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

Category: Media

  • Saturday night must-reads

    I’ve got two cats sleeping on my lap and so all you get is links tonight;

    First, stop by and take at look at the Gathering of Eagles who were rewarded for braving the weather to support the military recruiters in Times Square by a visit from Pamela Gellar from Atlas Shrugs.

    If Baldilocks says he’s dead, then he’s dead as far as I’m concerned.

    Big Dog defends John McCain in the Boeing contract kerfuffle.

    The American Pundit catches the media lying about McCain’s position on waterboarding.

    Bloodthirsty Liberal examines Arab techniques of border control.

    Gaius at Blue Crab Boulevard writes on the absurdity of Hillary’s statement that she ended the hundreds of years of Britain’s war with the Irish.

    Jammie Wearing Fool writes about an idiot judge who disagrees with the war against terror, so she keeps a foster kid from enlisting. I’d always thought judges were supposed to lay aside their own bias when they rule – I must be wrong.

    The Liberty Pundit ties in yesterday’s job report to the only legislation the Democrats passed last year – the minimum wage.

    Gateway Pundit rounds up news on the death of the latest FARC leader found in pieces several miles apart.

    Bob Parks at Outside the Wire dissects the Obama sucker factor and reports that Obama doesn’t have a plan to withdraw from Iraq. Bob Owens at Confederate Yankee explains what that means. Meanwhile, Flopping Aces writes that Hillary’s military advisor says she won’t pull troops out of Iraq. I’m beginning to see a pattern here.

    Wild Thing explains in detail the history of the Weather Underground buddies of Barak Obama.

    Crotchety Old Bastard compares Michele Obama’s speeches to Che Guevara’s “New Man” speech.

    Pam at Right Voices reports on a stunning archaeological find.

    The Hatemonger’s Quarterly has the exclusive report on several fictional TV characters and who they support in the Presidential campaign.

    Moonbattery‘s Van Helsing warns that environmentalists are coming for your X-Box.

    Jay at Stop the ACLU explains why he’s voting for John McCain.

    GI Jane at The Foxhole tears up the Washington Post for their self-flagellating over their treatment of Muslims.

    Weasel Zippers writes on the Hamas admission that they’re supported by Iran – and I feign surprise.

    Dean Barnett at The Weekly Standard Blog writes that the New York Times will take a swipe at Barak’s Iraq policy tomorrow.

  • Blackface is OK, if you’re a liberal

    Liberal and drug addict Robert Downey Jr appears in the forthcoming movie, Tropic Thunder, as a Black guy. Wow…

    Just imagine if a conservative actor, and a few do exist, did this. The howls of outrage and racism would shake the Hollywood sign.

  • AP’s reporting on the unemployment rate (UPDATED)

    I’ve been seeing the AP story on the unemployment rate for February released this morning under the headline “Employer Slash Jobs By Most In 5 Years“. It was pretty scary headline, so I finally read the article after avoiding it all morning;

    Employers slashed 63,000 jobs in February, the most in five years and the starkest sign yet that the country is heading dangerously toward recession or is in one already.

    The Labor Department’s report, released Friday, also indicated that the nation’s unemployment rate dipped to 4.8 percent as hundreds of thousands of people perhaps discouraged by their prospects left the civilian labor force. The jobless rate was 4.9 percent in January.

    Job losses were widespread, with hefty cuts coming from construction, manufacturing, retailing, financial services and a variety of professional and business services. Those losses swamped gains elsewhere, including education and health care, leisure and hospitality and the government.

    So I decided to slip over to the report at the Bureau of Labor Statistics and this is what it said;

    Nonfarm payroll employment edged down in February (-63,000), and the unemployment rate was essentially unchanged at 4.8 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Employment fell in manufacturing, construction, and retail trade. Job growth continued in health care and in food services. Average hourly earnings rose by 5 cents, or 0.3 percent, over the month.

    The number of unemployed persons (7.4 million) and the unemployment rate(4.8 percent) were essentially unchanged in February. Over the month, the unemployment rates for adult men (4.3 percent), adult women (4.2 percent), teenagers (16.6 percent), whites (4.3 percent), and Hispanics (6.2 percent) showed little or no change. The jobless rate for blacks fell to 8.3 percent,in line with the average rate for 2007. The unemployment rate for Asians was3.0 percent, not seasonally adjusted.

    So employers certainly didn’t SLASH jobs really, and the writer’s bias, which by the way shows up nearly every week when reporting unemployment in the same lame phrase that “hundreds of thousands of people perhaps discouraged by their prospects left the civilian labor force”. Since when does “perhaps” become an acceptable part of an analytical phrase? “Perhaps” they all won the lottery. “Perhaps” they all started their own businesses. “Perhaps” it was a combination of thousands of possible answers.

    Only at the Associated Press does the unemployment rate falling a tenth of one percent portend doom and gloom. Seein’s how the unemployment rate has floating around 4.5% for over a year now (a half of one percent below what economists consider full employment) it stands to reason that jobs would start falling away.

    But let’s look what was the report a year ago?

    Nonfarm payroll employment continued to trend up (+97,000), and the unemployment rate (4.5 percent) was essentially unchanged in February, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Employment grew in some service-providing industries but declined sharply in construction. Manufacturing employment continued to trend downward.

    So unemployment rose .3% in the last year. And in February 2006?

    Nonfarm payroll employment grew by 243,000 in February, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 4.8 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Job gains occurred in contruction, financial activities, health care, and several other industries.

    Both the number of unemployed persons, 7.2 million, and the unemployment rate, 4.8 percent, were little changed in February.

    Hmm, the same as this February. How about February 2005;

    Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 262,000 in February and the unemloyment rate edged up to 5.4 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Job growth occurred in both goods-producing and service-providing industries.

    Over half-a-percent higher unemployment. Imagine that – I’ll bet the AP predicted economic failure for the entire period from February 2005 until February 2006, too.

    UPDATE: Thanks to Lamplighter for pointing out that AP changed their title to “Dangerous cracks appearing in job market” from the fear-mongering title that was up nearly all day while the market was open.

  • Blogger under attack from AP

    The blogs are aflame over Snapped Shot going dark because of a lawsuit from Associated Press for using their photos. I first heard of it from Ace of Spades, then I got an email from Lamplighter. Little Green Footballs has a post up as well as Confederate Yankee , The Jawa Report and Gateway Pundit.

    I use a lot of AP pictures, too, but not in the same way that Snapped Shot used them but I always attribute and link back the photos to AP and the photographer if I have the information. It appears that AP is just trying to squelch criticism of their journalistic integrity.

    I guess it’s easy to file a lawsuit against a poor cottage-industry blogger that can’t afford the same legal battle that a giant like AP can engage.

    I know we’ve a got lawyer or two that read this blog – if you can give Mr Ledbetter some advice or help, please contact him.

  • Dionne; Why Obama is like Reagan

    I read with some measure of amusement this morning Washington Post’s EJ Dionne‘s column comparing Ronald Reagan’s critics to those of Barack Obama.

    Like Reagan’s enemies, Obama’s opponents concede that he gives a great speech. Indeed, both Obama and Reagan came to wide attention because of a single oration that offered hope in the midst of a losing campaign — Obama’s 2004 keynote to the Democratic National Convention and Reagan’s 1964 “A Time for Choosing” address delivered on behalf of Barry Goldwater. But surely speeches aren’t enough, are they?

    Yes, Obama gets his crowds swooning. So did Reagan. It’s laughable to hear conservatives talk darkly about a “cult of personality” around Obama.

    But, lisping Dionne ignores, in his comparison, the fact that Ronald Reagan actually had a record of leadership and reform as governor of California before he made his first run at the White House in 1976. What has Obama done? He’s been a legislator – he’s always been one of the voices in the crowd, he’s never led a thing.

    You can almost hear the Republican crowd shouting, “Yes, we can!” Reagan offered, well, change we could believe in.

    Still, Democrats kept telling themselves, right to November, that voters wouldn’t fall for any of this. Charisma, eloquence, idealism and hope were no match for experience, realism, prudence and predictability.

    Yeah, EJ, but the Republicans of 1980 didn’t chant “Yes, we can”, they didn’t swoon and collapse, they didn’t fall for language – they were seduced by a record of experience, wrapped in a language we could understand and backed by Reagan’s record of doing what he’d said he’d do. Reagan was the only President to ever run for office with a union card in his wallet, his stint as governor proved him to be a man of action, not merely words. All Obama has is words.

    The reason voters “fell” for Reagan’s talk in 1980 was because we’d already had four years of Jimmy Carter and his scolding us for being ate-up with the dumbass – we were ready for change. As an entire nation, we were tired of the inept Jimmy Carter who followed through on not one campaign promise of the 1976 campaign – right down his promise to not give away the Canal. Do you think America would have voted for Jimmy Carter if he’d told us the first thing he was going to do was give amnesty to draft dodgers? Obama is following in Carter’s footsteps, according to the Liberty Pundit;

    Barack Obama has ratcheted up his attacks on NAFTA, but a senior member of his campaign team told a Canadian official not to take his criticisms seriously, CTV News has learned.

    Dionne continues;

    Democrats in large numbers have reached the same conclusion that so many Republicans did in 1980: Now is the time to go for broke, to challenge not only the ruling party but also the governing ideas of the previous political era and the political coalition that allowed them to dominate public life.

    See, there’s your problem, EJ. This is why you are consistently wrong on every prediction and every observation you make about politics – Democrats aren’t Republicans. You’d be more right if compared Obama’s campaign and empty rhetoric to Jimmy Carter’s run in 1976. But being right would be a new experience for you, wouldn’t it, Dionne?

  • Race baiting from the Dems

    Patterico’s Pontifications and Protein Wisdom are both running pieces from the leftist blogosphere alleging, without a shred of evidence, that John McCain is going to run a racist campaign. From Patterico;

    Josh Marshall:

    Hopefully, everyone can now see the McCain strategy for running against Barack Obama. Yes, we have some general points on taxes, culture wars and McCain as war hero who can protect us in ways that flash-in-the-pan pretty boy Barack Obama can’t.

    But that’s not the core. The core is to drill a handful of key adjectives into the public mind about Barack Obama: Muslim, anti-American, BLACK, terrorist, Arab. Maybe a little hustler and shifty thrown in, but we’ll have to see.

    Yes. Because McCain denouncing such tactics is clear proof that his strategy is to engage in such tactics.

    That’s exactly it – when McCain denounced the comments by some no-name radio talk fellow, he was trying to set the tone of his campaign – that it’s going to be about the issues and not this identity politics game the Democrats played through their primaries. But that’s all their candidate has – what he is and not who he is. Democrats can’t allow this campaign to be about substance – their guy is an empty suit.

    Karl at Protein Wisdom boils Marshall’s rant down to it’s essence;

    Josh Marshall’s effort to impose a double-standard on the campaign, under which John McCain must repudiate any person or any comment about Barack Obama deemed to be inappropriately racial or ethnic, while Obama is excused from discussing his less savory associations, has been taken up by a number of left-liberal bloggers during the course of the day.

    While the Leftist blogs were stirring up the troops, Li’l Howie Dean was whipping up the crowd at Georgetown U;

    The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee and former Governor of Vermont contrasted the two parties’ presidential candidates, saying that with a woman and an African-American as the two front-runners, the Democratic field “looks like America,” while the all-white male Republican field “looks like the 1950s and talks like the 1850s.”

    Funny how Dean mentioned those two decades. The 1950s was when the Democrats were siccing their dogs and turning the fire hoses on Blacks in the South while Republicans were crafting the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The 1850s was when the Republican Party was formed to oppose the Democrat Party’s stalwart opposition to the emancipation of Black slaves.

    Bookworm at Webloggin found an article from the San Francisco Chronicle that paints Conservatives with a broad brush as racists one-and-all. Bookworm nails the reason the press and the Democrats have to do that;

    It’s a lousy story and it’s a hit piece on the Right. More than that, it sets up a straw man that allows the media, again, to avoid actually looking at the real Obama:

    The reason they lose this election has to be about race, otherwise they have to admit that no one wants their big worthless government programs. They have to shame Americans into voting for their candidate.

  • Benjamin calls for Marines

    medea-benjamin-code-pink-protest.jpg

    I picked this up from Jammie Wearing Fool; apparently Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin’s alligator mouth overloaded her hummingbird ass and when she chased a guy who spit on her down the street in Berkeley while she was blockading the famous marine Recruiting Station. The spitter stepped out of his car at which time Benjamin called for the Marines from the very recruiting station she was picketing to protect her from a long-awaited ass-kicking. (Canada Free Press link);

    “Medea Benjamin yelled and I quote “Marines!” She actually yelled for our help because this man had stepped out of his car. I even asked her if she was yelling Police and she told me, “I said Marines” then put her arm around my friend Allen (the Marine Vet). Ironic?”

    Of course we can’t read about this in the local media can we?

  • Only Democrats can end wars

    You can’t help but giggle whenever you read the Washington Post opinion section these days. Today is no different. John Podesta, Ray Takeyh and Lawrence J. Korb all take turns revising history to make their vacant point that it takes a Democrat to end our wars.

    Even a cursory examination of American history reveals the complexity of concluding a war that has taken on such a stark partisan tint. The shadow of Vietnam looms, as it has become standard Republican narrative that back then it was the Democrats in Congress who stabbed America in the back by cutting off funding for a winning cause. The fact that the war was lost in Southeast Asia, as opposed to the halls of Congress, is no matter. The Republican machine will press this same theme should it lose the White House in November. A Democratic administration would be accused of surrendering to evildoers, as once more the dovish successors of George McGovern are wrongly said to have pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory.

    Um, guys, have you forgotten that it was a Democrat administration that manufactured the Gulf of Tonkin incident that put Marines on the ground in 1965 in the first place? That three years later that administration had to withdraw from the election because they’d managed the war so poorly that they couldn’t win an election. That they’d deceived the American people so badly, Democrats had lost all credibility as well as the next two elections (and five out of the next six elections)?

    In fact, a reasonable person can make a rational argument that Democrats have been responsible for all of our wars from 1860 until 1965 (with the possible exception of the Spanish American War).

    Can you buffoons name ONE American defeat on the field of battle in Southeast Asia? Just ONE. The war was lost on the streets of America and in the halls of the politically-motivated Democrats. Nothing you pinheads can tag-team write will ever change history.

    Just like your mischaracterization of the situation in the Middle East today;

    In today’s Middle East, America is neither liked nor respected. Iran flaunts its nuclear ambitions, confident that a bogged-down Washington has limited options but to concede to its mounting infractions. Afghanistan is rapidly descending into a Taliban-dominated state as the Bush administration responds only with plaintive complaints about NATO’s lack of resolution. And the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is nowhere near resolution. America’s occupation of Iraq is estranging an entire generation of Arab youths, creating a reservoir of antagonism that will take decades to overcome. A Democratic president who may enjoy a modest honeymoon in the Middle East simply by virtue of not being George W. Bush can take a giant step toward reclaiming America’s practical interests and moral standing by leaving Iraq.

    Ya know why we’re not liked nor respected in the Middle East? It’s because of pseudo-intellectuals like you three who are constantly preaching about American hegemony and how we need to understand and talk with leaders in the Middle East. here’s all you need to understand – leaders in the Middle East only respect strength. That’s why Arafat almost broke his neck getting to the negotiation table after the first Gulf War, it’s the reason Jordan is our strongest ally in the Middle East, it’s the reason Gaddafi surrendered his chemical and nuclear weapons programs without a shot being fired.

    Iran is a thorn in our side because they don’t think we have the will to attack them – they get that idea from nimnils like you three.

    Yeah, Democrats can end wars – but the way they end wars brings us to the next war much more quickly. But since Leftists and Democrats have the world view and attention of a fruit fly, that part doesn’t bother them.

    There’ll always be a Republican administration to clean up Democrats’ messes – and Democrats can blame the Republicans for screwing it up like these three imbeciles are doing in this vacuous brain fart on the pages of the Washington Post.