Thursday, 15 January 2009
RACHEL MADDOW - PLAYING TO THE ANGRY HARD-LEFT
It's not easy being an angry hard-left "journalist" on an angry, hard-left
cable news network that has built a following based on angry, hard-left
news. You have to find enough of it every day to fill the hour you are
on. And sometimes there isn't an hour's worth.
So what do you do?
In Rachel Maddow's case, you just make some up.
I've posted blogs which called her on this before, and I'm doing so again
today. Here is a piece from Jack Coleman of www.newsbusters.org, showing how dishonest
Maddow was in her phony attack on President Bush two days ago:
Maddow Falsely Claims Bush
Whined He 'Inherited This Recession'
Ever compete against ballplayers who cheat?
You know the type -- the runner who tags early on
a sacrifice fly. The pitcher who scuffs the ball for better break in his curve.
The base-stealer out by a mile who spikes the shortstop.
In the ballgame of political punditry, Rachel
Maddow is that kind of player. And apparently it matters little to Maddow that
her team, with Obama as its captain, is way ahead in the score.
Most recent example: Maddow twice making a
demonstrably false claim about remarks by President Bush in his final press
conference on Monday. In previewing a segment during her MSNBC cable show that
night, Maddow said this --
Today, still-President Bush insisted the federal
response to Hurricane Katrina wasn't slow and that he inherited the
You caught it too, right? "The" recession.
OK, so it's one word, no big deal, I told myself upon first hearing Maddow make
this claim. Then she did it again several minutes later, and, to mix metaphors,
the foul was more flagrant --
Coming up next, you do realize that President
Bush inherited this recession and that he's been unfairly accused for the
current economic freefall, right? That's what he said today and that's
why we're doing a Lame Duck Watch special report
When it came time to air a clip of Bush's remarks,
Maddow avoided repeating her earlier claim, since to do so risked making its
falsity immediately apparent. Here's what Bush actually said --
In terms of the economy, look, I inherited a
recession, I'm ending on a recession. In the meantime, there were 52
months of uninterrupted job growth.
Contrary to what Maddow wants her viewers to
believe, Bush never said he inherited "the recession" or "this recession." That
implies Bush blames his predecessor, Bill Clinton, for our current economic woes
while also believing we've suffered recession for the entirety of his
presidency. Suffice it to say, Bush believes neither, though the First Amendment
certainly allows Maddow to claim otherwise, regardless of accuracy.
Adding insult to revisionism, Maddow said this
about the initial recession cited by Bush --
The first was a mild economic downturn which
started in March '01. And you know, back in 2001, March came after
January, which is when Bush took office. So it makes it kind of hard to call
that one something he inherited.
What's actually "kind of hard" is what Maddow does
-- imply that Bush, who served in neither the presidential administration before
his, nor the Congress, had anything to do with creating the "mild economic
downturn" that began weeks after he took office.
Sigh ... another missed bag in Maddow's dash to
Seeing how Maddow is so fond of citing
specifically when recessions start and end, let's look at the one that came
before the 2000 recession. According to the National Bureau of
Economic Research, it began July 1990 and
ended in March 1991, while George H. W. Bush was president -- and six months
before Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton announced his candidacy for
You'll recall Clinton's signature issue in that
campaign -- "It's the Economy, Stupid" -- even though the recession ended more
than 18 months before the '92 election. A more honest slogan would have been,
"It's How the Economy is Perceived, Stupid" -- as Maddow would readily
See how easy it is to fill that hour? Take a statement, change it a bit
to alter the meaning, and bingo! You've got your red meat for
Who cares if it's honest or not. Won't the angry hard-left viewers be
happy? That's all that counts, isn't it?
One other thing: Since Ms. Maddow is highly
educated, this probably was an accidental oversight, but she somehow neglected
to take into account that the USA's budget starts in the fourth quarter of
In other words, President Bush's first budget did not start
in January of 2001. The first day of President Bush's first budget
was October 1, 2001 -- after the recession, and three weeks after 9/11 decimated
If you measure the economic performance of President Bush's adminstration
starting when the economy was from his administration, we had a remarkable run of success until the
financial meltdown of a few months ago. And the
blame for our meltdown is hardly exclusive to President Bush.
That's a tad different than Ms. Maddow would lead you to believe, isn't
"NEUTRAL" MEDIA UPDATE
From Michael Calderone, writing for www.politico.com:
Obama at the
Obama arrived at the Washington Post headquarters
today, as covered in priceless pool report by the New York Times Helene
After three and a half hours at
his transition office, PEOTUS obama took another 6 minute ride through
washington, arriving at 157 pm at the nondescript soviet-style building at
15th and L street that houses the washington post.
people--Post reporters perhaps?--awaited PEOTUS's arrival, cheering and
bobbing their coffee cups.
Pool is holding in a van outside,
while Mr obama does his washington post interview, and will exercise enormous
restraint by ending report before saying what really thinks about this turn of
Is Cooper bitter about the Times still not getting an interview?
There you have it. Our wonderful "neutral" media in action.
And this ends the blog entry. What can I tell
you that 100 people, most of them probably Washington Post employees (why else would they be there at
that moment) cheering for Barack Obama
OF THE UN, ISRAEL AND GAZA'S CHILDREN
As I write this, the UN is railing and raging about an Israeli bomb that
damaged its headquarters in Gaza City, leaving several people wounded (no
The fact that hamas puts the UN building at risk by attacking Israel from Gaza
City, thus forcing Israel to hit these areas, is of no consequence
at all to UN Secretary General ban ki-moron and his merry men.
It's just Jews under atack, so who gives a
But I wonder if the UN can take time out from its regularly scheduled
denunciations of Israel to comment on the fact that - as befits "people" of
their stature - hamas is intentionally booby-trapping its own schools, where
Gazan mothers send their children.
Watch the video below and see for yourself:
January 12, 2009...01:30
Video: Hamas Booby Trapped School, 11 Jan 2009,
Have you heard a word from ban ki-moron and his merry men
at the UN about this? Or about the schools, and mosques being used as
ammunition dumps and launching areas for attacks against Israel?
Oh, wait; I forgot. It's just Jews. And Israeli Jews at that.
Who cares about Israel's agricultural miracle in the desert, the
irrigation technology it innovated which created the agricultural miracle, the
world-class technology sector, the world-class medical facilities and the
astounding number of scientific advances which emanate from Israel? What
good does that do for the world?
Remember; in the words of a French diplomat just a few years ago, it's
just "a shitty little country". He was right, of course.
How much better off we would all be if Israel disappeared and was replaced
with the Gazan way of life.
Heaven on earth, wouldn't you say?
THE WORLD'S GREATEST WEDDING DANCE
If this isn't the world's greatest wedding dance, I'd love to
see what is.
It comes to us from a New Jersey web site: www.parkwayreststop.com , and is
dated November 13, 2008. I don't know if that is the wedding date or just
the date this video was put on the site. It doesn't matter.
I hope you enjoy this as much as I do:
UPDATE: I have been warned that
there is a "virus video" going around -- not
a wedding video but something relating to the
middle east. Please note that I have McAfee Security and it found nothing wrong
with the wedding video in this blog. But please also note that I never
can guarantee the safety of what you put on your computer. Not from this
blog site or anywhere else. Make sure you are
BILL MOYERS AND DAVID DUKE
Edward Olshaker has written a
brilliant piece for www.americanthinker.com, in which he
makes the case that bill moyers of PBS and david duke of nazi/White supremacist
"fame", have virtually identical positions on Jews and Israel.
If you think that sounds far-fetched, I suggest you try the following test
from Mr. Olshaker's article:
remarks are from commentaries on the Israel-Hamas war by Moyers and by
the world's best-known Nazi/Klansman, David Duke. Can you tell which is which?
(The answers appear at the end.)
1) All you have
to do is the look at the resolution recently passed by the House of
Representatives (HRES 34 EH) with only 5 dissenting votes.... It condemns
Hamas and the people of Gaza as terrorists but has no mention of the decades
long Israeli occupation and strangulation of the West Bank and
2) America has
officially chosen sides. We supply Israel with money, F-16s, winks and tacit
3) [People killed
in Gaza] are the casualties and victims of Israel's decision to silence the
rockets from Hamas terrorists by waging war on an entire
4) For over 40
years Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza, imprisoned and walled off
5) Israel misses
no opportunity to humiliate the Palestinians with checkpoints, concrete walls,
routine insults, and the onslaught in Gaza.
6) By the
blockades of food and medicine, by the checkpoints and by the mass bombing and
resulting slaughter, Israel is endeavoring to make life so horrible for the
Palestinians, that they simply leave Palestine ...
7) By killing
indiscriminately -- the elderly, kids, entire families by destroying schools
and hospitals -- Israel did exactly what terrorists do...
8) ...Israel has
bombed and terrorized the people of the region for years, and ...will not
recognize the government the people of Gaza voted for in free
9) ...one man's
terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression.
10) It is time
for the United States and all EU nations to completely cease all economic and
military aid to Israel.
11) As if
boasting of their might, Israel defense forces even put up video of the
explosions on YouTube for all the world to see. A Norwegian doctor there tells
CBS, "It's like Dante's Inferno. They are bombing one and a half million
people in a cage."
12) Our political
elites show neither independence nor courage by challenging the consensus that
Israel can do no wrong. Although one recent poll found Democratic voters
overwhelmingly oppose the Israeli offensive by a 24-point margin, Democratic
Party leaders in Congress nonetheless march in lockstep to the hardliners in
Israel and the White House. Rarely does our mainstream media depart from the
monotonous monologue of the party line.
13) A tremendous
array of media personal attacks and political sabotage both in influence and
monetary will descend on the hapless [politician who opposes Israel] The same
thing is true in media...
14) But those who
raise questions are accused by a prominent reform rabbi of being "morally
15) Go to the
Book of Deuteronomy. When the ancient Israelites entered Canaan their leaders
urged violence against its inhabitants. The very Moses who had brought down
the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" now proclaimed, "You must destroy
completely all the places where the nations have served their gods. You must
tear down their altars, smash their pillars, cut down their sacred poles, set
fire to the carved images of their gods, and wipe out their name from that
place"....So God-soaked violence became genetically
Moyers: 2,3,5,7,9,11,12,14,15; David Duke: 1,4,6,8,10,13)
How did you do? If
it was difficult to tell the difference, we might have found PBS a replacement
for Moyers when he retires.
Unbelievable. But there it is.
Make of it what you will.
I"m sorry for referring to soon-to-be Vice President Biden as a
jackass. But, based on Paul Mirengoff's piece at www.powerlineblog.com today, I
have to. Because only a jackass would bray out something like this:
January 15, 2009 Posted by Paul at 9:59 AM
Joe Biden has been talking about his favorite
topic -- Joe Biden. In particular, he's been attempting to talk his way past the
widespread view that he, Joe Biden, marks a return to the days of the irrelevant
vice president. Talkin' Joe himself has contributed to that perception by
insisting that he will not be like Dick Cheney.
A more astute vice president-elect would have
little trouble distinguishing himself from Cheney without casting doubt on his
own relevance. The problem with Cheney, from a liberal perspective, should not
be that he was the foremost of Bush advisors. Cheney was, after all, the only
advisor who faced the national electorate. Rather the problem should be that
Cheney's advice (again from a liberal perspective) was bad.
But selecting intelligently among portions of the
liberal narrative has never been Biden's strong suit. In any event, Biden surely
recognizes that Obama will not allow him to become the foremost presidential
advisor. Hence, attacking Cheney's role becomes a convenient excuse for the fact
that Biden will be on the sidelines.
To compensate, Biden touts his experience. He
claims he will bring more to the job than any of his predecessors, except
possibly Lyndon Johnson. Insisting that "I know as much or more than Cheney,"
Biden concludes, "I'm the most experienced vice president since anybody."
He's also the first vice president "since anybody"
pathetic enough to feel compelled to defend himself in this fashion, much less
to claim that he knows as much or more as his predecessor. Moreover, Biden's
experience -- decades in the Senate -- plainly does not compare to that of
Cheney, who had been White House chief of staff, Secretary of Defense, head of a
major corportation, and influential member of the House.
Joe Biden has found his role in the Obama
administration. It will be the self-referential one of defending his importance.
Biden is the best suited vice president to play this role since anybody.
Is there any limit to Joe Biden's ego? Or to the level of
insecurity it would take to make comments like this?
Get ready, folks. Four years of Jackass Joe. It just might be
enough to make you wish for Dick Cheney again.
UPDATE ON ISRAEL'S BOMBING OF UN COMPOUND IN GAZA
Middle East | Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 8:39:54
The media and the United Nations are
screaming again today about an IDF attack on a UN compound; Ehud Olmert
apparently apologized to the UN immediately after the incident, but now the IDF
says Hamas was using the compound as
a firing station.
Gunshots and an anti-tank missile were fired at
IDF troops near the UN compound that was attacked by the IDF on Thursday,
senior defense official told The Jerusalem Post.
Accordng to the officials, the IDF responded by
firing artillery shells at the location of the gunmen and that the shells
caused damage to the UN installations. At least three people were wounded and
the building was set on fire.
The IDFs Gaza Coordination and Liaison
Administration coordinated the arrival of five fire trucks to the compound to
help put out the flames.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, in Israel
Thursday to promote a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, expressed strong
protest and outrage at the reported shelling of the UN compound.
Ban also demanded an investigation into the
shelling, and said Defense Minister Ehud Barak had told him it was a grave
Palestinians reported that an IDF tank shell
also struck one of the wings of a Gaza hospital midday Thursday. Witnesses
said part of the structure was on fire. The army said that the building was
also being used by Hamas men who were firing on IDF
UPDATE at 1/15/09 11:54:08
MSNBC reports that the IDF came under
fire with anti-tank weapons and machine guns from inside the UN compound.
Israel says it does not target U.N. buildings or
personnel. But the Israeli officer said troops opened fire after militants
inside the compound shot anti-tank weapons and machine guns. He said the
troops used 155 mm artillery shells.
hamas would do that?
JON STEWART: HAMAS HERO?
For a period of time, one of my sons tried to get me to watch Jon Stewart's
"Daily Show" on Comedy Central. He assured me that I'd love its
political humor. In truth, I did watch a couple of times and found the
material clever and well written. But Stewart's reliably leftward
positions and smirky, snarky delivery ruined it for me.
Now it turns out that, in an effort to go beyond the smirky/snarky boundaries
he has already forged, Stewart has decided to take pot shots at Israel during
its action in Gaza. And,because of this, he has become something of a
That's right, hamas. And, yes, Stewart is (ancestrally, at least)
How can this be? Debbie Schlussel explains, complete with the video
that hamas sympathizers seem to like so much:
Jon Stewart In the Tank for HAMAS: "Israelis
Forced Palestinians to Live in Their Hallway"
This is one of the problems with America's high
school and college kids and many others who are already in the job market. They
rely on an annoying, sarcastic, ignoramus, left-wing, self-hating Jewish
comedian as their primary news source.
This video is posted on a gazillion Islamic,
pro-HAMAS (redundant)and far-left websites, urging readers to "thank Jon
Stewart." This Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz video is being sent out with gushing
praise by the pro-HAMAS/pro-Hezbollah American Arab Anti-Discrimination
Committee. As you'll note, Stewart a/k/a Leibowitz entitles Israel's response to
HAMAS terrorism, "Strip Maul." Get it?--He thinks Israel is unfairly "mauling"
the Gaza Strip. Idiocy.
As you'll also note, Stewart seizes on a dumb
interview New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg gave to CNN. A number of readers sent
me that video, but I didn't post it because his analogy is stupid and
inaccurate: The Palestinians are not "an emotionally disturbed person in the
hallway banging on your door." They are not crazy--they are cold and
calculating. And, of course, you wouldn't expect 50 NYPD police to respond to
one crazy person in your hallway. This is far different than that. It's a nation
of mass murderers trying to burn your home down with you inside.
And, of course, Stewart uses another bullcrap
analogy, claiming the Israelis "forced" the Palestinians to live in the hallway.
On the contrary, the Palestinians invaded and camped out in the hallway, while
the Israelis were kicked into the hallway by all the Arab nations where 1
million Jews lived before they were expelled to Israel and elsewhere.
In any event, if you are a Jew or any other
American who (inexplicably) likes the obnoxious Jon Stewart, but--unlike
him--actually gets it on Islam's war against the West, I hope you'll stop
watching this overpaid emperor with no clothing.
He's the new hero of the net's HAMASniks. He can't
But one thing's for sure: He epitomes that word
that rhymes with "classhole."
Stewart is married and has two children, both under the age of 5. I
wonder what he would do if his next door neighbor tossed rocks at his wife and
children every day. Even if they missed.
Do you think he'd respond by tossing an equivalent number of rocks back? Or do you think he'd do everything
in his power, however far beyond tossing rocks it was, to force the neighbor to stop?
I know there's a lot of great humor potential in what I just said - there always
is humor potential in everything for the Jon Stewarts of the world. But
maybe he ought to think about this for a minute or two, before his next hamas-approved