m sure DeGette knows about the poll but is attempting a bluff, wanting her shaky colleagues and leadership to think public-funded escr is in the bag and that it would be to their political benefit to have a hand in this done deal. From the article:

As Congress prepares to return for a limited pre-election agenda… DeGette… said she has picked up wide support for her bill to permit embryonic stem-cell research and expects it will pass this month. Although it has been strongly opposed by anti-abortion activists, she voiced confidence that the measure will be a political boost for its backers as well as good policy.

Working with her bipartisan allies and with Democratic leaders who want to make sure the bill does not raise objections from pro-life Democrats, DeGette has not resolved all details of the measure. But “the stars are pretty well aligned,” she said. “This is a positive wedge issue. Supporters can use it in an election because there is strong public support and its opponents look extreme.“

I refer DeGette’s colleagues back to the Rasmussen poll. Interestingly, the poll indicates Americans don’t have such a moral issue with escr as a fiscal issue with spending their tax dollars on it.

So people are not now arguing about whether embryos are human and even if so whether it would be for the greater good to experiment on them. They’re saying it’s fiscally irresponsible right now to throw money at it, since we have none. (“They” being the critical independent vote.) And so, in fact, public funded escr is a negative wedge issue that enjoys overwhelming public opposition.

As for DeGette’s “bipartisan allies,” way down in Cohen’s piece, in the 2nd-to-last paragraph, we learn those amount to a whopping 2:

DeGette has worked closely with Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) and cites the bipartisan support for her bill. But the 51 cosponsors include only 2 Republicans: Castle and Mark Kirk (R-IL). Coincidentally, both are running for the Senate.

Currently Kirk is losing in the polls to his Democrat counterpart with absolutely zero conservative support. His support of this issue puts him in the negative-zero range, meaning he should begin to anticipate cat calls at rallies.

Meanwhile Castle is much in the news as a Tea Party primary target, with he and DE Republican leaders “scrambling to prevent the possibility” of a “seismic upset.”  Daily Kos reported August 30 that with conservative Christine O’Donnell breathing down Castle’s neck, a debate over public-funded escr “puts Castle in a spot.” I expect Castle is wishing right about now DeGette would shut up and go away.

I equally expect pro-life Democrats – you know, the ones our groups are targeting and beating for supporting Obamacare – are privately telling DeGette the same thing.

To help them along: Call your congressperson today and tell him or her to oppose DeGette’s bill or any measure authorizing taxpayer funding of escr.

[Photo via Politico]