Posts Tagged ‘liberal media’

Presidential Double Standards: Bush and Obama Given Different Treatment on Same Issues

November 26, 09

Hypocrisy Meter from theblogprof.

When Bush golfed while two wars were ongoing and the deficit was dropping, the media excoriated him for his apparent carefree attitude – including Michael Moore, who did a trailer for Fahrenheit 9/11 based on it. (Bush responded by quitting the game for the remainder of his time in office.)

When Obama golfs ten times more frequently (update: now 60 times, equaling two whole months on the green), while two wars, a recession, trillion dollar debt and terrorist attacks are ongoing, the media praise him for his ‘strategy’ and analyse how it takes times away from his basketball – and even try and claim he’s taken more flak than Bush did for vacationing during a major terror attempt. Why, they even praise him for his vacations!

When hawkish anti-terror policies were under Bush’s watch, they were loudly protested and condemned by Michael Moore, Code Pink and so on. When the same are continued under Obama’s watch? Silence.

When Bush’s deficit was high, CNN focused on the record breaking spending. When Obama’s deficit is many times higher, CNN focuses on how it boosts jobs.

When Bush the elder had 6.9% GDP growth rate, it was not considered a recovery. When Obama has 20% real unemployment, it’s a turnaround!

When Bush had 2.7% GDP growth, NYT called it a ‘gross national letdown’. With Obama’s 2.0% GDP growth, NYT calls it ‘steady improvement’.

When Katrina happened, the media went wild with baseless claims of sniper attacks, cannibalism and how George Bush failed to act – including Kanye West ranting that “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.”.

When five states suffered intense freezing cold, Obama enjoyed a turned up thermostat and wagyu beef. Nary a peep from the media.

When liberals portrayed Bush and Condoleeza Rice (a black woman) as apes, it was lauded as creative freedom of speech. When Obama is portrayed similarly, it is racist hate and must be banned.

The same goes for witch doctors and the Joker.

And apparently, Bush is the only one who can be compared to Hitler or Nazis. If you carry protest signs denouncing Nazi-like Dem policies, you are slandered as Nazi-supporting.

When people repeatedly called for Bush’s death, the media covered it ‘objectively’. When one sign saying ‘Bury Obamacare with Kennedy’ was spotted, the media went crazy over this ‘death threat’ against Obama.

Above from here.

When Bush exercised, the media called it ‘creepy’ and say it wastes time better spent leading. When Obama does it, they swoon and gush how it helps him do his job.

The same scavengers who savaged Bush over his vacations and golfing now suck up like remoras at Obama’s many more vacations and golf outings during the worst ‘recovery’ ever!

When the Bushs held a big dinner during a mild recession, they were lambasted for their ‘extravagance’. When the Obamas do it during 10.2% unemployment and 1.75 trillion debt, the media gush with teenage infatuation and avoid mention of the recession while praising the festivities – all 28 parties in December alone.

When Bush had a relatively low key inauguration in 2004 during a mild downturn, the media criticized his spending. When Obama had his massively grand inauguration during the ‘worst recession sinc the Great Depression’ which he was elected to reverse… Well, take a wild guess.

With Bush, the media’s job is to bash the President. With Obama, they think “above the world, he’s sort of God.”

With Bush, it’s okay to hurl serious and unfounded allegations at him. With Obama, ‘it is unfair and, frankly, political to take pot shots at the president‘.

When Rush Limbaugh recently said he hopes Obama’s policies fail, he is attacked – by the same man who hoped Bush would fail just minutes before 9/11.

When Rush Limbaugh calls Obama’s administration a ‘regime’, it is deemed unacceptable. When the liberal media did it 6000+ times to the Bush administration, it apparently goes unnoticed.

When Bush enters, the media remain seated. When Obama enters, they stand for him and then timidly sit down quietly while he speaks.

When Bush holds an Inaugaral Ceremony, he is lambasted in the media. When Obama does the same, the same media praises him.

When Bush led a broad coalition to invade Iraq to oust a mass murdering, UN-flaunting, rape and tprture using, chemical weapons flinging Saddam, the media excoriated him as a warmonger. When Obama attacked Gadaffi – who merely sent his army to fight with armed rebels – with a coalition half the size (update: one QUARTER the size!), he’s acting in the interest of peace. Where are the protests? See here for protests against the previous administration by contrast.

Ecen ESPN covers for Obama by editing out his gross misspelling of a team name as if nothing happened.

No wonder we call them the Obamedia.

And what about the Dem supermajority Congress?

When hard-working, high-achieving black man Clarence Thomas and Latino Miguel Estrada were nominated by Bush, the Democrats dragged them through every hurdle and racial insult possible. When ‘wise Latina’ Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by Obama, suddenly she was the ‘first’ Latin American nominee and her opponents must be racists.

When Joe Wilson interrupted Obama’s speech shouting “You lie!”, he was criticized by the Dems. But guess who interrupted Bush back in 2006?

When people criticize Obama while the conflict in Afghanistan is ongoing, it ‘only serve the goals of al-Qaeda’. Tell that to Obama during Bush’s time of conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Now that Afghanistan is on Obama’s watch – crickets.

When Bush liberated Iraq with 40 nations backing him, he was a war criminal waging illegal invasions. When Obama wants to go to Syria with one… ONE ally…

When Bush had Gitmo, liberals screamed daily. When Obama has places far worse than Gitmo, crickets.

Plenty of Bush-bashing books have gotten favourable reviews in the media. But when someone submits a book detailing Obama’s ties to radicals, the media go rabid on him.

Compare joblessness headlines in the media for the two. Bush’s 5.7% unemployment:

The President’s Jobless Recovery
Frustrated Job Seekers Cause Jobless Rate To Drop
Economy Adds Few New Jobs
Low Jobless Rate Reflects Lost Hope
US Jobless Rate Drops But For Wrong Reasons

vs Obama’s much worse 8.6% unemployment:

Unemployment Rate Drops To 8.6% Raising Hopes
Jobless Rate Drop Could Boost Obama
Obama Gets Economic Indicator He Can Crow About
Good News On Job Front For Obama
Jobless Rate Lowest In 2.5 Years

And again here.

When Bush broke election spending records and opted out of publicly-financed campaign spending, the media excoriated him. Guess how much noise was made when Obama did the same, only moreso?

And guess who criticized Bush’s deficit, saying: ‘Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.… And now has himself achieved a 1.75 trillion deficit?

When there is a massive oil leak, you can bet Bush’s oil connections would be all over the news… Not a peep about Obama’s.

When Bush struggled through 9/11, Katrina, two wars and financial collapse, the media didn’t sympathize with him – in fact, they piled on him all the more. Guess what their attitude to vacationing golfer Obama is, when he has played twice as much golf in 2 years as Bush did in 8?

When Bush couldn’t think of any mistakes he had made, the media ripped into him. Guess what the response is when Obama can’t think of any?

When Bush spoke in his usual style the media often did not ‘clean up’ his words or grammar to make it correct. When Obama does the same and the media doesn’t ‘clean up’ his words, they must be racist.

When oil prices skyrocket, the media loudly complains about it under Bush but ignores it entirely under Obama. Barely 1% of reports about the high prices even mention Obama’s drilling moratorium.

When Bush enacts some surveillance, he’s a despot. When Obama enacts far, unprecedentedly more… It’s more complex.

Via Moonbattery:

When Bush calmly spent 7 minutes finishing his reading of The Pet Goat to schoolkids after being told about 9/11, the media constantly mocked him. When Obama was told of Osama bin Laden’s confirmed location, he postponed his decision by SIXTEEN HOURS and the media spins it as decisive action.

Apparently it’s forbidden to question Obama’s grades and acceptance into tertiary education, but not Bush’s.

And imagine if Bush had spent millions blocking the release of his birth cert, would the media scold him or the seekers – as it targets the latter in Obama’s case?

The gist of the above with some specific examples in this excellent, tongue-in-cheek article at NRO, via Moonbattery.

And Laura Bush dares to point out the double standards.

See also this piece comparing and contrasting Obama and Bush and explaining why America – and even liberals! – miss Bush. Contains several references to the double standard criticisms leveled at them.

BONUS: see how the media reported on Reagan vs Obama during a recession:

No one blinked when reporters heckled Reagan and both Bushes… But when a reporter interrupts Obama briefly? RACIST!

Via Liberal Logic 101:

When Bush invoked ‘executive privilege’, Obama and his cronies blasted Bush. When Obama does it to defend Eric Holder whose acts cause the loss of hundreds of lives? Cronies defend it – even though that means Obama is the one behind the murderous operation! Including taking the contempt charge to the grand jury.

When Obama adds 200,000 fewer jobs than Bush, he’s doing a great job not like that failure!

The Federalist:

Anywhere, anywhere, but a discussion of Obama’s handling of national security as it relates to Islamist terrorists. Can you even imagine such journalistic avoidance under the Bush administration? Particularly, seven long years into the Bush administration?

From Washington Examiner:

Where Bush was asked every day if he regretted invading Iraq, Obama is never asked if he thinks leaving Iraq had something to do with the chaos engulfing the region, or the vulnerability of citizens here and in Europe to Islamic State-inspired attacks.

And while Bush was held responsible for every last casualty that occurred anywhere while he held office, Obama is absolved from responsibility for the massacres, rapes and enslavement of innocents that have followed his numerous foreign policy blunders — given a pass as the victim of forces he did not enable and disasters he didn’t create.

Pajamas Media:

A few hours before delivering that State of the Union, President Obama met with rapper Kendrick Lamar. Obama announced that Lamar’s hit “How Much a Dollar Cost” was his favorite song of 2015. The song comes from the album To Pimp a Butterfly; the album cover shows a crowd of young African-American men massed in front of the White House. In celebratory fashion, all are gripping champagne bottles and hundred-dollar bills; in front of them lies the corpse of a white judge, with two Xs drawn over his closed eyes. So why wouldn’t the president’s advisors at least have advised him that such a gratuitous White House sanction might be incongruous with a visual message of racial hatred? Was Obama seeking cultural authenticity, of the sort he seeks by wearing a T-shirt, with his baseball cap on backwards and thumb up?

To play the old “what if” game that is necessary in the bewildering age of Obama: what if President George W. Bush had invited to the White House a controversial country Western singer, known for using the f- and n- words liberally in his music and celebrating attacks on Bureau of Land Management officers? What if Bush had also declared that the singer’s hit song—perhaps a celebration of the Cliven Bundy protest—was the president’s favorite in 2008, from an album whose grotesque cover had a crowd of NASCAR-looking, white redneck youth bunched up with an African-American official dead at their feet? And what if the next day, Bush told the nation that he regretted not being able to bring the country together? Would there have been media calls for Bush’s impeachment?


Also this tipped by kesava:

If George W. Bush had doubled the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had criticized a state law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot head?

If George W. Bush joined the country of Mexico and sued a state in the United States to force that state to continue to allow illegal immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who’s side he was on?

If George W. Bush had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one company had an accident, would you have agreed?

If George W. Bush had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87,000 American workers unemployed, would you support him?

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a TelePrompTer installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced YOUR retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and
given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had stated that there were 57 states in the United States, would you have said that he is clueless.

If George W. Bush would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in Texas, would you have thought he was a self important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

When Hurricane Katrina hit, the media blamed Bush. When Hurricane Sandy hit, the media praises Obama for doing basically nothing (even though a Dem Governor calls it worse than Katrina). What a blatant and disgusting difference.

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had misspelled the word “advice” would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoes as proof of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?

If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had created the position of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George Bush would have taken a vacation involving 40 planes and 3000 people to the Taj Mahal in India, costing almost a Billion Dollars, would you have approved?

So, tell me again: what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can’t think of anything?

Don’t worry. He’s done all this in 15 months — so you’ll now have two years to come up with an answer.

Every statement in this email is factual and directly attributable to Barrack Hussein Obama, a self-important, conceited, egotistical jerk.

Every bumble is a matter of record and completely verifiable.

Name That Party! MSM Almost Always Omits Mention Democrat Party Affiliation of Convicted Politicians

December 10, 08

So, lib trolls… Tell me again how there is no such thing as Liberal Media Bias, and how the only biased media is FOX News.

Here’s a very, very partial list of examples of the MSM obscuring the Democrat affiliation of big sleazy crooks (while taking pains to make sure readers know when a Republican is caught).

The motive? Plain and simple to see – gradually and relentlessly expose the public to wrongdoings of the Republicans while covering up the more serious and frequent wrongdoings by Democrats, thus moulding public perception against the Republicans.

Journalistic integrity? Objectivity and fairness? Pah!

(Readers can also do their own fun searches for “Name That Party”!)

(Or play Name That Party with Lawhawk!)

(Malkin and Moonbattery have a list of recent major Democratic corruption/dishnoesty scandals. And if you haven’t heard of them before… That is exactly my point!)

Related: The media labeled mainstream Justice Alito “conservative” ten times more than they have labeled Kagan a “liberal”.

Another recent case Ann Coulter points out:

According to Nexis, there have been more than 300 news stories reporting on the Bell scandal. Guess how many mentioned the party affiliation of the corrupt government bureaucrats?

One. Yes, just one. Now guess if the government officials were Democrats or Republicans? Yes, that is correct.Congratulations — you’ve qualified for our bonus round!

The one newspaper to cough up party affiliations, The Orange County Register, admitted that the corrupt officials were all Democrats only in response to reader complaints about the peculiar omission.

Lots of news stories on the scandal in Bell used the word “Democrat” or “Democratic.” But that was only to say that the DEMOCRATIC attorney general of California, Jerry Brown, who is running on the DEMOCRATIC ticket for governor, is investigating the Bell officials’ salaries.

See also ruminations by AoSHQ here.

AFTER Getting Obama Elected, Liberal Media Admits – Media Was Biased in Favour of Obama

November 9, 08

This should be an interesting factoid for the various commentors who seriously don’t believe there is any such thing as a huge liberal media bias in favour of Obama, over at here.


Here’s something we’ve been saying all along, but the Obama supporters who voted him in adamantly refused to be educated on, thanks to the Obamaworshiping media. Then again, it turns out they’re pretty much an educated but ignorant, un-informed, selectively deafblind bunch.

Via Gateway Pundit and Michelle Malkin, from How Obama Got Elected:

On November 4th, 2008, millions of Americans were shocked that a man of Barack Obama’s limited experience, extreme liberal positions and radical political alliances could be elected President of the United States. For many of these Americans, the explanation was rather simple… the news media, completely enamored with Obama, simply refused to do their job.

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet…..

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!


Obama appeared on HALF the Times magazine covers this year! No bias?


Via Gateway Pundit, from The Washington Post:

The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts…

The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces (58) about McCain than there were about Obama (32), and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain.

Stories and photos about Obama in the news pages outnumbered those devoted to McCain. Post reporters, photographers and editors — like most of the national news media — found the candidacy of Obama, the first African American major-party nominee, more newsworthy and historic. Journalists love the new; McCain, 25 years older than Obama, was already well known and had more scars from his longer career in politics.

But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager.

…One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama’s running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission. However, I do not agree with those readers who thought The Post did only hatchet jobs on her. There were several good stories on her, the best on page 1 by Sally Jenkins on how Palin grew up in Alaska.

As Gateway Pundit points out, journalists love the new… But they loved to trash Palin, while gushing adoringly over Obama.

Via Doug Ross, from the Philadelphia Daily News:

…there were enough reporters in 2008 who were willing to shed the cloak of contrived objectivity – to acknowledge the once unprintable fact that one side was lying more than other.

I myself would call it truth-telling, and honest journalism, but now we have some who want to call it “media bias.” That’s fine with me, but understand this.

“Media bias” may have just saved America .

And from Washington Post again, via Malkin, a lot of links at the original:

Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled “Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story.” Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama’s campaign.

Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue — “Obama’s American Dream” — filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.

Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit? Yes, they are.

All this bias has taken its toll… Even the Internet is more trusted than traditional media now! Same link has link to Time magazine admitting that 2008’s election media coverage was the most biased yet.

Diversity Lane: Anti-Obama Biased MSM Helping McCain

October 16, 08


Kudos to Zack Rawsthorne of Diversity Lane for sending this one to me for bloggage. See more of his cartoons featured at this post.

He’s being sarcastic with content of the cartoon, and I’m being sarcastic with the title of this post, of course. The Mainstream Media is obviously and heavily leaning towards Obama in particular and the Left in general.

See Obamedia Loves Obama… And I Mean Red Hot, Steaming Wet Lurve!!! for proof of the media Obama leanings.

See the 113 pluses cases of Blatant Anti-Palin Bias in the Liberal Media for proof of how anti-Right the MSM is.

And see a flashback of the MSM’s liberal leaning lies at Mainstream Media Dishonesty – 101 Liberal Media Lies.

Yet, the reality-deluded Moonbats can still convince themselves that there is no Liberal Media… Despite the fact that the MSM is itself populated almost entirely by liberals (except for FOX).

Liberals Are Being Emotionally Manipulated Into Siding With Terrorists

March 12, 08

An excellent article about manipulation of liebral emotions to influence them to surrender their own country to the enemy.


Excerpts from full article at National Summary (emphasis and extra links are mine):

Psyoping Liberals
Our Enemies are Winning the IO War
By D.W.

All of our enemies know that the Western liberal is the weakest link in the chain of our civilizational strength. They know that the liberal is inclined to Marxism and is opposed to a strong religious belief system.

They know that pleasure and indulgence is the liberal’s highest virtue since they lack a strong belief system.

They also know that liberals are easily influenced and control by emotions and that they are less willing to engage in difficult struggles that require pain and sacrifice. Liberals respond exceptionally well to imagery that influences emotions.

Do you think that I am wrong?

Look at the liberals in Europe, especially Spain who surrendered after one terrorist attack.

Look at the Clinton Administration who pulled out of Somalia after one battle where 18 soldiers were killed but was otherwise a butt whooping by the United States.

Look at the liberal response to Afghanistan where a noisy but ineffectual Taliban offensive is being spinned as a strategic defeat for NATO.

Of course Vietnam was the best example of the ability of an enemy to manipulate the American liberal into surrendering. The Tet Offensive was a colossal disaster for the North Vietnamese and led to the absolute decimation of the Vietcong. Yet liberals reacting emotionally to imagery of the battle concluded that the war was lost.

Just how are our enemies conducting Information Operations against the American liberal to compel an American defeat?

Well the exploitation of Western media is the most obvious answer. Liberals tend to accept biased and emotionally charged reporting from the mainstream press uncritically. This is because the media is reporting in line with their strongly held beliefs and mental schematics, reinforcing what they already believe. America is bad and because America is the strongest capitalist nation, it therefore harms all the innocent people of the world out of greed.

One of the essential rules of propaganda is that people automatically resist hostile messages from foreigners but readily listen to messages from co-nationalists. Any good propagandist will use internal actors to deliver his message for him or he will hide the source of the propaganda to make it appear local.

This is easy to do when foreign entities channel money or messages through influential groups like the ones George Soros operates. The Soviets were notorious for their financial support of Western liberal and communist organizations that were sympathetic to their position.

The Chinese gave generous contributions to the Clinton campaign through legitimate surrogates. And campaign contributions that aren’t regulated are an easy way to manipulate a democracy.

Lobbyists acting on behalf of foreign entities are another venue because these guys have direct access to politicians. Well known Washington figures like Madeline Albright make fortunes lobbying on behalf of foreigners.

Our enemy is exceptionally clever and maybe understands America better than we think he does. Why did they attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?

They were symbols of the dominance of the American system and of global capitalism.  Liberals also tend to believe that these are symbols of American wickedness. Ward Churchill is openly saying what most of the American left is terrified to say; that the terrorists were right to attack these targets.

Why didn’t Al-Qaeda attack gay bars, abortion clinics, porno shops, and strip bars? Because these are things that liberals believe in. Attacks on these establishments would cause liberals to react emotionally and call for the destruction of Islam.

Al-Qaeda rails about the corruption of the Western way of life because it embraces unrestrained pleasure in defiance of God’s law. In their minds, gay bars and porno videos are the ultimate symbols of American wretchedness and moral degeneracy.

So why not attack symbols of American corruption directly? So why didn’t the Islamist attack gay bars?

Perhaps they understood the weakness of American liberals. All they have to do to gain this understanding is to watch Western television and read Western literature.

Two Recommended Christmas/New Year Articles

January 2, 08

First, a serious piece by Jerry Bowyer from Townhall. Excerpts:

AD or ADD?

2008 years from what? Most people still know (I hope) what event initiates our calendar. Few people know why. That’s because we have, long ago, stopped paying attention to history.

One of the reasons that it’s so hard to read and understand ancient history books is that they lack a unified chronology. Herodotus, Plutarch, etc., never say ‘this happened in the year X’. Instead they give you a lot of ‘in the tenth year of the reign of emperor such and such’, ‘or in the year of the 50th Olympiad’ etc.

There is, ancient man would say, no such thing as history. Everywhere there is chaos, except where our emperor/king/sheikh/chief/president-for-life reigns, and when he dies, the clock must be re-set. The King is dead, we shout, long live the king, and the calendar goes back to year one of the new reign.

When a new emperor comes, the clock is reset: It is year one. On it goes until the emperor dies and his reign ends. Then a new emperor and a new calendar.

But what if we had an emperor who will never (again) die? Then each generation will share the same calendar. We won’t date events by ‘the 10th year of the emperor Augustus’ or the 8th year of the reign of President Bush, or the 50th year of the glorious leader Fidel.

We’ll calculate them by the 2008th year of the reign of our lord and savior, Jesus Christ. We’ll abbreviate them with AD (anno domini) using the Latin of the alleged city of eternal conquest.


And a fun satire mocking all the irreligious icons liberals hold dear, by The People’s Cube:

Christmas in History: First Media Reports of Nativity Story



Other Christmas posts:

Nostalgic Christmas Cartoons With a Christian Message

12 Days of Christmas Spoofs And Christmas Joke Songs


Be Thankful For Jesus’ Incredible Self-Control (Christmas Related Post)

Proof That Iran Loves Jews! As Far as Lie-Beral Media Stealing Pics From The People’s Cube Counts

December 31, 07

It’s more Lie-beral media dishonesty, laziness, incompetence, downright lack of intelligence, and assumption that all their readers are as lousy as the Lie-beral media types, as a pro-Iranian news piece unquestionably proves that Iran loves it Jews…

With a photoshopped image unknowingly and uncreditedly sourced from The People’s Cube.

Screen capture of the self-embarassing news site (which has changed the image to a different, but probably just as stolen and fake, pic):


Compare with screenshot from the original satire piece by The People’s Cube:



Read all about it (with heavy, heavy doses of satire and mockery) at The People’s Cube Pwns Iranian Propaganda!

With step-by-step video presentation of the fakery at Youtube here.

And also mocked to death (penalty for homosexuals and women and apostates and everyone else in Iran) at Gateway Pundit, Snapped Shot and Solomonia among others.

See the following for more liberal media diregard and disdain for the that supposedly sacrosanct thing called truthful journalism:

Mainstream Media Dishonesty – 101 Liberal Media Lies (with mega-list of anti-Israel media lies at this comment)

All Your Fakes Are Belong to Us

Flat Fatima will Make Your News Stories Become The Truth!

Malaysiakini: Are US News Agencies Biased Against Palestine?

Compare with allegedly Conservative-biased Fox: FOX is the Most Balanced U.S. Media

See also Iran Prez Ahmadinejad Sez: “There Are No Homosexuals in Iran” (And Why There Ain’t Any)

And for the reports of 40 Iranian Jews secretly fleeing the country that the morono-news site tried to debunk, you can check the following:

Prairie Pundit: Christian Zionist Pay For Iranian Jews

Google search

Mainstream Media Dishonesty – 101 Liberal Media Lies

October 10, 07

If you’re here from Debate Politics message board, SEE ALSO: FOX is the Most Balanced U.S. Media (according to non-profit, politically neutral, non-partisan George Mason University Centre for Media and Public Affairs)

More and more, I am convinced that the liberal mainstream media is NOT to be trusted. They selectively report events, twist and nuance words, and even downright falsify information to promote their own pet agendas.

Just look at Malaysiakini: Are US News Agencies Biased Against Palestine? for my exegesis on various stupidities and intentional misreportings regarding the Middle East conflict, All Your Fakes Are Belong to Us, Flat Fatima will Make Your News Stories Become The Truth! which mock liberal media lies, and Media Mythbusters Wiki which links to a growing collection of dishonest journalism.

Now I’ve learned from The Jawa Report and Moonbattery of a list of mainstream media lies over the years. Not just mistakes, un-confirmed rumours or biased reporting – but outright hoaxes, plagiarism, intentionally faked and acted-out scenes, doctored tests, and utter incompetence/laziness/low-intelligence/intentional malice in discerning fact from fantastic comic book fiction.

No wonder less than HALF of Americans surveyed trust the mainstream media anymore!

A selection of the list follows, paraphrased from the original by myself. View full article, with citations and links, at American Thinker – Media Dishonesty Matters. My own comments and links in [bolded square brackets] after each selection.

4. AFP/Yahoo News (2007). Fell for hoax/lie. Ran a pictureof an elderly Iraqi woman holding up two bullet, wiht the caption claiming that those bullets were fired by coalition forces and hit her house. But she was holding up unfired cartridges, which could only have ‘hit her house’ if they were thrown at it by hand. [Michelle Malkin: MSM propaganda watch: Ready, aim…not fired!, also where this pic comes from. Wouldn’t bullets that punch through a house be at least a bit flattened or damaged?]


9. Associated Press (AP) (2005). Fell for hoax and phony photo. Ran a story with photo about a soldier held hostage in Iraq, assault rifle to his head. The photo turned out to be that of an action figure doll, and the gun was similarly a toy. [Wikipedia: John Adam hoax. You will not believe how fake the ‘real soldier held hostage’ looks. And double that for how people were so easily fooled by it!]


13. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, The New Republic (2007). Lying. TNR hired this U.S. Army private and husband of one of its own staff to write first-hand accounts from Iraq. One of his accounts, supposedly demonstrating the dehumanizing effects of the Iraq war on him and fellow soldiers, occurred in Kuwait before Beauchamp even entered Iraq. Other parts of his writing are likely false, and if not, constitute military crimes on his part. [Wikipedia: Scott Thomas Beauchamp. Hot Air covers Beauchamp’s talk with his disappointed editors. I’ll illustrate this with a cartoon from Day by Day.]


19. The Boston Globe (2004). Fake photos, fake story. The Boston Globe published pictures alleging U.S. troops raped Iraqi women. The pictures turned out to be commercially available pornography. [WorldNetDaily: Boston Globe publishes bogus GI rape pictures (taken from pornographic website).]

24. Jimmy Carter, former U.S. President, Nobel Peace Prize winner and author of Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid. Lying, plagiarism, bias. His book was so full of errors, including doctored maps, that his chief collaborator Kenneth Stein of Emory University resigned his position with the Carter Center. Carter’s book was condemned by Alan Dershowitz and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, among others. [National Review for negative review, Wikipedia for both sides, and Investor’s Business Daily special report series on Jimmy Carter. Cartoon from Cox and Forkum. You can see more cartoons at here, here and here.]


25. CBS 60 Minutes, the “Runaway Audi” (1989). Fake footage/manufactured evidence. Drilled a hole in an Audi transmission and pumped in air at high pressure. Viewers didn’t see the drill or the pump – just the doctored car blasting off like a rocket. The story starred a mother who had run over her six-year-old son. On the air, she insisted that she had had her foot on the brake. When her $48 million claim came to court, the investigating police officer and witnesses at the scene testified that after the accident she had admitted that her foot had slipped off the brake. The jury found no defect in the car.

43. Walter Duranty, The New York Times (1930s), Pulitzer Prize winner. Lying. Cisited Stalin’s Russia and wrote that nothing untoward was happening there – even though 10 million people were dying in the Ukraine famine. His writings matched Russian propaganda almost exactly. His Pulitzer Prize still stands. [Wikipedia: Walter Duranty.]

47. James Forlong, Sky News (2003). Fake story, fake footage. He presented footage from a missile test as actual combat in Iraq. He subsequently committed suicide.

57. Adnan Hajj, Reuters (2006). Doctored photos. He doctored dozens of pictures of the 2006 Lebanon-Israel conflict. Reuters later withdrew all 920 of his photos from sale. (See more on middle east “fauxtography”, at Zombietime: The Reuters Photo Scandal – A Taxonomy of Fraud.) [The Jawa Report: August 06, 2006
Another Fake Reuters Photo from Lebanon
 who broke the story. Animated gif below at
All Your Fakes Are Belong to Us, link to video there too.]


62. Michael Isikoff, Newsweek (2005). False/unsubstantiated reporting. The Newsweek article claimed that a U.S. interrogator at a Guantanamo Bay had flushed a Koran down the toilet. “Anti-U.S. fanatics seized on the report to stir up riots that have left more than a dozen people dead in Pakistan and Afghanistan.” There is no evidence such a thing ever happened. [Wikipedia: Qur’an Desecration Controversy of 2005. Protestors riot and attack people, causing much destruction and murdering dozens of lives worldwide… Because of anger over a hoax. How justified. See also Politically Correct Bathroom Etiquette in America for a comparison with how other belief systems have it. Cartoon below from Cox and Forkum, with more news links.]


69. Jesse MacBeth, anti-war star (2006). Lying/fabricating. Stoked opposition to the Iraq war when he spoke out about atrocities he committed as a U.S. Army Ranger serving as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He claimed to have killed more than 200 people, many at close range, some as they prayed in a mosque. None of MacBeth’s claims was true. [Wikipedia: Jesse Macbeth, see also Michelle Malkin: Rush Limbaugh, phony soldiers, and the Left’s desperate need for its own “Betray Us” moment for a list of more phony soldiers.]

74. National Geographic and paleontologists, (1999). Fell for hoax. Announced the discovery of Archaeoraptor at a press conference at the National Geographic Society. At the time, they called it a missing link between birds and dinosaurs. Later, the specimen was found to be a made-in-China fake combining the tail of a dinosaur with the body of a bird. [Cartoon from, which also has full info on topic. Archaeopteryx was also claimed as the ‘missing link between dinosaurs and birds’ previous to this. See also Piltdown man for the most famous example of evolutionists jumping at purported ‘proof’ of evolution in the fossil record, and Tunneling Meatball Mole (one of my earliest posts) for why they need it so much.]


75. NBC, Waiting to Explode segment on Dateline NBC (1992). Faking evidence and footage. NBC demonstrated the explosive danger of GM trucks’ gas tanks by showing one actually explode in what appeared to be normal circumstances. In fact, NBC consultants set off explosive miniature rockets beneath the truck split seconds before the crash!

76. New Orleans Times-Picayune and many other newspapers reported rumors, hoaxes and lies related to hurricane Katrina. The NOTP came clean and critiqued itself and others who “… described inflated body counts, unverified ‘rapes’, and unconfirmed sniper attacks as among examples of ‘scores of myths about the dome and Convention Center treated as fact by evacuees, the media and even some of New Orleans’ top officials’.” Also see Popular Mechanics for a refutation of Katrina myths.

78. NPR, CNN and others on the “Jenin massacre” (2002). Lying. CNN reported: “There’s almost a massacre now taking place in Jenin. Helicopter gun ships are throwing missiles at one square kilometer packed with almost 15,000 people in a refugee camp . . . This is a war crime, clear war crime.” However, the actual “death toll was 56 Palestinians, the majority of them combatants, and 23 Israeli soldiers.”

81. Reuters, Lebanon coverage (2006). Fake/staged photos. A burning tire dump as the scene of an Israeli bombing, Photoshopped bomb smoke, etc. during the Lebanon-Israel conflict. [Michelle Malkin: “Fauxtography” alert: NYTimes and USNews; plus Time and Reuters’ Issam Kobeisi.]


82. Reuters Russia’s North Pole coverage (2007). More fake photos/footage. “Reuters has been forced to admit that footage it released last week purportedly showing Russian submersibles on the seabed of the North Pole actually came from the movie Titanic.” The mistake was caught by a 13-year-old Finnish boy. [Wikipedia: Arktika 2007.]

96. Washington Post (and others), “Plastic Turkey” story (2003). Lying or false reporting. The Post and a host of other media, including the New York Times, reported that President Bush was photographed with a plastic turkey rather than a real one when he visited troops in Iraq on Thanksgiving. The story was used to paint the White House as a public relations spin machine, with policy just as fake as the turkey. But in fact, the turkey was real. Multiple newspapers issued corrections.

99. Duff Wilson and Jonathan D. Glater, New York Times Duke Lacrosse reporting (2006). Flawed reporting. The NYT stories generally painted the prosecution as strong and the defense weak. As it turned out, it was the exact oppostie. The charges were dropped, the defendants completely vindicated and apologized to, and prosecutor Nifong was himself put in jail. [See Ann Coulter: The End if Nifong for more on the lying manipulator Nifong – a man who would smear and send innocent boys to hardcore prison for his own standing. Also see Ann Coulter: Stripper Lide… White Boys Fried for the facts of the Duke Lacrosse case and Ann Coulter: The Stripper Has No Clothes for the biased incompetence of the prosecution.]




Above from All Your Fakes Are Belong to Us.



More Than 23,000 Terrorists Killed

%d bloggers like this: