In the wake of the Komen fiasco, Daily Kos has now fixed its sights on another private charity — Paul’s Pantry of Green Bay, Wisconsin. The leftist website is hurling expletives and encouraging readers to go after the food program for allegedly refusing to send their truck to a Planned Parenthood location to pick up donated food.

Image credit: Corey Wilson, Green Bay Press-Gazette

Let’s shower this POS with our calls. I have left a message. So should all of you. Maybe this is a distraction, but much is at stake-a woman’s right to choose. And not to mention the poor and their hunger are being used as political chips by the callous right. Pro-life. Bullshit.

The Planned Parenthood location posted an item on their Facebook page. A scroll down the page indicates they were very active in the campaign to intimidate Komen over Planned Parenthood funding.

Paul’s Pantry refused our food donations collected by our area health center to help combat local hunger. This level of extremism impeding individual access to essential health care and now food is outrageous and must be stopped.

(more…)

What Think Progress trumpets as an “exclusive” has turned into a “retraction required.” The Soros-funded blog claims that Republican Ari Fleischer was “secretly” involved with the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s decision on Planned Parenthood:

Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for George W. Bush and prominent right-wing pundit, was secretly involved in the Komen Foundation’s strategy regarding Planned Parenthood. Fleischer personally interviewed candidates for the position of “Senior Vice President for Communications and External Relations” at Komen last December. According to a source with first-hand knowledge, Fleischer drilled prospective candidates during their interviews on how they would handle the controversy about Komen’s relationship with Planned Parenthood.

Fleischer’s relationship with Komen and the Planned Parenthood controversy was previously undisclosed.

A slick move, to blame the other team for your side’s transgressions in order to deflect. Sources close to the Komen Foundation tell me Fleischer wasn’t involved in any way with Komen’s Planned Parenthood strategy. The person Komen did bring in to lead the effort is none other than Brendan Daly, Nancy Pelosi’s former press secretary, who is heading a team from Ogilvy PR. While Fleischer was assisting Komen CEO Nancy Brinker in finding a qualified PR person, Fleischer wasn’t directing decisions in the resulting Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle; it was Daly.

So Think Progress is accusing Ari Fleischer for Brendan Daly’s decisions. Don’t they have an editor fact-checking such things over there?

(more…)

From Accuracy in Media’s Lynn Woolley and Cliff Kincaid:

When the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure made a decision to sever its ties with America’s number one seller of abortions, Planned Parenthood, the media went to war. The media coverage was slanted in such a way that “mainstream” reporters like Andrea Mitchell and Lisa Myers of NBC News were openly advocating for a point of view—pressuring Komen to reverse course and give in to Planned Parenthood.

Why would the media go to war over something as seemingly insignificant as a policy change regarding funding at Komen, a private cancer charity? Part of the answer lies in the fact that, for the media, “women’s rights” take precedence over all other rights, including the rights of children. This is what “feminism” has become and this is what the Komen controversy was supposed to be about. In reality, it had nothing to do with breast cancer because the fact is that most Planned Parenthood affiliates don’t even provide mammograms. That money from Komen was used to refer women at risk of contracting the disease somewhere else.

So the issue was something else as well. While there were references to Planned Parenthood being an “abortion provider,” there was no explanation of what this “service” actually “provides”—a procedure that destroys a human life. This is why the annual March for Life against abortion is mostly ignored by the major media. It is a sad fact that even some conservative women still think that Planned Parenthood is simply an organization that provides information about voluntary family planning.

You saw very little in the mainstream media from pro-life people who supported Komen’s initial decision. The bias is so pronounced that the media long ago adopted the language of the Left. The term “pro-life” is never used. But “pro-choice” is. Newspapers use the term “abortion rights” to describe the political process of terminating the lives of the unborn, but use “anti-abortion” when referring to those of us who value human life. We are “against.” They are for “rights.”

So we made it a point to tune into the Big Three network newscasts on Friday night—hours after Nancy Brinker of Komen had caved. We wanted to see if this story would be treated in a neutral manner, or if the stories would be written from the standpoint that Brinker did the right thing—and, why did it take her so long? We did receive a shock, though it was a mild one. One of the three networks actually did a fairly nice job.

(more…)

***UPDATE: Think Progress was named in lieu of Crooks and Liars in the drafting process. That’s been corrected. We wouldn’t want to insult the integrity of one far left propaganda site by inadvertently identifying it as another far left propaganda site.

In an attempt to discredit my Sunday morning remarks on Planned Parenthood and mammograms, a Crooks and Liars blogger promoted a debunked narrative on the Live Action investigation of Planned Parenthood and mammograms. This is what happens when you confuse knowledge with partisan agenda.

To what does Crooks and Liars link? The debunked Media Matters story. Behold:

Yeah, about that lack of mammography machines … turns out, the whole thing was a sham.

Actually, it wasn’t:

Every defense they have put up about their story has been thoroughly discredited:

Media Matters Still Has Trouble With the Word “Provider,” Owes Correction

Media Matters Proves Why Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Need Taxpayer Funding

Media Matters Refuses To Retract Factual Error

CORRECTION REQUEST STANDS: Media Matters Fudged Truth On Planned Parenthood Mammograms

We ask again for Media Matters to live up to the purpose described for the organization and correct their bad information. Stubbornly clinging to information proven unarguably false isn’t journalism, it’s devotion to propaganda over truth. Media Matters must choose: ideology or journalism.

It’s humorous how one Soros associated blog attempts to bail out another Soros blog using the first Soros blog’s bad and discredited information that they refuse to correct.

Komen didn’t retract funds because Planned Parenthood doesn’t offer mammograms. It never has. I’ve had a wellness check-up from Planned Parenthood (I was between jobs and didn’t have insurance for about a year) and it included a manual breast examination as well as instructions on the proper methods of self-examination (an important tool in early detection, which leads to higher survival rates). Had they detected anything or if I had belonged to any of the high risk groups, they would have referred me for a mammogram. That service could save potentially thousands of women’s lives.

And waste-of-intelligence hack pundits like Dana Loesch want to keep that from them.

I would advise that the next time “Nicole Belle” attempts to deconstruct my remarks, she does so while practicing listening comprehension. Planned Parenthood doesn’t do mammograms, as I clearly and explicitly stated, they provide the “most basic of screenings,” which scores of clinics (not to mention Medicaid) provide to low-income women. If  Crooks and Liars’ blogger needed a mammogram, she would have been referred to another clinic entirely by her Planned Parenthood clinic. Why? Because Planned Parenthood does not offer mammograms.

(more…)

It was an onslaught of savvy PR tactics yesterday that brought the Susan G. Komen Foundation to its knees, apparently prompting the organization’s retreat today from its initial decision to cut its funding to Planned Parenthood.  As Politico reported this morning:

On a day when the breast cancer charity’s top official made the rounds with the national media, insisting the organization’s decision to stop giving grants to Planned Parenthood wasn’t political, the firestorm only got worse. Top Democrats piled on; the head of the Komen chapter in Los Angeles quit; and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is giving a $250,000 matching gift to Planned Parenthood.

The Atlantic Wire reports that the Susan G. Komen foundation’s website was even hacked, for some period displaying a banner that had been changed from “help us get 26.2 or 13.1 miles closer to a world without breast cancer“  to read, “help us run over poor women on our way to the bank.”  And the long repeated myth that the current Komen CEO takes home a half a million dollar salary was brought back to life yesterday – even though the truth is that Komen’s current CEO, Nancy Brinker, takes home $0 in annual salary.

But hey, breast cancer isn’t supposed to be political, right?

Officials with the Susan G. Komen foundation had insisted the initial decision was never political, that it was about providing more direct mammography screening services for women, according to Nancy Brinker, the charity’s founder and CEO.  From Politico:

(more…)

Unfortunately , Komen For The Cure is now experiencing the full fury of the Left following their apparent divorce from the murder factory that is Planned Parenthood. In keeping with their typically Leftist agenda, NPR immediately released a bitter indictment of Komen for separating from Planned Parenthood (PP).

The nation’s leading breast-cancer charity, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, is halting its partnerships with Planned Parenthood affiliates — creating a bitter rift, linked to the abortion debate, between two iconic organizations that have assisted millions of women.

The change will mean a cutoff of hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants, mainly for breast exams.

NPR’s opening salvo contains the usual argument for supporting Komen’s involvement with Planned Parenthood; PP’s use of Komen funds for offering “breast exams” to women at their clinics. This argument contains some very serious flaws, as Jenny Erikson points out in her piece here (please note Jenny’s piece has been attacked by the Left):

Sure, they say the money goes for breast health exams, but money is liquid. Once it goes into the bank, it’s grouped with all the money that’s in there, and then it’s paid out for expenses. It’s like having a dual-income household with a joint checking account. The mortgage isn’t paid with one income and groceries with the other; they’re both paid out of the same checking account.

Besides, Planned Parenthood doesn’t even offer mammograms, which are the surest way to detect early signs of cancer. How much money do they need to be able to tell a patient, “Yup, that feels like a lump — here’s the number for a place that can actually help you”? [my emphasis]

Essentially all of the funds are co-mingled meaning that they may be used for any purpose, not just breast exams. This argument is a red herring used by PP to keep their funding from Komen while trying to make Komen’s involvement with them more palatable to the growing number of donors choosing not to give to Komen. Whether or not Komen acknowledges it, this was clearly a growing issue for them,

Life Decisions International includes Komen on its “boycott list” of companies and organizations that support or collaborate with Planned Parenthood. In December, Lifeway Christian Resources, the publishing division of the Southern Baptist Convention, announced a recall of pink Bibles it had sold because some of the money generated for Komen was being routed to Planned Parenthood

The author of the NPR piece goes on:

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has depicted Stearns’ probe as politically motivated and said she was dismayed that it had contributed to Komen’s decision to halt the grants to PPFA affiliates.

“It’s hard to understand how an organization with whom we share a mission of saving women’s lives could have bowed to this kind of bullying,” Richards told The Associated Press. “It’s really hurtful.”

The Left and Planned Parenthood cannot look past their embrace of the culture of death to realize their mission is really not about saving lives. In fact, PP’s mission is so repugnant it has to be researched to be believed. Short summaries may be found here and here.

Komen, however,  is the antithesis of PP. Komen’s mission since their founding has always been about women’s health and actually saving lives. In fact, since its inception in 1982, Komen has contributed nearly $1.9 billion to the fight against breast cancer.

NPR wants to emphasize where they believe the blame lies:

(more…)

If you want a case of clear bias, the Washington D.C. affiliate of CBS will surely fill the bill for its bias against pro-life supporters. On January 23 the DC affiliate featured on its website a photo slide show of pictures taken at the March for Life rally held annually at the nation’s capitol. Curiously, though, there wasn’t a single photo of any pro-lifers. Instead, the photo essay featured only photos of abortion-supporting protesters who stood on the sidelines taunting the pro-life marchers.

The photo slide show initially featured seven photos of abortion supporters, such as one of marchers holding signs saying “Family Planning Saves Lives Worldwide,” one featuring women holding signs saying that abortion should be kept legal, and another showing a woman sporting an abortion on demand sticker.

Upwards of 50,000 pro-life supporters turned out in the DC cold to participate in the March for Life, yet apparently CBS could only find the small handful of pro-abortion supporters to photograph.

Pro-life advocates like Jill Stanek were incredulous, and it wasn’t long before the comments section on the CBS website exploded with pro-lifers crying foul. Dozens of unhappy commenters remarked how badly the bias of CBS galled them.

Finally, a day or so later, CBS altered its slide show and added some photos of some of the actual participants of the pro-life march. The slide show now features seven photos of pro-lifers and an equal amount of pro-abortion supporters.

(more…)

Media outlets didn’t cover March For Life while it happened, despite knowing it was going to happen and hundreds of thousands of people there. News outlets do have stories on it now, but of course the number of people there are distorted and the stories are pretty bland. Again, remember how much effort went into Occupy Wall Street coverage. Reporters were at the scenes. News stations were always on them. Also if they had anyone on the scene at March For Life they’d have a more accurate number of people.

Photo Credit Michelle Fields from The Daily Caller

The best coverage belongs to Judge Andrew Napolitano on his show  ”Freedom Watch” on FOX Business Network. Judge Napolitano is a fierce pro-life advocate and doesn’t shy away from the issue. At the end of every show he signs off with “The Plain Truth” and yesterday it was about abortion.

His guest was Rep. Renee Ellmers who discussed the defense of life. This was the most coverage by anyone in the media. Thank you, Judge Napolitano.

I then went to FOX News and I’ll admit, I was disappointed. The article was written by Shannon Bream and just like C-SPAN she called the protestors anti-abortion. Yes they are anti-abortion, but why doesn’t anyone ever call them pro-life? Why do they have to be constantly addressed as anti? When pro-choice protesters march they’re referred to as pro-choice, not anti-life. She did, however, give a reasonable estimate of people there, tens of thousands. Trust me, that’s much better than some of the others.

(more…)

The March For Life took place yesterday in Washington, DC despite the cold, dreary weather. But unless you tuned into C-SPAN2 for a few hours this morning or EWTN (the Catholic station) all day you wouldn’t have known it happened. Other stations, including FOX News, glossed over this march while it happened.

Credit Elizabeth Avis @Beth_Avis

Before the march Michelle Malkin wrote a post about the media’s lack of attention. It got me interested and I decided to tune into DirecTV News Mix and the C-SPAN coverage all afternoon. Some people on Twitter, especially Sharon Cabana, helped me out by keeping an eye on CNN and MSNBC. There were a a few seconds of coverage on FOX News & MSNBC, but didn’t see anything on CNN. I’m not shocked, but it doesn’t mean I’m not disappointed. The Old Media was on hand to cover OWS at all times. They knew this was happening and yet no one on stand by. It’s awful how these peaceful, clean, and civilized people were completely ignored by the Old Media while the disgusting and uncivilized people of Occupy Wall Street received so much attention.

Thank goodness for social media like Twitter. Since I knew I wasn’t going to receive anything from the Old Media I knew I had to use the New Media. I reached out to people on the #MarchForLife hash tag and people have been tweeting me pictures. Here are a few:

(more…)

Jezebel, the site where self-obsessed women celebrate unprotected promiscuity, is smearing another woman’s loss of child for politics. This, in the Claire’s Boutique mindset of progressive feminism, is called “empowerment.”

Let’s get down to brass tacks: Presidential candidate Rick Santorum, Personhood Pledge-signing, Griswold vs. Connecticut-opposing, Mr. Ban Abortion in All Circumstances With No Exception for the Life of the Mother, believes that the actions of his own wife should be treated as criminal. Why? Because, back in 1996, his wife had a procedure that resulted in the deliberate death of her fetus, even though it was a matter of saving her own life.

Karen Santorum’s difficult pregnancy and resultant life-saving, induced early delivery is nosecret; in a 2004 interview with NPR’s Terry Gross, her husband characterized the 1996 procedure as a harrowing but necessary. Karen, in her 19th week of pregnancy, received a risky surgery to save a pregnancy that doctors thought had little chance of survival. After the surgery, she came down with an infection, and doctors told Rick that unless the source of the infection — the fetus — was removed, his wife would die and his already-born children would be motherless. The doctor also told Santorum that his wife’s fetus would not survive outside of the womb. According to Santorum, Karen went into labor as a result of the antibiotics, and then doctors gave her a drug that further induced labor. She delivered, and unfortunately the doctors were right.

Jezebel confuses an attempt to undergo surgery to save the life of her child with procedures a woman undergoes a to end the life of her child.

The Santorums’ child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive. Karen Santorum wasn’t going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didn’t have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen. The Santorums chose the route that provided the biggest return for the gamble. How asinine and petty for women to politicize the loss of a child for a straw man argument. Doing all you can to prevent the loss of a child you wanted is nothing like planning the execution of a child you don’t want. Of course, I don’t expect a site operated by drunk, self-described “slut machine(s)” who talk about how they don’t report rape (but like to use it as a political issue nonetheless) to understand the elementary difference. Perhaps, like our President, the issue is “above their pay grade.”

(more…)

He has written about having sex with an underage girl, and claims he once threatened to kill a pregnant girlfriend unless she had an abortion. He claims to hate marijuana, but recommends heroin as the cure for suburban boredom. He mocks “Tea Baggers” and scorns “hippies.” His Russian newspaper was shuttered after a government crackdown, and he’s a regular on The Dylan Ratigan Show on MSNBC.

Meet Mark Ames, the provocateur who created the Koch brothers conspiracy theory.

Long before John Podesta’s Center for American Progress began targeting the Koch brothers for their supposed role in the Tea Party, and two years before the Kochs were cast as the villains of public sector union protests in Wisconsin, Ames had already shaped the Koch brothers meme.

Ames and co-author Yasha Levine launched the conspiracy theory–and its twin themes of drug abuse and gay sex–with a blog post (now removed) at Playboy.com in February 2009, entitled: “Backstabber: Is Rick Santelli High on Koch?” They published almost exactly the same article at their own site, exiledonline.com, as “Exposing the Rightwing PR Machine: Is CNBC’s Rick Santelli Sucking Koch?”

Ames and Levine alleged that Santelli’s famous “rant heard around the world” that inspired the Tea Party movement “was not at all spontaneous as his alleged fans claim, but rather it was a carefully-planned trigger” for an “anti-Obama campaign.” That campaign, they claimed, had been planned for months before the 2008 election, and funded by “the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups.”

Ames would later explain that he had been inspired to write about the Kochs by his experiences in post-Soviet Moscow, when he edited a sensational newspaper, the eXile–described last year by Vanity Fair as “arguably the most abusive, defamatory, un-evenhanded, and crassest publication in Russia” before it closed in 2008. (more…)

I sometimes wonder if the opinion writers for the Washington Post let anyone read their articles before they get published. The main stream media at one point prided itself for its “layers of editors and fact checkers,” but they seem to have disappeared. I say this because, every once in a while, I come across an article so deaf to its own irony that I need to stop and wonder. I don’t mean to say that I don’t expect a misrepresentation of facts, the building of straw men and a dozen other logical mistakes in the writings of ideologically compromised “journalists.” It’s just the absolutely unbridled transference that I would think that someone in those vaunted layers would maybe dare to say, “uh … about that.”

Such is the feeling I got when reading Richard Cohen’s latest screed in the Washington Post. I hope you’re ready for this one, it is pretty laughable. The GOP is a cult. You need to take a pledge to join up. Well, no, not exactly, but certain interest groups want you to promise to agree to their causes to get an endorsement. That’s totally like joining a cult, except it isn’t. For the sake of entertainment and to see how oblivious to irony these people are we’ll take a look.

Cohen has to make a silly jab at the memory of Ronald Regan to start things off.

“It is not enough to support the party or mouth banalities about Ronald Reagan …”

It is true there are those in the Republican Party who would use President Reagan’s memory as a political tool without actually believing in any of the principles that made the GOP the party of Reagan. However, the majority of Republicans do not “mouth banalities” about Reagan; they hold the truths that he espoused to be the bedrock upon which the country stands.

What are the pledges that have Cohen so up in arms?

No increase in taxes and any closing of loopholes would be matched by other tax cuts. Right, you can now run screaming into the woods as the mad cultists of the GOP come for you. Just not for your money.

The pro-life pledge is next on the list of bugaboos for Cohen. GOP candidates who want the endorsement of the Susan B. Anthony List must agree to oppose abortion including the opposition of judicial nominees who might decide against the wholesale slaughter of the unborn. Can you smell that? That’s the irony burning. If I could remind the Washington Post editorial staff it is the Democrat party who have for years been using the pro-abortion stance as a litmus test for judges. It is the radical feminists of NOW who have raised the concept of abortion to an inalienable right. A right that trumps every other consideration.  A politician can be the biggest womanizing, sexual harassing scum bag, but if they are a pro-abortion advocate Democrat then they’re good to go. That’s a Pro-Hypocrisy stance if I have ever seen one.

(more…)

Lawrence O’Donnell on his show Friday read an email from a woman who said she couldn’t afford either cable or birth control so “please Lawrence,” she wrote, “shout some sense into them.”

The way O’Donnell said that she couldn’t “even afford cable t.v. to watch this program” as though it was the Great Depression and she was going without food rather than cable.

In his haste to carry water for abortion advocates, O’Donnell makes no mention of the Women’s Health Program in Medicaid that already does exactly the things Planned Parenthood does (and even provides mammograms) or the many other clinics and organizations which do the same thing.

(more…)

Don’t Worry, It’s Not Racist. He Just Wants Black Children To Die To Save Money.

What’s wrong with you, bitter clingers? Don’t you realize that a dead child is a cheap child? I mean, all dead babies cost is the funds to suck or cut them mercilessly from their mother’s womb. Presto! No more pesky expenses of a living child.

Ezra Klein, writing at the Washington Post, actually proffers that argument in favor of  taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood; that abortions are cheaper for the government than having an “unintended pregnancy”. (That’s their euphemism for unborn baby killed by abortion.) His article is filled with predictable talking points, all easily disproved – the SBA List has already done so here.  Setting the horrid spin aside, his concluding paragraph is truly vile:

The fight also isn’t about cutting spending. The services Planned Parenthood provides save the federal government a lot of money. It’s somewhat cold to put it in these terms, but taxpayers end up bearing a lot of the expense for unintended pregnancies among people without the means to care for their children. [my emphasis]

(more…)

Media Matters knows nothing of what it speaks and continues to ignore the facts when it deals with health care laws, compliance, and regulations.  In its zeal to prove Lee Stranahan wrong, MM ignores the fact that Planned Parenthood does not provide the mammography service.  MM stated:

Team Breitbart is still challenging our perfectly accurate statement that Waco’s Planned Parenthood provides mammograms, apparently arguing that in order to provide a service it is necessary to perform that service. But this reasoning suffers an obvious and fatal flaw: it ignores the costs associated with providing a service.

[...]

We pointed out that Planned Parenthood in Waco pays for mammograms to be performed.

Let’s read on, shall we.  Its narrow interpretation, simplistic definitions list, and cute sandwich analogy are completely flawed as there are layers of compliance, coding, and state/federal regulations health care practitioners/providers must abide.  Let’s take this step by step for the Media Matters scribes, so they can follow along on who legally “provides” the service according to health care regulations, by which they which must be applied to this scenario to be accurate.

(more…)

Yesterday, I did a piece showing how Media Matters used deceptive editing techniques on the Fox / Bill Sammon story. I’m still waiting to hear back from Sammon before I do part two but I wanted to show you a couple of more videos that I’ve done in the meantime.

The first one shows how Media Matters used the ‘straw man’ fallacy to attempt to discredit the piece published by Lila Rose yesterday on the Mammosham story. As I say in the video, your position on the controversial issue of abortion doesn’t really matter here – Media Matters are contemptible news twisters.

(more…)

This has been an ongoing controversy and now that LiveAction has come out with another sting on Planned Parenthood, this is significant.  The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation states in its March 2011 Statement on Planned Parenthood:

Early screening through mammograms and education is critical to end the suffering from this disease: 98 percent of women treated for early stage breast cancer, before it spreads, are alive five years later. The widespread use of mammography and heightened public awareness of breast cancer both contribute to these favorable statistics.

And while Komen Affiliates provide funds to pay for screening, education and treatment programs in dozens of communities, in some areas, the only place that poor, uninsured or under-insured women can receive these services are through programs run by Planned Parenthood. [emphasis mine]

More information provided on the PP homepage shows they clearly refer out for these mammography services:

Where Can I Get a Mammogram?

Ask your health care provider, health department, or staff at your local Planned Parenthood health center about where you can get a mammogram in your area.

Additionally, it appears that PP does provide breast exams only. However, the Komen memo links mammography, screenings, education, and treatment of breast cancer as their list of reasons it contributes to PP. It’s perpetuated all across the media without validation.

Now that LiveAction has proved that PP does NOT provide mammography services to its clients, what is the money being used for, because clearly is not for mammography screenings?  Education, treatment? Are these questions we can expect our mainstream media propagandists to divulge in their articles? Or will the discovery stop with these citizen investigators and go unreported by the networks?

The Komen Foundation needs to come clean on specifically what those PP contributions are designated and why they really continue to support PP.

Crossposted at  The Minority Report

In a bid to discredit the Live Action’s investigation of Planned Parenthood as a “hoax,” Media Matters forgot that fact-checking matters most.

Says Media Matters:

This is false.

(more…)

The left and their friends in the media have been frantically pushing the spin regarding Planned Parenthood and the recent move, via the Pence Amendment, to stop providing them with federal funding (from we, the taxpayers). Screeching things like “If you defund Planned Parenthood, women will die! They won’t be able to get mammograms. Why do you hate women and their girl bits?”

As many of us know, Planned Parenthood does not, nor have they ever, provided mammograms. That has not stopped them from outright lying about this in an attempt to scare people into giving them money.

(more…)

I love it when Atheists proclaim to know more about people of faith than those people know about themselves.

The March 3 hatchet job on Christians perpetrated by the Secular Progressive Atheist Clown Phil Zuckerman is another case in point.  Now, Christians don’t need me to defend them.  They are the MSM’s favorite religious target.  The sad thing about Zuckerman is that it isn’t enough for him to just espouse his own lack of faith.  He has to attack other people’s faith.  I guess that’s part of the “new tone.”

Never mind that Zuckerman’s way into the article is to make a completely false statement derived from a Pew Poll.   Never mind that demonizing Christians for their support of the death penalty is done without mentioning that even left-leaning Californians support the death penalty.  Never mind that Zuckerman could have presented an intriguing non-partisan sociological study of religious and political beliefs among Evangelicals (he is a “Professor of Sociology” after all).

No, Zuckerman’s huge revelation — his entire reason for writing the article — is that Evangelical Christians are hypocrites when it comes to reconciling their religious and political beliefs.

Hypocrites.  Imagine that.  People…actual human beings….are flawed.  They say one thing yet do another! (more…)