This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Media

  • What did they expect?

    Last night I wrote about one moonbat who was disappointed that Obama was continuing the policies of his predecessor in regards to the war against al Qaeda in Pakistan. This morning, Drudge’s headline is;

    In the linked article, Jewish leaders are surprised that Clinton has done an about-face from the Clinton who needed Jewish votes to keep her seat in the Senate. Mort Zuckerman complains;

    On Thursday, as Secretary of State she had yet another about face in the form of angry messages demanding Israel speed up aid to Gaza. Jewish leaders are furious.

    “I am very surprised, frankly, at this statement from the United States government and from the secretary of state,” said Mortimer Zuckerman, publisher of the New York Daily News and member of the NYC Jewish Community Relations Council.

    Did they really expect anything to be different? Her husband came into office with a liberal agenda and when he got spanked by reality, he abandoned it all to “become” a small government president who suddenly championed government reform.

    Wasn’t anyone paying attention to the fact that Obama was promising gun owners that he wouldn’t take their guns days after he promised church groups he was going to take gunowners’ guns? Didn’t anyone notice that he alternately promised to end the war to one group and vowed to continue the war to others?

    Say what you want about President Bush, but when a certain event would occur, we knew how he’d react because we knew what his principles were. There are no principles in the Democrat Party. Well, no principles beyond attracting votes. That’s why the troops lost their privacy at Dover AFB – there are more Leftists who want to exploit flag draped coffins than there are military personnel who don’t. Leftsts win.

    That’s why compensation and benefits for the military are going to get cut – there are more people who don’t give a shit about them than do. So if you want to guess how the current administration will come down on any issue, check your local liberal rag. Looking for principled decisions will be a long and fruitless search – trust me.

  • Time Warp Journalism

    Yeah, you really don’t need to watch the President’s speeches anymore. you can get crib notes from the media hours before the speech happens, along with their impressions of the president’s abilities – hours before he does anything. notice the date in the corner of the article;

    But the media isn’t biased. Any of you Obama voters feeling like suckers yet?

  • Varney confronts ACORN crank

    Take your BP meds before you watch this video of Stuart Varney confronting Bertha Lewis of ACORN (found at Hot Air)

    Maybe if more media outlets would confront these completely vacuous “activists” (who are really nothing more than race-baiting thugs) we could have a real discussion about a solution to this problem instead of throwing other peoples’ money at it.

    Related is Michelle Malkin’s exposure of ACORN’s poster child fraud in Baltimore who bought her house for $87k in 2001 and within a few years refinanced the house for $270k and spent it and now can’t afford payments for her follies. Michelle has the whole story and, characteristically, all of the documentation.

  • AP targets AER

    Associated Press saw nothing wrong with Congress passing a $ trillion “stimulus” bill that Congress  hadn’t read and that wouldn’t stimulate the economy. But that’s because they’re busy investigating why the Army Emergency Relief hoarded cash contributions instead of loaning it out.

    For some reason, AP mixes up the term “veteran” to confuse the reader about the AER mission;

    Today, AER’s mission is to ease cash emergencies of active-duty soldiers and retirees, and to provide college scholarships for their families. Its emergency aid covers mortgage payments and food, car repairs, medical bills, travel to family funerals, and the like.

    According to 2007 U.S. Census Bureau figures, 1.3 million veterans — or 6 percent — lived in poverty, with 537,000 unemployed.

    “I have so many people who are losing their homes, they’re behind on their mortgage payments, they’re losing their jobs because of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) or the medication they’re taking — and the Army Emergency Relief can’t help them,” says Outreach Director Sema Olson at U.S. Welcome Home Foundation, which finds aid for combat veterans.

    The AER can’t help them because “veterans” are not necessarily “active duty or retired” soldiers. Their own charter requires soldiers to clear their debt with AER before they leave the service. Just like everything else civilians write in the media about the military, AP finds something wrong with soldiers donating to AER and the fact that military officers are on the board of the AER.

    The truth is that AER loaned soldiers money when no one else would and if they hoarded money, it was because they’d rather have too much than too little – AP’s lack of scrutiny on Congress’ stimulus bill demonstrates where their priorities are. Every time I took one of my soldiers in need to AER, they got the help they needed and they didn’t pay interest on the loan and usually got the money the same day – and they can pay it back with allotments from their pay checks. What could be better?

    I don’t know what AP is trying to prove here, all they proved is that AER is a responsible organization that helps the troops and plans for the future. I’m sure some people might have some bad experiences with AER, but I’ve never seen them do anything but help the troops.

  • MSNBC’s Santelli draws ire of Democrats

    In case you missed it the other day, MSNBC’s Chicago trading floor reporter, Rick Santelli let loose on the air Thursday over the “stimulus” bill. I could recite some his points, but it’s much better if you watch him give them;

    Well, it must have had some effect because yesterday, press secretary Gibbs mentioned Santelli by name six times (from the Washington Times);

    A day after President Obama’s housing foreclosure plan was battered by a cable network reporter, the White House on Friday launched a bullish retaliatory attack, saying CNBC reporter Rick Santelli’s “rant” was uninformed and dangerous.

    “I’m not entirely sure where Mr. Santelli lives, or in what house he lives,” press secretary Robert Gibbs said, mentioning the reporter six times by name and holding up a copy of the fact sheet the White House released to back up its foreclosure plan.

    “I would encourage him to read the president’s plan and understand that it will help millions of people, many of whom he knows. I would be more than happy to have him come here and read it. I would be more than happy to buy him a cup of coffee – decaf.”

    Maybe they should buy us all some de-caf coffee (maybe it’s already in the stimulus bill to buy us some de-caf), because everyone I’ve talked to gets just as exercised about the whole thing – including people who voted for Obama.

    Mr. Gibbs refused to accept the stock market as a valuable measure of White House policies.

    “I think it is very safe to assume that what is being priced into the day-to-day fluctuations of the market is not just what happens or is announced at the White House or on the road by the White House,” he said.

    Of course, he’d say that, look at what the market has done since the election;

    Investors don’t bet on the economy in the stock market based on day-to-day events, they bet on what they think the future looks like – and the future under Obama looks grim. Obama says so himself almost every day.

    Firing back at Mr. Gibbs on Friday, Mr. Santelli – more staid than during his Thursday performance – said all he was asking for was more specifics and that he appreciated the offer to read the plan. But he chided Mr. Gibbs over the massive $787 billion spending bill, spanning hundreds of pages, which Congress passed and Mr. Obama signed within a matter of days – and before most lawmakers had a chance to read it.

    Mr. Santelli also said he was happy to be invited to the White House, though he had a slight change for Mr. Gibbs’ plans for coffee: “I’m not really big on decaf, though. I think I prefer tea.”

    Here’s Santelli on Hardball with some doofus who tries to make Santelli’s rant political instead of based on economics;

    Instead of addressing the points of Santelli’s rant, Matthews minimizes the accuracy by claiming Santelli is partisan and “iconized” like Limbaugh and Hannity. Pathetic partisan hack that Matthews is.

  • Mountains from molehills

    The other day I wrote about Brandon Neeley, a former guard at Guantanamo and currently the President of the Houston chapter of the Iraq Veterans Against the War (probably because he ate the previous president) who has come out to tell us how he’s ashamed of his conduct and what he was forced to do at the tropical resort we built for terrorists in retirement.

    Like I wrote before, nothing in his testimony rises to the level of an atrocity in any shape of form. But that didn’t stop Rachel Maddow from interviewing him on her absolute waste of a cable show. I found a video of that show but I have to warn you – out of a nine minute video, you have to sit through 3 minutes of MadCow’s blather and BDS. The six minutes that follow are of Neeley describing two events at Guantanamo. One story was of him slamming a prisoner to the concrete floor when he tried to resist when Neeley removed his cuffs. The story leaves the viewer wondering what the problem was.

    The second story is of a medic trying to force feed a can of Ensure to a detainee and then punching him in the face. I can’t imagine any medic doing that, but even if it did happen, so what? And why didn’t Neeley report the incident when it happened instead of half-a-decade later when the cameras are turned on?

    MadCow then tries to get Neeley to blame the Bush Administration for not giving the troops in Guantanamo adequate training and Neeley agrees with her. I’m pretty sure some of our commenters who were there will dispute that.

    Anyway, here’s the video below the jump;
    (more…)

  • Marcus missing the point completely

    Washington Post‘s Ruth Marcus tries to explain the near victory the Republican Party scored in the recent over the stimulus bill last week by chalking it up to “peer pressure”. To recap, the Republicans attracted six Democrats while losing only three Republicans to the Democrats;

    Still, the ability of House Republicans to maintain their united front — twice — came as an unpleasant shock to the White House. Even after the first rebuff, the administration anticipated 20 to 30 Republican defections.

    Instead, the vote demonstrated that everything you need to know about Congress you learned in middle school: Peer pressure works wonders.

    She misses the whole point completely – it wasn’t peer pressure at all. The whole point of contention is the definition of “compromise”. Neither the White House nor the Congressional Democrats attempted anything resembling compromise. Republicans didn’t bite. What divides Republicans and Democrats is IDEOLOGY not some stupid grade school game of gotcha. It’s not whose team you’re on, it’s what you believe. What kept Republicans together was their refusal to participate in Democrat patronage to unions and liberal strap hangers.

    It’s not your team versus my team, you silly clown of a woman. Marcus is the one playing at grade school antics.

    Regardless, I wrote this last night, so I screen shot the POS column she wrote in case she changes it by the time I post mine.

  • Where’s the stimulating part of the stimulus?

    As the president signed his stimulus bill yesterday, the stock market tumbled to new lows;

    CNN marveled at the fall, claiming that the shrinking value in the market was “despite” the stimulus bill – I guess it didn’t occur to them that the tumble was BECAUSE of the stimulus bill;

    CNN wonders if maybe the contraction wasn’t because the President didn’t spend enough money.

    The Washington Post takes the same tack;

    The truth is this: The markets’ biggest decline came STARTING on the day Obama was elected because investors (that’s you and I, by the way) have no confidence that Democrats are committed to helping the economy. Their “stimulus” is is actually just buying patronage and votes. They’re doing absolutely nothing for the economy and the country realizes it – no matter how much camouflage the media throws up for him.

    The Obama administration has launched Recovery.Gov where we’re supposed to be able to track our money as it spins down the drain. I’m still trying to figure out what “Protecting the Vulnerable” means and why it’ll cost $81 billion. It sounds to me like it’s to protect vulnerable congressional seats.