Thursday, February 26, 2015

Examining the Bill O'Reilly Controversy

There is no real mystery to the attacks on Bill O'Reilly from Fox News. It is exactly what it appears to be: the Liberal media's attempt to deflect attention from one of their shining stars: Brian Williams. 

Every journalist exaggerates...bring Williams back! 

To fit that narrative, Liberals had to search thirty year old archives and parse whether O'Reilly said "to" or "at." Nice try.

Undaunted, the New York Times gives us a thirty paragraph article on the subject wherein they conclude in paragraph seven that O'Reilly is guilty:

The accusations against Mr. O’Reilly, which have since been substantiated by other journalists in Argentina at the time, have played neatly into the network’s narrative of being the conservative outlier in an industry dominated by liberals.

Proving that the authors (never mind the editors) of New York Times articles do not read their own pieces, the ironclad guilty verdict against O'Reilly is called into question six paragraphs later:

In the days after the Mother Jones article was published, Mr. O’Reilly mounted an aggressive campaign against the article and its authors on Fox, and aired a video clip and an interview with a former NBC journalist that he said supported his version of events. (New York Times, 2/26/2015)

Oh well...

The O'Reilly kerfuffle is also important to the Liberal media because it deflects attention from the news at MSNBC that the show of Pulitzer Prize winning wunderboy Ronan Farrow is being canceled. Apparently, even though Farrow attracted twelve viewers, two more than Al Sharpton, MSNBC pulled the plug. 

MSNBC is in a real bind with Sharpton because canceling his show will lead to charges by the Rev of...RACISM! Don't you love it when Liberals get caught in their own games?

ObamaCare customers who received health insurance subsidies last year are getting an unpleasant surprise this tax season -- with many finding they have to repay hundreds of dollars. 

An analysis by tax-preparer H&R Block found that to date, 52 percent of those who enrolled in Affordable Care Act coverage are paying back part of their premium tax credits. (, 2/26/2015)'s working!

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

10 Liberal Media Questions for Prospective 2016 Presidential Candidates

For Scott Walker:

-Do you believe in evolution?

-Are you in favor of birth control?

-Does President Obama love America?

-Are you a climate denier?

-Would it be fair to repeal Obamacare and take healthcare away from poor Americans?

For Hillary Clinton:

-Do you look forward to bouncing your granddaughter on your knee in the Oval Office?

-Why do you think that Republicans criticize the non-profit Clinton Foundation?

-Has Chelsea talked about having another baby?

-Are you rooting for another granddaughter or a grandson?

-Can you envision your granddaughter someday being elected president?

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Examining Rudy Guiliani's Comments

Rudy Guiliani is in the crosshairs of the Liberal media for recent comments about President Obama. Let's examine the two points that have generated the most controversy. 

First, Guiliani questioned whether Obama loves America. In answering this question, let's reflect back on another president, Ronald Reagan. Liberals despised Reagan and yet no thinking person of any ideology could or would question Reagan's love of America. He wore it openly and shamelessly. Liberals might say that his patriotism was corny or jingoistic, but they could never say it was either non-existent or insincere. 

Now let's look at Obama. The trail of evidence that Obama has left includes numerous examples where he talked of America's misdeeds or America's arrogance. His worldview seems more closely aligned with those who view America as a colonialist bully. Surely Obama has talked of America favorably, but what are the soundbites that stick in your mind? They are not the Reaganesque comments. Most often they mimic the criticisms that we have heard from the likes of Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. 

The Liberal rebuttal to those like Guiliani who question Obama's love of America is simply to say that Obama is the president, of course, he loves his country. That is hardly an answer, particularly because the case of Obama is so unique. Obama's father was Kenyan - not American - and Obama spent a good portion of his youth outside of America.  Furthermore, Americans have no memories of a president who seems to go out of his way to point out American mistakes - often to other countries including enemies of America. When Obama criticizes America, many Americans are uncomfortable because they intrinsically feel that whatever her faults, America is a fair and honorable country. Similarly, when Obama brings up the Crusades in a discussion of the barbarism of ISIS he sounds more like a jihadist then an American president.

Certainly even some who are born of American parents and are raised here do not love their country. But Obama's history, coupled with the public record of his comments on America make the topic of his love for his country fair game. Guiliani was only expressing the doubts and concerns that many Americans harbor. 

Guiliani's second point has been reduced by the New York Times, among others, to an inarticulate headline that does not accurately reflect the issue being raised. The Times simplifies Guiliani's comment to: "Obama's mother was white, ergo I am not a racist." We suspect that Guiliani was attempting to deflect the inevitable accusation made against any Republican when criticizing Obama: "You are a racist." This is Liberal 'reflexology' and Republicans tend to fall for it. When accused of being racist Republicans instead should simply respond: "Really, what makes you say that?" Then they should wait and force the other side to articulate the case for racism. The ensuing gibberish will end the discussion. 

For the record, RedStateVT wonders also whether Obama truly loves his country. 

Let the fun begin. 

Friday, February 20, 2015

The Exaction of Justice

Indecisiveness is the predominant characteristic of how Mr. Obama executes U.S. national-security policy. Undoubtedly there are other influences: ideological blinders; mistrust of America’s presence in the world; inadequate interest, knowledge, focus and resolve. But in implementing his policies, good or bad, the president has shown that equivocating is what he does best. (John Bolton, Wall Street Journal, 2/18/2015)

That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it? There is almost no decision that Obama isn't willing to postpone.

Best line from Bolton? This one:
Colin Powell as secretary of state once advised British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that “if you want to bring the Iranians around, you have to hold an ax over their heads.” Instead, Mr. Obama is holding a selfie stick over his own.

CNN reports that “between 4.5 million and 7.5 million taxpayers received subsidies,” and an earlier CNN report cites an H&R Block estimate that 3.4 million of them will end up owing the IRS money on the deal. (Wall Street Journal, 2/18/2015)

OK, for the one-thousandth time: What would be the reaction to news like this if George Bush and Republicans had promulgated a policy like Obamacare? Answer: Rioting in the streets, egged on by MSNBC and the New York Times.

About 800,000 taxpayers who enrolled in insurance policies through received erroneous tax information from the government, and were urged on Friday to hold off on filing tax returns until the error could be corrected. (New York Times, 2/20/2015)

Liberals prove - once again - that government cannot be trusted to do much of anything correctly. 

Liberal answer? Hire more government workers.

President Obama chooses his words with particular care when he addresses the volatile connections between religion and terrorism. He and his aides have avoided labeling acts of brutal violence by Al Qaeda, the so-called Islamic State and their allies as “Muslim” terrorism or describing their ideology as “Islamic” or “jihadist.”

With remarkable consistency — including at a high-profile White House meeting this week, “Countering Violent Extremism” — they have favored bland, generic terms over anything that explicitly connects attacks or plots to Islam. (New York Times, 2/19/2015)

In his ceaseless quest not to offend Muslims Obama is all-too-willing to offend just about everyone else - Christians, Jews, Americans, Europeans, etc.

In return for his delicacy, radical Muslims continue with the beheadings. We're guessing this is just another example of how Obama has been "set free to be himself" because he has no more elections. 

Best line from the WSJ on this topic:
Foreign policy is not a Harry Potter tale of good versus He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. (Wall Street Journal, 2/19/2015)

As he sought to rally the world behind a renewed attack on terrorism, President Obama argued on Thursday that force of arms was not enough and called on all nations to “put an end to the cycle of hate” by expanding human rights, religious tolerance and peaceful dialogue. (New York Times, 2/20/2015)

Because what the radical Islamists are really seeking is human rights, religious tolerance and peaceful dialogue....

Uniformed and Ignorant
The government should open a special enrollment period that lasts beyond April 15, the traditional filing time for most taxpayers. That would be fair to millions of consumers who remain uninformed about the health care law and ignorant about the subsidies it provides and the penalties for failing to enroll. And it would strengthen implementation of health care reform. (New York Times editorial, 2/19/2015)

New York Times editors apparently believe that there are still "millions of consumers" out there who do not know about the free health care available to them courtesy of Obamacare.

Still, the country was treated to a level of detailed testimony on sexual indiscretion that surely surpassed what President Bill Clinton was made to endure over the liaison that eventually led to his impeachment in 1998. (New York Times, 2/20/2015)

In an article on French pervert Strauss-Kahn, the New York Times throws this line in. "What Bill Clinton was made to endure." Never mind what Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky and others endured.... In just a few short years, the Times will have reshaped Clintons travails from a sordid case of sexual abuse of an employee into a Republican hit job. 

Actually the Times has pretty much already done that, haven't they?

He does not return phone calls. He does not ask for support. He arrives late for meetings. And he acts as if he has all the time in the world. The complaints have piled up for weeks, dismaying many longtime supporters of Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and sending others into the arms of his rivals for the presidential nomination, according to interviews with more than two dozen Republican donors and strategists. (New York Times, 2/20/2015)

Jeb Bush. Chris Christie. Scott Walker. Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush. Scott Walker. Jeb Bush. Chris Christie. Scott Walker. 

What is it?

The New York Times rotation for hit pieces on potential Republican presidential contenders. 

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

Obama: Acts of religious-inspired violence are to be the Crusades for example

...Meanwhile ISIS beheads a dozen Egyptian Christians. 

College Daze
Liberals are aghast that Wisconsin governor Scott Walker did not graduate did neither Harry Truman or Bill Gates. George W. Bush not only graduated college, but was a Harvard MBA, the nation's first MBA president. Of course, that did not discourage Liberals from disparaging Bush's intellect. They saw his transcripts and realized that he was no genius, unlike say, Barack Obama. The only problem, of course, is that Obama has not released his grades. What is he hiding? Do you think if he had gotten straight A's that he would NOT have released them? Our guess is that he got a couple of C's or even a D. Probably in American History....or Oration.

As Dynasty’s Son, Jeb Bush Used His Connections Freely (New York Times headline, 2/15/2015)

Now that Mitt Romney is not running, it's back to softening up Jeb Bush at the New York Times. Article #227 on Jeb Bush appears today. 

Now as Yemen descends into chaos and anarchy, if the Times would only remind us who declared the U.S. anti-terrorism policy there to be a success....

The notion that income inequality has continued to rise over the past decade is part of the conventional wisdom. You’ve no doubt heard versions: The rich just keep getting richer. Inequality is higher than ever. Nearly all of the gains from the economic recovery have gone to the top 1 percent.

No question, inequality is extremely high from a historical perspective – worrisomely so. But a new analysis, by Stephen J. Rose of George Washington University, adds an important wrinkle to the story: Income inequality has not actually risen since the financial crisis began. (New York Times, 2/17/2015)

Lizzie Warren and Bernie Sanders now will have nothing to talk about!

Saturday, February 14, 2015

Obama: For gay marriage before he pretended to be against it

Name Calling
In the long-running political battles over climate change, the fight about what to call the various factions has been going on for a long time. Recently, though, the issue has taken a new turn, with a public appeal that has garnered 22,000 signatures and counting.

The petition asks the news media to abandon the most frequently used term for people who question climate science, “skeptic,” and call them “climate deniers” instead. (New York Times, 2/13/2015)

We suggest calling those who do not question "climate science"...."climate truthers."

In The Name Of
Why does Obama have no problem declaring that “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” yet he has never once said that terrorists have “committed terrible deeds in the name of Allah” or “in the name of Islam”? In his prayer breakfast speech, Obama bent over backward to avoid using the word “Islamic” in reference to the terrorists. He will not even call it the “Islamic State,” the name that virtually every U.S. news organization uses. He said that “ISIL” killed “in the name of religion.” So the Islamic State kills “in the name of religion,” but Christians killed “in the name of Christ”?

Obama is willing to condemn by name what he considers Christian radicalism, but he still to this day refuses to condemn “Islamic radicalism” by name. You can’t defeat an ideology if you are unwilling to even name it. When the president of the United States watches Islamic terrorists burn a man alive in a cage and responds by saying we should not “get on our high horse” because “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ” it is a propaganda victory for the terrorists and a loss for persecuted Christians struggling to survive under the Islamic State’s brutal rule. (Marc A. Thiessen, Washington Post, 2/10/2015)

Why indeed. We have pondered this long and hard and a possible answer is beginning to dawn on us.... Obama is a Muslim. 

Could it be true? (After all, Obama famously declared he was a Muslim in an interview with George Stephanopolous years ago. Stephanopolous bailed him out by saying: "You are a Christian." If you haven't heard about this, no surprise as it was largely suppressed by the State Media.

We are not yet certain, but how else to explain his constant reminders of American and Christian sins coupled with his soft apologies for Islamic terrorism.

Long Ago
Months ago, Mrs. Clinton’s top advisers encouraged the three pro-Clinton super PACs — Ready for Hillary, Priorities USA and Mr. Brock’s American Bridge 21st Century — to combine efforts. Mr. Brock’s organization would provide opposition research to Priorities, which would eventually raise high-dollar donations to pay for attack ads. (New York Times, 2/11/2015)

Three Super PACs. High dollar donations. Attack ads.

Kind of makes the Koch brothers look genteel ...

Monday, February 9, 2015

All This And More!

Step Off
Brian Williams, acknowledging that the scrutiny and criticism he was attracting was becoming a distraction for his network, said on Saturday that he was stepping aside as anchor of NBC’s “Nightly News” for the next several days. (New York Times, 2/8/2015)

The Liberal News Oligarchy is in disarray! First Al Sharpton is forced to resign from MSNBC when it is learned that he purposefully ginned up racial conflict in a number of stories, then Brian Williams takes a leave of absence from NBC. 


Al Sharpton hasn't resigned? He is still on the air?

200 Experts Agree
With advice from more than 200 policy experts, Hillary Rodham Clinton is trying to answer what has emerged as a central question of her early presidential campaign strategy: how to address the anger about income inequality without overly vilifying the wealthy. (New York Times, 2/8/2015)

Having tried and failed badly at the "you didn't build it" meme owned by 1%er Lizzie Warren, Hillary searches for a new catch phrase to capture her economic vision. May we suggest the following:

Be Like Bill!

Instead of vilifying the rich, Hillary should embrace wealth, using her husband as the poster child for economic opportunity in America. The backstory goes like this: 

My husband grew up as a backwoods hillbilly. Through hard work and determination he became the governor of Arkansas where his position afforded him sexual access to many local women. He parlayed his roguish charm into a successful run for the highest office in the land which afforded him sexual access to even more women. After leaving office we were "dead broke." He (and I) became fabulously wealthy attracting hundreds of millions of dollars (lots from foreign donors) to our "foundation." (By the way, the foundation thing is the way to go if you can pull it off!) 

Be Like Bill!

Good One!
National Review’s Eliana Johnson quotes a wonderfully pithy response from Louisiana’s Gov. Bobby Jindal: “The Medieval Christian threat is under control, Mr. President. Please deal with the Radical Islamic threat today.” (James Taranto, Wall Street Journal, 2/9/2015)