Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
How American Sniper Almost Became an Anti-American Flick Under Spielberg
Flashback to Munich
Spielberg took a story about Israeli operatives avenging a terrorist attack and turned it around to make it sympathetic to the terrorists while minimizing their atrocity.
Before Clint Eastwood was on board with American Sniper, Spielberg had already been there. And he had an idea… the same bad idea.
After a Spielberg flirtation — he wanted to humanize the other side through that doppelganger sniper killing U.S. soldiers for the other side — they enlisted Eastwood, who tells a smartly spare anti-war story about the price of bravery in battle.
Humanizing the other side was how Spielberg had justified slipping Munich around from anti-terror to anti-Israel.
SPIEGEL: Your opponents say that you “humanize” terror.
Spielberg: Do these critics really mean that terrorists are not human beings? I try not to demonize them. Again, this has absolutely nothing to with relativizing their acts or sympathizing with them. But I do believe that it sullies the memory of the victims if we do not ask questions about the reasons, about the roots of terror.
Spielberg’s larger agenda was not simply anti-Israel, but pro-terrorist.
‘I find it kind of astonishing that people who don’t like this movie are saying that I’m trying to humanise terrorists,’ he says, adding in exasperation, ‘as if it was ever acceptable for me to dehumanise anyone in any of my pictures. Some political critics would like to see these people dehumanised because when you take away someone’s humanity you can do anything to them, you’re not committing a crime because they’re not human. This film clearly states that the Black September of the Munich murders were terrorists. These were unforgivable actions but until we begin to ask questions about who these terrorists are and why terrorism happens, we’re never going to get to the truth of why 9/11 happened, for instance.’
And indeed Spielberg explicitly makes the 9/11 link in Munich. It’s not hard to imagine what he would have done with American Sniper if he had gotten his hands on it.
USA Today published a study on the political effect of cable news networks on viewers. It makes sense. The survey says watching Fox News makes you more conservative, watching MSNBC makes you more liberal and if you watch CNN you never think any airplane is going to land safely or be found.
Something to think about:
A cop kills a black man.
Liberals: “ALL COPS ARE BAD!”
A crazed person shoots someone.
Liberals: “ALL GUNS ARE BAD!”
A Muslim kills innocent people for his God.
Liberals: “YOU CAN’T JUDGE ALL MUSLIMS BY THE ACTIONS OF A MINORITY!”
It’s this kind of logic that makes it impossible to take them seriously.
~ The Libtard Show
The Most Dishonest Year on Record
Last week, according to our crackerjack mainstream media, NASA announced that 2014 was the hottest year, like, ever.
No, really. The New York Times began its report with: “Last year was the hottest in earth’s recorded history.”
Well, not really. As we’re about to see, this is a claim that dissolves on contact with actual science. But that didn’t stop the press from running with it.
If you follow the link I gave to the New York Times piece, you will see that this opening sentence has since been rewritten, for reasons which will soon become clear. But the Times wasn’t the only paper to start with that claim, and most of the headlines are still up. The Washington Post has: “2014 Was the Hottest Year in Recorded History.” The Boston Globe: “2014 Was Earth’s Hottest Year in Recorded History.” And so on.
You can see how misleading this is. When you read the phrase “in recorded history,” you think we’re talking about a really long time—the time dating back to the first historical records in Sumeria, circa 3500 BC. (That’s what you’ll find if you look up the phrase “recorded history.”) That’s a time frame of 5,000 to 6,000 years. But in the case of the temperature record, it actually means only 135 years. Accurate, systematic, global thermometer measurements of surface temperatures go back only to 1880. That’s why the Times report, presumably after getting whacked for a wildly misleading opening sentence, changed it to: “Last year was the hottest on earth since record-keeping began in 1880.” Which is a whole lot less impressive.
Liam Neeson spoke out this week and said that he believes America has too many guns. And nearly all of them were used by Liam Neeson in “Taken 3.” ~ Seth Meyers
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Boston CBS Affiliate Angers Far Left Tools Who Blocked Highway
“Protesters React To Negative Backlash Following I-93 Sit-In,” Boston’s WBZ-TV reports, sending out a reporter to the homes of some of the protestors who blocked a major highway because Ferguson, maaaaan. Curiously, after disrupting commuters and potentially delaying ambulances, firemen, and other emergency responders, the protestors — who look to be straight out of central casting, including several who apart from their ultra-retro ’70s-era Bob Marley/Mumia-style dreads are living perfectly bourgeois lives in their upper middle class parents’ homes and condos — aren’t happy about a journalist showing up to knock on their doors.
Branco cartoon from Legal Insurrection http://legalinsurrection.com/
Charlie Hebdo Editor: When Our Cover Is Blurred, “You Blur Our Democracy, Secularism And Freedom”
CHUCK TODD: I’m just curious of your reaction. Many news organizations, including our own, have not shown your cover completely. Either blurred out. And it’s a decisions we made editorially. No government told us to do anything. But it was a decision we made. And every news organization is making their own decision. What is your reaction to our decision and others who have chosen not to show your cover?
GERARD BIARD: Listen, we cannot blame newspapers that already suffer much difficulty in getting published and distributed in totalitarian regimes for not publishing a cartoon which could cost them, at best jail, and at worst death. On the other hand, I am quite critical of newspapers which are published in democratic countries.
This cartoon is not just a little figure, a little Mohammed drawn by Luz. It’s a symbol. It’s the symbol of freedom of speech, of freedom of [conscience], of democracy, and secularism. It is this symbol that these newspapers refuse to publish, this is what they must understand. When they refuse to publish this cartoon, when they blur it out, when they decline to publish it, they blur out democracy, secularism, freedom of [conscience], and they insult the citizenship.
CHUCK TODD: Do you feel like you’re a part of this war right now, this war that’s taking place in the Western world between some radical Islamists? Do you feel like you’ve been drawn into this war?
GERARD BIARD: We do not kill anyone. We should stop conflating the murderers and the victims. We must stop declaring that those who write and draw are “provocateurs,” that they are throwing gas on the fire. We must not place thinkers and artists in the same category as murderers. We are not warriors. We only defend one thing: Freedom, our freedom, secularism, freedom of conscience and democracy.
I would say that the Charlie Hebdo editor, Gerard Biard, put Todd quote nicely in his place. On the side of censorship by the terrorists. Well done Monsieur Biard!
Sniper Brushes Off Michael Moore Attack: ‘A Lot of My Friends Died’ for His Freedom of Speech
The Last Stuff:
Intelligence Tests for Liberals
American Sniper has lit up the box office over the weekend, with packed theaters having to turn away moviegoers. Selma, not so much. The total box office for American Sniper may well top $100 million by the end of the weekend.
And guess who really really hates the success of this movie? Liberals. Like Guardian columnist Lindy West: “The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer. Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a hero?”
Here’s another intelligence test for liberals: a study from the Solar Foundation that finds that there are now as many solar power jobs in the U.S. as there are coal jobs. Great news, right? Perhaps if you’re an economically illiterate liberal it is. Let’s see: coal produces 39 percent of America’s electricity, while solar power produces less than 1 percent at best. If solar really requires the same amount of workers to produce so little energy compared to coal, it’s obviously a really inefficient energy source. No wonder it costs so much more.
Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
No Room for Parody
I was sound asleep when the phone rang and so I cannot be absolutely sure the conversation was not a dream, but it seemed real enough.
“Hello,” the caller began. “My name is Mr. Mensch, I am president of the Parodists of the World, professional comedy writers, and we want to engage you in a suit against the administration for tortious interference with our livelihood.”
“What exactly are you alleging, I mean specifics?” I responded.
He then launched into a litany of grievances against the administration which the Parodists claimed had made it impossible for them to continue making a living.
“First, our country sent no one to the important anti-terrorism demonstration in Paris, and then there’s Valerie Jarrett calling the march against the slaughter of innocents in Paris a ‘Parade’, as if this were some sort of celebration.‘ Certainly We Would Have Loved To Participate In The Parade,” But We “Got The Substance Right”’.” She said and then proceeded to claim that Holder couldn’t attend because he was in a very important terrorism conference at the time, forgetting that we knew everyone else at the conference made it to the march except Holder. So at the time of the march he was meeting with himself, it seems.”
“Well, that was silly, “I agreed. “And?” I waited for the next item.
“Then our secretary of state, John Kerry, whose entire life has been fashioned around his self-imagined superior diplomatic skills and international affairs expertise, shows up speaking execrable high school level French, accompanied by an aging ex-druggie who sings to the grieving French ‘You’ve Got a Friend’”
“I have to agree that was preposterous and really embarrassing. One wag suggested the French ought to respond by having Carly Simon sing, ‘You’re so Vain’ to the President and his Secretary of State. ‘Send in the Clowns’ comes to mind.”
“It’s all of a piece you know. It’s cutting substantially into our employment prospects.
Quote of the day:
Hillary Clinton’s Charlie Hebdo Problem
“In the days since the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the response from American politicians has ranged from pathetic to parodic,” John McCormack writes at the Weekly Standard:
Through his press secretary, President Obama expressed regret on Monday that neither he nor any other high-ranking American official joined 44 world leaders who marched alongside millions in Paris last weekend. Then on Friday, in an effort to make amends, Secretary of State John Kerry brought James Taylor to Paris to sing “You’ve Got a Friend.”
The response from Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and likely 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, hasn’t been any better. Clinton has remained silent about the Charle Hebdo massacre since it occurred on January 7.
Clinton’s spokesman Nick Merrill confirmed in an email to THE WEEKLY STANDARD that the former secretary of state has not publicly commented on the attack, but Merrill declined to give any particular reason for Clinton’s silence. (She did manage to find the time Friday afternoon, however, to condemn Republicans in Congress for “[a]ttacking financial reform.”)
What seems most likely is that Clinton has remained silent in response to the Charlie Hebdo massacre in order to avoid scrutiny of her own failure to defend free speech in the face of Islamist violence.
As McCormack notes, Hillary was one of numerous Obama operatives who blamed Benghazi on a hapless YouTube video maker, whom the administration promptly had jailed. Concurrently, Hillary pushed the “video did it” theme at Dover Air Force Base, as the remains of the Americans killed by al-Qeada were returned to US soil on September 14th of 2012:
But in addition to her role in the Benghazi cover-up, Hillary Clinton’s highlight reel is filled with anti-free speech moments, not the least of which was her show-stopping “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” soundbite in 1998. About which, Ann Coulter wrote in May of 2001:
The conservatives — primarily writers at The American Spectator — had a devilish plan to investigate Bill Clinton’s venality, corruption and crimes as governor of Arkansas. At the conclusion of their little scheme, the Spectator intended to publish the fruits of their conspiracy as widely as possible.
This is a highly unusual strategy for a criminal conspiracy. Typically, conspiracies are marked by hiding evidence, losing billing records and developing amnesia — pretty much everything the Clintons did. Rarely do criminal conspiracies plot to write magazine articles about their dirty business.
Though you wouldn’t know it from the behavior of the mainstream media, it is not, strictly speaking, against the law to publish articles critical of Democratic presidents. And it is not against the law to associate with individuals reputed to be conservatives engaged in journalism. (In fact, it’s not even against the law to consort with known felons, like Bill Clinton, or convicted felons, like Webb Hubbell.)
Something to think about:
Republicans Should Hold Off on Iran Sanctions
Republicans should wait to enact new sanctions on Iran, both because President Obama is correct that it’s not worth rocking the boat at this point and because to do so would alleviate Obama of blame should his negotiations fail.
It’s very simple: Enact sanctions now and the minute talks collapse, Obama will blame Congress for what will mostly be his screwup – he’s on his third deadline – saying everything was going great and they were just about get a deal until Evil Republicans got in the way.
And Obama is right, new sanctions could in fact blow up the deal. I have little confidence in any agreement Obama might negotiate. But given how bad things could be were there a war, it’s worth seeing the process through.
Elizabeth Warren keeps pressure on Hillary Clinton and Democrats ahead of 2016
Sen. Elizabeth Warren has an explanation for the singular nature of her power.
“I’ll always be an outsider. That’s how I understand the world,” the Massachusetts Democrat said in an interview. “There’s a real benefit to being clear about this. I know why I’m here. I think about this every morning before I open my eyes, and I’m still thinking about it every night when I go to sleep.”
Being the target of that kind of focus can be an excruciating experience — the freshest case in point being investment banker Antonio Weiss, whom President Obama put forward last year as his nominee for Treasury undersecretary for domestic finance.
Initially seen as a highly credentialed and noncontroversial pick for a low-profile post, Weiss found himself up against a storm of opposition, led by Warren, who said he was yet another example of Wall Street cronyism within the Obama administration.
On Monday, Weiss wrote a letter to the president asking that his name be taken out of consideration.
Whenever I read about some Senator or other public official being “powerful” I can feel the hair on the back of my neck stand up. I don’t care if the person is from the left or the right. I don’t “like” them being too powerful. Bad things are often done by those with the best of intentions. I don’t think Elizabeth Warren is a phony, other than that whole Fauxcahontus b.s. She’s worse that a phony, she’s a true believer and as such she sees no other POV but her own. If you oppose her you are an enemy. And as for her “keeping” Hillary in line if it didn’t scare me that she had that power I would find it humorous that the “powerful” Clintons are being held in thrall by a relative newcomer.
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Anti-Israel CNN Reporter Jim Clancy Resigns
Last week we covered the story of CNN’s Jim Clancy, who embarrassed himself with a feeble Twitter attempt to tie the radical Islamists behind the Charlie Hebdo massacre to Hasbara (Israeli PR). Today, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports:
Veteran CNN anchor Jim Clancy stepped down on Friday, one week after a series of Twitter posts in which he mocked pro-Israel tweeters on a thread discussing the Charlie Hebdo massacre.
Neither CNN nor Jim Clancy gave a reason for his departure, which was reported by AdWeek. Clancy had worked at CNN for 34 years.
Apparently, at one point the Twitter backlash got so bad that Clancy took mouthing off to a whole new disgusting level:
Clancy later told the Twitter account for Human Rights News, “You and the Hasbara team need to pick on some cripple at the edge of the herd.”
Jay Ruderman, head of the Ruderman Family Foundation, which is dedicated to advocacy and inclusion for the disabled, demanded an apology from Clancy and CNN. Ruderman said the use of the term “cripple” was insensitive.
Whether it was a long-overdue retirement or a simple parting of the ways, Clancy’s exit from CNN is one thing for which we can fully thank some serious Twitter hasbara.
David Brooks on Charlie Hebdo: When It Comes to Free Speech “We Should Have Certain Social Standards”
Once again PBS, and David Brooks as well as Judy Woodruff misunderstand the whole “free speech” issue. Free Speech has nothing to do with “Social Standards”. If so, by my “Social Standards” there would never been another Kardashian on television ever again. Or any number of “Survival” episodes. But I don’t get, using free speech as a guideline to choose what other people choose to watch or see. I don’t have to watch and I don’t have to approve. I can be just a damn “offended’ as I want – that doesn’t abrogate freedom of expression for others. End of discussion. Just wonder why they bother to have a liberal on their panel when they have David Brooks. That said I haven’t watched a PBS “news” program in years. If it weren’t for programming like <strong>Downton Abbey</strong> I wouldn’t watch PBS at all.
BBC Mocks Admin’s James Taylor Outreach to France: ‘No Better Definition of Soft Power’
The Last Stuff:
Obama: Dem Senators Do What Donors Tell Them
At a closed-door meeting on Thursday, President Barack Obama suggested that some Democratic senators base their foreign policy positions on the preferences of their campaign donors.
Sen. Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) was livid at the president’s claim that his Democratic colleagues support increased sanctions on Iran as a way of appeasing their financial contributors, the New York Times reported:
The president said he understood the pressures that senators face from donors and others, but he urged the lawmakers to take the long view rather than make a move for short-term political gain, according to the senator. Mr. Menendez, who was seated at a table in front of the podium, stood up and said he took “personal offense.”
Another of those great Obama foot in mouth moments that the MSM will not report.
Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
Oscar Report: Al Sharpton Calls Me a Racist!
Maybe it’s actually a badge of honor — after all Sharpton himself makes Bull Connor  seem like Martin Luther King — but the Rev Al has called me a racist  because I am one of those (white!) Academy members who did not vote for Selma as an Oscar nominee. I cannot tell a lie. He’s right. Not only that, I did not vote for the movie for screenplay either, the only other category for which I can nominate, since I am in the writers branch.
Of course, it was a group accusation. Al didn’t come to my house or anything, not that I would have let him in. But I do acknowledge my vote publicly, although it’s a secret ballot taken online, known only to the Academy and fifty thousand North Korean hackers. On my behalf, I will say I only nominated three films (Birdman, Boyhood and The Imitation Game) instead of the permissible ten. I’m one of those elite snobs who thinks nominating ten films for best picture is the cinematic equivalent of grade inflation. (Also, I’m easily bored.)
Nevertheless, it was a bit depressing to wake up this morning to find myself accused of racism on the top of Drudge. I tried to tweet Matt the truth that I voted for Twelve Years a Slave last year — I thought maybe he’d put something up — but didn’t get an answer. So I’m stuck.
But I have bad news for Al. I’m not going to pay him one penny to get one of his pseudo-papal absolutions saying I’m not really a racist (even though I was in the civil rights movement and a financial backer of the Black Panthers, to my ever-lasting shame). He’s going to have pay his millions of back taxes by himself when the Republicans take the presidency, as people like him and the jihadists are making it likely they will.
And as for Chris Rock, who is also complaining about the white skin privilege  or whatever of the Oscar voting and general Hollywood behavior (mostly in excluding Chris Rock), I have news for him. Some years ago I wrote for and worked with his most famous predecessor in African-American comedy, a certain Richard Pryor. And Richard was wildly more talented than you, Chris. You see, some of us old white guys vote for talent and accomplishment, not skin color. I know that doesn’t fit in with your narrative or whatever you want to call it, but as anyone who has worked in Hollywood knows, it all comes down to the ol’ box office-arooney. Blame whoever you want, but Pryor got them into the theater in his time like nobody else around. Chris Rock doesn’t. End of story, whether you’re black, white or heliotrope.
So the new criteria is that you have to like a “Black” movie whether it’s any good or not, whether you like it or not, whether it defames someone as a racist who was not a racist, or not, or you are a racist. The list of things you cannot do or not do or be called a racist is so long, and so absurd by now, the sixth year of Al Sharpton’s presidency that I just can’t keep track. Perhaps that’s racist too. Who the hell knows?
Quote of the day:
Sometimes I lie awake at night and ask “Why me?”
Then a voice answers “Nothing personal, your name just happened to come up. ~ Charlie Brown
Don’t Do It, Mr. Romney
He’d have been a better president than Obama. That’s not nearly enough.
A conversation with a Republican governor who is a possible presidential aspirant:
I told him I’d been thinking about something and wanted his response. You can argue that a governor is a better presidential nominee than a senator because governors, unlike lawmakers, have to do something and can be judged by their performance, which is measurable. You can look at their terms and say they raised or cut taxes, which helped or hurt the economy. They reformed the prison system, or they failed to. They balanced the budget or they didn’t. They improved education or not. They succeeded or failed in creating a favorable business climate. There are numbers and statistics that can to some degree test their claims. They know domestic issues and can be judged on domestic issues.
But they know nothing about the world. They haven’t been filling their brain-space with foreign policy and foreign affairs the past 20 years; they’ve been filling their minds with the facts of Indiana or Louisiana or New Jersey.
And so when they go national, they farm out these key areas to the party’s foreign-policy eggheads. And they unknowingly become captured by this worldview or that, this tendency and attitude or that. And they don’t even know they’ve been captured, they’re not that sophisticated. They just think they handed the foreign-policy portfolio over to someone respectable who’s called a thinker. (The first thing the thinker usually shares is not a thought but political advice: “You have to sound strong!”)
Senators, on the other hand, can’t be judged by clear domestic measures. They don’t have to do anything but talk on TV. Their communications offices send out press releases on their latest bill, which goes nowhere because the Senate doesn’t really do anything anymore, it’s just a big talking machine. You can’t judge them by what they did on unemployment or schools or taxes because they haven’t done anything.
But on foreign affairs they actually know a few things, because foreign affairs is in their portfolio. They’re on the Foreign Relations or Armed Services committee, they’re on subcommittees dealing with serious international issues, they go on fact-finding trips to Iraq and Africa and Asia. They visit and to some degree witness the results of American action or inaction. They get a more worldly view. (Once a senator told me his life is an intellectual feast. He gets to meet with scientists, prime ministers, visionaries, historians, great men—he has access to everyone, being a senator. I thought jeesh, glad you’re having a good time on our dime. But I also thought, OK, he’s going to know some things by the time he’s done.)
Anyway, to the governor I said, in a world in which foreign affairs continue to be more important than ever, in a dangerous world with which we have ever more dealings, shouldn’t we be thinking about senators for the presidency, and not governors?
He listened closely, nodded, then shook his head. No, he said, governors still have the advantage. Why? Because foreign policy still comes down, always, to your gut, your instincts. And your instincts are sharpened by the kind of experience you get as a chief executive in a statehouse, which is constant negotiation with antagonists who have built-in power bases. You learn what works from success and failure with entrenched powers that can undo you, from unions to local pressure groups to unreliable allies. Being a governor is about handling real and discernible power. A governor can learn what a senator knows more easily than a senator can learn what a governor knows.
This will be one of the subtexts of the 2016 GOP presidential race.
Something to think about:
Suppose Islam Had a Holocaust and No One Noticed
While Western newspapers were debating whether or not to reprint the Mohammed cartoons, in Nigeria as many as 2,000 people were massacred by the Islamic State in Nigeria, also known as Boko Haram, in what is being called the deadliest attack by the Muslim group to date.
Survivors described the Islamic State setting up efficient killing teams and massacring everyone while shouting “Allahu Akbar”.
“For five kilometers (three miles), I kept stepping on dead bodies until I reached Malam Karanti village, which was also deserted and burnt,” one survivor said.
There’s a word for that. It’s genocide.
Not so much “noticed” as not reported. Guess to the MSM black lives don’t really matter all that much if Sharpton, Holder, Jackson and POTUS and the rest of the race baiters aren’t involved
Obama to Business: I Know How To Run Your Company Better Than You Do
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said today that President Obama knows how to run small businesses better than small business owners.
Asked what the White House message to small business owners who are concerned Obama’s proposed new mandatory paid sick leave policy could hurt their bottom line, Earnest replied, “I think the president would have a different view which is to say that this is good business and I think there are any number of examples I can site for you where businesses have chosen to put in place these policies and it’s served to reduce the turnover associated with their employees, but also increase their employees productivity.”
In his State of the Union next Tuesday, Obama will call on Congress to pass new legislation mandating that all employers give all employees seven paid sick days a year.
Also on Thursday, Obama also signed a Presidential Memoranda, directing all federal agencies to give federal workers six weeks of paid paternal leave for parents with a new child. Obama’s own Council of Economic Advisers estimates that this policy will cost taxpayers at least $250 million in just the first year.
Obama also will call on Congress to pass similar legislation forcing all American companies to offer the same six weeks of paid paternal leave, although the White House did not say how much money this would cost the nation’s employers.
Obama’s humble view of his own skills at running other people’s businesses is perfectly in line with his assessment of his political skills. Obama famously told his speechwriter Patrick Gaspard in 2008, “I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters. I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m gonna think I’m a better political director than my political director.”
The absurdities that dribble from the lips of Obama and his minions are so frequent and on such a range of subjects its difficult to even get outraged. This one, once again, highlights the giant ego stuffed inside a mediocre man.
Obama is not a humble man and that’s odd since there are so many reasons for him to be humble.
Branco cartoon from Legal Insurrection http://legalinsurrection.com/
Conservatives Battling Comcast Turn to Left-Wing Pressure Tactics
Activists target Comcast’s bottom line in campaigns against a perceived left-wing behemoth
by Lachlan Markay
As Comcast pursues an acquisition of competitor Time Warner, some conservatives are adopting corporate pressure tactics pioneered by the left designed to punish the cable giant for what they regard as its support for a liberal policy agenda.
Generally averse to targeting businesses over their political affiliations, conservatives are increasingly attempting to exact an economic toll on companies that they see as enablers of their political adversaries and the policies they favor.
A right-leaning super PAC called Conservative War Chest PAC is taking out a five-figure ad buy in five battleground states criticizing Comcast for its ownership of NBC and its liberal cable news arm MSNBC.
“Media giant Comcast-NBC Universal is becoming America’s most powerful and militant leftwing political force,” the two-minute ad states, rattling off a list of objectionable coverage and corporate decision making by Comcast’s media arm.
Conservative War Chest spokesman Mike Flynn criticized the proposed merger, which is currently awaiting approval by the Federal Communications Commission, in a statement accompanying the video.
“The last time Comcast needed a government favor we got Al Sharpton five nights a week,” Flynn wrote. “What will we get in exchange for a deal worth billions to [chairman and CEO] Brian Roberts and other owners of Comcast?”
Roberts is President Barack Obama’s golfing buddy and a high-dollar donor to his campaigns, and Comcast enjoys a wealth of political connections that observers expect will grease the federal bureaucratic wheels as it seeks approval for the merger.
In his statement, Flynn alleged “potential collusion between Comcast and the Obama Administration” in the former’s pursuit of FCC approval. He called on Republicans “to respond with full mobilization to halt a Comcast/Time-Warner merger.”
“Potential collusion between Comcast and the Obama Administration”, what a surprise. Not. Having 90% of media in their pocket isn’t enough for the Dems. Never chance that some truth, some facts just might seep into the public consciousness.
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Even Liberal Media Can’t Believe John Kerry Bringing James Taylor Apology to the French
In the kind of response that sounds like a joke — even to liberal journalists — Secretary of State John Kerry brought Seventies pop star James Taylor (now almost 67) to sing his old chestnut “You’ve Got a Friend’ to the French as a show of support after President Obama blew off the “historic” rally of world leaders last Sunday.
For the first time since 2007, the FDA Has approved a new device to treat obesity. The amazing breakthrough is called a vegetable. ~ Conan O’Brien
Dem Rep: Obama Right Not to Call Terrorists ‘Islamic Extremists’ Because It Would Anger Them
Oh right, let’s by all means not piss them off. Because if we’d just not call them names they would go home and quit killing people. Another airhead from California.
The Last Stuff:
Obama to Take Questions from Imbecilic YouTube Stars
President Obama will avoid the glare of harsh questioning and incur a grilling instead from inane stars of the YouTube BoobTube following his State of the Union speech.
It’s clear that Obama counts as one of his signature achievements the diminishment of the presidency, whether by smacking gum around at world leader summits, slow jamming the news with Jimmy Fallon, and so on. Being interviewed by people who post viral videos on YouTube advances this accomplishment another step.
From the Washingtoin Times:
Mr. Obama will meet with meet YouTube creators Bethany Mota, GloZell and Hank Green. None of the YouTube personalities appear to have any experience in the media world or in interviewing political officials, though each has millions of subscribers.
Ms. Mota, for example, has more than 8 million subscribers. Her last three YouTube postings involve tips on how to host a great party.
One of GloZell’s recent postings is titled, “My push-up bra will help me get my man.”
Maybe with her focus on her bra, Glozell has been staying a breast of the news and will have some good questions.
What a circus.
Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
Obama’s Next Foray: Paid Sick Leave
Ted Kennedy is gone and Iowa’s Tom Harkin retired from the Senate last year, but in their absence, President Obama on Thursday plans to echo their advocacy for paid sick leave, championed by Democratic stalwarts in Congress and by organized labor over many decades.
Previewing an element of his State of the Union address, the president will gather a roundtable of working women as a backdrop for his challenge to the Republican-controlled Congress to pass legislation even Democrats couldn’t muscle off Capitol Hill when they held the majorities. Obama will ask lawmakers to pass the Healthy Families Act, a long-stalled measure that would grant workers up to seven days of paid leave annually when they or family members have medical needs.
On Wednesday, Obama met privately at the White House with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, whose members support the legislation. Organized labor last year helped champion state and local paid sick leave initiatives adopted by Massachusetts voters, and by Oakland, Calif., and cities in New Jersey.
Three states – Connecticut, California and Massachusetts – now require earned sick leave. Obama plans to deploy a blend of executive action and bully pulpit cheerleading to encourage more states and cities to follow suit.
Democrats Patty Murray in the Senate and Rosa DeLauro in the House said Wednesday they will reintroduce the legislation this year, touting their measure as an economically crucial benefit for middle-class women and families, and an expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act, signed into law at the outset of President Clinton’s first term.
If the alliance between Obama (who is unlikely to see mandatory paid sick time enacted in Congress on his watch) and the Clintons on the subject appears to be unconscious, consider Hillary Clinton’s statement in Boston a few weeks ago:
“We need to get paid leave provisions on every state ballot by 2016 that we can possibly manage to do,” she said in December after congratulating Massachusetts voters for requiring businesses to grant employees paid sick time.
Oh joy, more stuff this country cannot afford to pay for. And if Patty Murray and Rosa DeLauro are involved it has to be something to hang around the neck of taxpayers. These two idiots are the kind of people you NEVER want to trust with your credit card. Lord knows how they spend on their own but they are certainly free spenders when someone else has to pay the bill.
Quote of the day:
“Have the courage to say no. Have the courage to face the truth. Do the right thing because it is right. These are the magic keys to living your life with integrity.” ~ W. Clement Stone
Scott Walker–Sleeper in 2016 GOP Presidential Race?
Among the vast number of Republicans considering a run for president, two candidates with the familiar last names of Bush and Romney are sucking up most of the attention in the early going.
And for now, that’s just fine by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a preacher’s son who is finding virtue in patience.
The early, visible and loud machinations of Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney and even New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie don’t seem to bother Walker. Recently re-elected to a second term—his third win in four years, considering his success in beating back a 2012 recall effort—Walker is making moves ahead of 2016, to be sure: he hired a top national strategist to run his campaign, with more senior staff hires coming soon, and is creating a political entity to allow him to raise money and travel. He is boning up with
regular policy briefings and is traveling to Iowa next week for an early GOP cattle call. But Walker’s approach is more tortoise than hare, steadiness over speed.
Walker isn’t vying to be the top contender in the Republican field—at least not yet. He’s carving out a spot now as Second Best, a candidate who can build consensus among voters seeking an alternative to the establishment or far right, who will be ready if and when a preferred candidate falters.
“He could be the No. 2 choice of a lot of people, and being No. 2 is not a bad place to be,” says a GOP strategist familiar with the field.
Something to think about:
Mitt Romney backlash intensifies
Conservatives argue he has too much baggage and the GOP needs a fresh face.
“Recycled.” Not the “new blood” the GOP needs. A man who “had his shot.” A “terrible candidate.”
A Republican backlash against Mitt Romney that had been simmering for days boiled over on Wednesday as conservatives across the GOP spectrum panned the prospect of another presidential bid by the former Massachusetts governor and two-time loser on the national stage.
Leading the anti-Romney charge was the voice of the GOP establishment wing, the Wall Street Journal editorial page. “The question the former Massachusetts Governor will have to answer,” the newspaper wrote, “is why he would be a better candidate than he was in 2012… The answer is not obvious.”
I don’t think he has “too much baggage”, other than the lies and smear by the left and their lapdog media. I just think his time has come and gone. And I definitely believe the GOP needs a new face. Obama may well have turned out to be a minus for the Dems but as a fresh face in 2008 he was a plus and gave them some enthusiasm. A Scott Walker or a Rand Paul could do the same for the GOP IMO. No more re-treads please. The establishment may now be anti-Romney because they are pro-Jeb Bush. I personally don’t want another Bush either. Enough.
Well, Mitt Romney apparently thinks what the country needs is Mitt Romney, and so he is, as White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest deadpanned Tuesday, “considering getting the band back together again.”
He’s calling his old donors and telling them to keep their mouths and their wallets shut, contacting former operatives and telling them he’s going operational, and generally signaling he’s about to inflict another campaign on us.
The White House has contempt for lots of people, but one can certainly excuse its contempt for Romney, who lost to Obama in 2012 even though the sitting president was presiding over a lousy economy, had jammed through Congress an unpopular signature policy – Obamacare – and was losing his grip on an increasingly disordered and violent world.
Romney, who lacks a seriousness about conservatism, can only claim that he’d somehow run the country better than anyone else, which makes little sense since he ran his general election campaign worse than anyone else. The Democrats beat him soundly by every measure – voter targeting, getting out the vote, use of social media, canvassing, and so forth. Sure, he’d bring more discipline to running the government than Obama, but that’s like saying your mother-in-law would be better company at breakfast than a puff adder. Of course she would.
I make no secret of the fact that Mitt Romney running again makes me nauseous. The take-away line from this piece that really hits home with me is: ” His claim that he’d somehow run the country better than anyone else, which makes little sense since he ran his general election campaign worse than anyone else”. No more re-treads! That is unless the GOP really wants 1/2 of those who would vote “against” a Democrat to just sit out the whole election in disgust.
What Romney Can Do
Mitt Romney got it on the chin in a well-written Wall Street Journal editorial Wednesday morning — “Romney Recycled.” I won’t rehash it all here, you can read it, but it comes down to this — oh, again??? (Rand Paul also took some shots at Romney, but he’d be better off keeping his eye on his father , the way things are going.)
The WSJ might have been a bit harsh but they were just expressing what everybody thinks. Even Mitt’s supporters harbor those worries. But I have a solution for Romney. He should throw caution to winds — BE THE PRESIDENT NOW (caps definitely mine — yes, I’m shouting)!!!
Why do I say that? Because America doesn’t have a real president at the moment and we are at war with radical Islam. ( I should add a “duh” in there.) The reactionary creep in the White House won’t even name it, let alone fight it. And we don’t have time to wait until 2017 to turn this around, as Jay Sekulow pointed out on Hannity. In a couple of months things could be spinning out of control, so many jihadists popping up in Europe, here, Australia, and everywhere else, we won’t know how to count them. And that’s not even including all the cyber war that’s going to be waged against us and already is.
Romney should put all the traditional election nonsense on the back burner, forget the fundraising and the tedious position papers on the various issues. That stuff can wait, if it’s even important. He should take the bully pulpit for himself now and tell America and the world what we should do about radical Islam. Nobody else is doing it and we’ve been fighting this undeclared war for 14 years. And the bad guys are ahead and growing It’s not just the major issue. It’s the only issue, if we don’t win. Who cares if we do or don’t have Obamacare, if we’re living under Shari’ah law?
And while he’s at it, Romney might state clearly that Israel is our ally and we’re behind her all the way. Oh and no matter how you feel about immigration, unless you’d like to see our shopping malls blown up, we have to secure our border — now!
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Obama Jokes Forbidden, but Boston Globe Can Joke About Killing Boehner
A rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask was denounced by everyone from the lieutenant governor on down who demanded that the people responsible be held accountable.
The rodeo clown got actual death threats. He was banned for life. The man who hired him was forced to resign. The Kansas City Star suggested that the Secret Service should investigate the event.
The NAACP demanded a federal probe.
When a parade float featuring an outhouse as the Obama presidential library happened, Democrats claimed that it crossed the line and was unacceptable.
None of these were assassination threats, even though the left had openly trafficked in Bush assassination fantasies before Obama. But even crude jokes like these were considered off limits.
The double standard still exists because assassination jokes about Republicans in the form of the Boston Globe’s Boston.com column by one of its assistant editors are just fine.
The story, written by Boston.com associate editor Victor Paul Alvarez and posted on the website’s “Top News” section last evening, was headlined “Would Anyone Have Noticed if Bartender Succeeded in Poisoning John Boehner?”
“The question is: Would anyone have noticed? Stories about Boehner’s drinking have circulated for years. His drinking inspired a blog called DrunkBoehner, and in 2010 he brought booze back to Washington,” the story read. “Had he been poisoned as planned, perhaps his pickled liver could have filtered out the toxins.”
“It’s hate speech,” wrote one commenter. “If a commenter said this about Obama, the FBI would be at their door.”
There was also backlash on Twitter.
“Imagine a plot involving the assassination of Obama getting this sort of treatment from the media,” wrote one tweeter.
Not only would this be considered ‘un-sayable’ about Obama, but even far milder jokes result in threats of Federal probes. People get fired over them.
Whatever you may think of Boehner, the problem here is a double standard. Obama jokes have to be as mild as possible. But you can casually joke about killing Bush or Boehner or Cruz because that’s just good comedy.
That’s not free speech. That’s the ISIS version of free speech in which they’re allowed to post severed heads on Twitter, but no one is allowed to mock Mohammed.
It’s time for the media outlets pretending to defend free speech in France to admit that they don’t believe in at home.
New #IRSscandal e-mails reveal a very paranoid Lois Lerner
Since 2013, we have been investigating charges that the IRS deliberately targeted and discriminated against conservative organizations that applied for tax-exempt status. Now, watchdog group Judicial Watch has uncovered even more evidence that the Washington office had something to hide during the initial Congressional investigations.
Today’s document release by Judicial Watch includes evidence that then-IRS official Lois Lerner strongly objected to and attempted to prevent a visit by Tax Exempt and Government Entities (TE/GE) Division Deputy Director Joseph H. Grant to the embattled Cincinnati office, which spent time “smack dab in the middle” of Congressional investigations into the IRS targeting of conservatives.
From Judicial Watch:
The newly released documents include an intense chain of emails in which Lerner pleads with Grant, who was a supervisor to her, to “put this [Grant’s planned visit to Cincinnati] off please” at the very time during which both the internal IRS watchdog and Congress were investigating whether the IRS had been inappropriately targeting conservative groups in the months leading up to the 2012 elections. The chain begins with an email from Lerner to Grant, apparently written in response to her learning of the Deputy Director’s planned visit to the Cincinnati office:
• April 4, 2012 – 4:41 PM – Lois Lerner to Joseph Grant:
We just gor an very extensive information request from Imraan [Imraan Khakoo, TE/GE official] –sure looks like op review material. I’m especially concerned that information about pipeline is being asked about … Add to that the fact tha cincinnati is smack dab in the middle of the c4 Congressional inqueries and is about to get a request from TIGTA on all of that, this is NOT a good time to be asking them for anything or to be talking to them about issue in their work. Everyone is stressed to the max and at their wits end, so can we put this off please? [Typos in originals]
• April 4, 2012 – 5:17 PM – Joseph Grant to Lois Lerner:
It is a visit, not an OP review … I am also interested in the questions Imraan sent to them. Some answers should be readily at hand. Others certainly won’t be … The questions just serve as a framework for a broader conversation about how things are going and what is on our respective minds.
• April 4, 2012 – 5:26 PM – Lois Lerner to Joseph Grant:
I get that–but timing would be bad if we have to go to Cincy now. So, I will assume we can go over this here as I get the information I’ve already asked for? Thanks.
Breathe, Lois, breathe!
Anderson Cooper: Biden Probably Watching Gilmore Girls When He Should Have Been at Paris Rally
I hope no one holds their breath until I post something from Letterman again. To the best of my recollection this is a first for me. And it in no way diminishes my revulsion towards him. I would say the sooner he leaves television the better except that idiot Steven Colbert is replacing him. A scum bag being replace by a dirt bag. Vive La Différence! Not!
Boehner Slams Obama: Reads 22 Instances Obama Said He Couldn’t Legally Do Executive Amnesty
The Last Stuff:
Rep. Duffy Schools Costello With CNN’s Poll on Amnesty, Her Own Words
Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
The Problem with Romney Nostalgia
In 2007, when President Obama announced that he was running for president, he did it in Springfield, Ill., to highlight his supposed connection to Abraham Lincoln. He brought in his biggest fans to cheer him on. When George W. Bush announced in 1999, he did it in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The Bush campaign, likewise, brought in a big crowd of supporters. John Kerry announced in Patriot’s Point, S.C., in 2003, amid a sea of American flags, war veterans and an aircraft carrier in the background.
And where was Mitt Romney when he announced on Friday that he was thinking of another run in 2016? He, too, was talking to his base: about 30 deep-pocketed donors in New York City. “Tell your friends,” he said.
You know how superhero flicks often have an extra scene after the credits to hint at what the sequel will be like? Well, this would be the perfect end to the movie “Romney 2012.”
The problem is that “Romney for president” is now an art house film thinking it’s a blockbuster franchise and that there’s a huge market for another sequel. There’s not.
Don’t get me wrong. I wanted him to win in 2012, and I think voters made a serious mistake not following my advice. I’ve met the man, and I know several of his friends and former staffers. He inspires great loyalty in them, and that speaks well of him. He’s an honorable, capable and decent person.
But I know lots of honorable, capable and decent people. I don’t want them to run for president either.
Romney’s support outside his personal network of donors is largely made up of people who lament that he lost the last time around. That — and name recognition — is probably the biggest explanation for why he polls so well. The last poll to include him among the GOP contenders (Fox News, Dec. 16), had him leading the field at 19 percent, with Jeb Bush second at 10 percent.
But the only poll you need to know about was the exit poll of voters in 2012, which asked, “Which one of these four candidate qualities mattered most in deciding how you voted for president?”
Romney won three out of four. On “shares my values,” Romney won 55 to 42. He won on “is a strong leader” 61 to 38. He took “has a vision for the future” 54 to 45.
But in the category “cares about people like me,” Romney lost by a staggering 63 points (81 to 18).
I like Mitt Romney. I voted for Mitt Romney and thought he would make a good president. But his time has come and gone. I won’t vote for him or Jeb Bush. If the GOP can do no better, or move forward then they will not get my vote. I will vote down ticket, and I could never vote for a Democrat, but I will not vote for either of these two men. And I suspect that a great many people of a conservative nature will just stay home and that will allow the Dems to not only win the White House but to win in state legislatures and Governor’s Mansions too. Funny how the Dems that beg for Tea Party and other conservative Republican and Independents vote so often show their contempt for same when they have the majority. Explains why they loose the majority so often in spite of losing to slimy Dems that most of the country don’t even like.
Quote of the day:
“These illustrations suggest four general maxims[…].
The first is: remember that your motives are not always as altruistic as they seem to yourself.
The second is: don’t over-estimate your own merits.
The third is: don’t expect others to take as much interest in you as you do yourself.
And the fourth is: don’t imagine that most people give enough thought to you to have any special desire to persecute you.” ~Bertrand Russell,
White-Out: Where Democrats Lost the House
In 2009, 76 Democrats represented primarily white working-class congressional districts. Just 15 of them are still in the House today.
Republicans have surged to their largest majority in the House of Representatives since before the Great Depression by blunting the Democratic advantage in districts being reshaped by growing racial diversity and consolidating a decisive hold over the seats that are not.
Compared with 2009 and 2010, when Democrats last controlled the House, the Republican majority that takes office this week has essentially held its ground in districts where minorities exceed their share of the national population, a Next America analysis has found. Aided by their control of redistricting after the 2010 census, Republicans over the past three elections have simultaneously established an overwhelming 3-1 advantage in districts where whites exceed their national presence, the analysis shows. Those white-leaning districts split between the parties almost equally during the 111th Congress, in 2009-10.
The GOP dominance in these predominantly white working-class districts underscores the structural challenge facing Democrats: While the party has repeatedly captured the White House despite big deficits among the working-class white voters who once anchored its electoral coalition, these results show how difficult it will be to recapture the House without improving on that performance. “The question is: Are we at rock bottom here?” says Tom Bonier, CEO of the Democratic voter targeting firm TargetSmart Communications.
Something to think about:
The Importance of Blasphemy
As a deeply religious person, I don’t like blasphemy. My religion and its holy books are sacred to me. And I understand perfectly well why a Muslim would not care for a cartoon of a naked Mohammed.
But the debates over freedom of speech and the sensitivity of religious feelings also miss the point.
For non-Muslims, the right to blasphemy is also the right to believe. While we may think of blasphemy in terms of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, each religion is also mutually blasphemous.
Muslims argue that the West should “respect prophets” by outlawing insults to Mohammed and a panoply of prophets that it gathered from Judaism and Christianity. But Islam considers the Christian view of Jesus to be blasphemous and Christianity considers Islam’s view of Jesus equally blasphemous.
If we were to truly prosecute blasphemy, the legal system would have to pick a side between the two religions and either prosecute Christians for blaspheming against Islam or Muslims for blaspheming against Christianity. And indeed in Muslim countries, Christians are frequently accused of blasphemy.
Malaysia’s blasphemy laws were used to ban Christians from employing the word “Allah” for god and to seize children’s books depicting Noah and Moses. The reason for seizing the children’s books was the same as the reason for the attack on Charlie Hebdo; both featured cartoons of prophets.
While Charlie Hebdo pushed the outer limits of blasphemy, every religion that is not Islam, and even various alternative flavors of Islam, is also blasphemous relative to Islam.
It isn’t only secularist cartoonists who blaspheme against Islam. “Mohammed seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure,” St. Thomas Aquinas wrote. Maimonides called him a madman.
To Bill Donohue, there may be a world of difference between Charlie Hebdo and Aquinas, but not to Islam.
In a multi-religious society in which every religion has its own variant theological streams, the right to blaspheme is also the right to believe. Liberal theology can contrive interchangeable beliefs which do not contradict or claim special knowledge over any other religion. But traditionalist faiths are exclusive.
Everyone’s religion is someone else’s blasphemy. If we forget that, we need only look to Saudi Arabia, where no other religion is allowed, as a reminder.
I have never seen the need to blaspheme against another’s religion. Let them believe what they believe so long as they allow me the same tolerance. But, and this is a big but, I find the blasphemy of “worshiping” some tawdry politician, from any party at any time, the ultimate blasphemy and it disgusts me. I “like” some politicians. I even respect a few. But worship? How can anyone be that stupid?
Settle for Hillary: Elizabeth Warren not “going” to run for President
Remember when Obama said he wasn’t going to run? Sleep well, Hillary, sleep well.
Until now, it’s been purely present tense.
“I am not running for President.”
The tea leaf readers were undeterred, insisting that Warren had not ruled out running in the future.
BREAKING: A possible twist.
Someone asked Warren if she is “going to run” for President, and she said “No.”
Granted, the words “going to run” did not come from her mouth, but were built into the question, but she did say “No.”
Obama Gains a New Watchdog
From Governor Scott Walker’s State of the State Speech
Gov. Scott Walker zings Christie: ‘Had plenty of fun hugging owners in the stands at Lambeau Field!’
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker managed to deliver his state of the state speech in just 28 minutes Tuesday night but managed to cover a lot of ground. As did New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie this afternoon, Walker managed to work in some shots at Washington, D.C., as well as at fellow governors who are shaping up to be contenders in 2016.
Here’s the speech:
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Bogus ‘1 in 3 Men Would Commit Rape’ Study Discredits Itself in Opening Sentence, Goes Downhill From There
The feminist-leftist fever swamp is apparently thrilled to have learned of a North Dakota University “study” purporting to show that almost one in 3 college men would commit rape “if nobody would ever know and there wouldn’t be any consequences.”
I’ll get to the study’s specifics shortly, but first want to note that the work, published in December, automatically discredited itself in its body’s opening paragraph: This “one in five” statistic was already discredited months before “Denying Rape but Endorsing Forceful Intercourse: Exploring Differences Among Responders” was published.
In June, columnist George Will demonstrated that the statistic could not possibly be true (bolds are mine throughout this post):
The administration’s crucial and contradictory statistics are validated the usual way, by official repetition; Joe Biden has been heard from. The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.
When did facts or honesty ever interest a liberal?
Muslim Mayor to Fellow Muslims: If You Don’t Like ‘Freedoms’ of the West, ‘Pack Your Bags and F*** Off’
Well Hallelujah – a decent Muslim with guts. I had begun to think none existed. First al Sisi and now this brave man. Let’s hope their courage will inspire other decent Muslims.
MSNBC Stunned By White House Refusal to Label Paris Attack as Islamic Extremism
The Last Stuff:
Islamic State says publication of new cartoon was an ‘extremely stupid’ act