Last month, Sen. Rick Santorum schooled CNN’s Candy Crowley on the subject of President Barack Obama’s appeasement of America’s enemies.

Today, on NBC’s Meet the Press, it was David Gregory’s turn.

Like Crowley, Gregory attempted to “fact-check” Santorum by arguing that it could not possibly be “accurate” or “objective” to describe Obama’s foreign policy as “appeasement.”

In particular, he challenged Santorum to distinguish Obama’s policy on Iran from that of his predecessor, George W. Bush. (For several years, Democrats have tried to defend Obama by pointing out that the Bush administration refused to approve military strikes, either by the U.S. or by Israel.)

Santorum, as usual, delivered the facts on demand:

Santorum pointed out that Obama failed to support Iran’s democracy movement–and later added that Obama cut funding to pro-democracy programs that Bush had supported. He noted that Obama has given tacit support to Islamist political parties in Egypt and other Arab countries that oppose America and our allies. (more…)

This Sunday morning, on CNN’s State of the Union, Candy Crowley attempted to “fact-check” Sen. Rick Santorum for his statement to the Republican Jewish Coalition on Dec. 7 that President Barack Obama had pursued a foreign policy of “appeasement.”

Her apparent intent–as with other so-called “fact-checking” efforts–was to attack what has been, and remains, an accurate and effective summary of Obama’s approach to hostile regimes.

Crowley must have thought she had Santorum cornered. After all, President Obama’s stern response to Santorum on Dec. 8 had provided a frisson of delight to liberals like Chris Matthews of MSNBC, who declared: “President Obama’s fierce defense against Republican charges of appeasement proves once again that if you underestimate this president, you may do so at your peril.”

But Santorum stood his ground–and then some.

The video and full transcript of their exchange is below. What emerges is Crowley’s adherence to pro-Obama talking points and her eagerness–like much of the rest of the mainstream media–to be impressed when Obama talks tough against his opponents, regardless of whether or not his response is true or complete. She is surprised when Santorum turns the tables and “fact-checks” her false assertions about Obama’s record.

CROWLEY: Let me move you along to something that you said last Wednesday at a Republican Jewish conference, talking about the President, his foreign policy. I’m going to play that for our viewers as well as something that the President said in response.

SANTORUM (VIDEO): This president, for every thug and hooligan, for every radical Islamist, he has had nothing but appeasement.

OBAMA (VIDEO): Ask Osama bin Laden and the 22 out of 30 top Al Qaeda leaders who have been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement.

CROWLEY: Appeasement? I mean this is a president who has killed more terrorists than were killed in the Bush administration. He took out Osama bin Laden. He has launched more drone attacks against terrorist targets than the Bush administration did, and yet you accuse him of appeasement–which is a very loaded word, as you know, toward terrorists.

SANTORUM: It’s a very accurate word. What President Obama was doing was continuing existing Bush policies with respect to Al Qaeda and respect to Afghanistan. I was talking about the new threats that have come up under his [Obama’s] administration. And at every single turn the President has appeased those who would do us harm. Let’s talk about President Ahmadinejad and the Iranians who are the biggest threat to Israel and to our national security. He has done nothing but appease the Iranians to say that he will negotiate, in fact did negotiate, tried to negotiate without preconditions–

CROWLEY: He imposed sanctions, did he not?

SANTORUM: He imposed weak sanctions. He opposed tough sanctions– (more…)

This is mind-boggling: Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Jon Huntsman demand Eric Holder’s resignation over Operation Fast and Furious. Perry went so far as to pen an op-ed for The Washington Times calling for Holder’s resignation. But for some reason CNN doesn’t ask a single question about the operation and honestly, the candidates could have brought it up too, and had ample opportunity.

Mr. Phil Truluck, executive vice president and COO of The Heritage Foundation, finally asked about border security. He asked:

“Let’s — I’d like to turn it back a little bit, a little closer to home, and talk about what’s going on on the borders, our southern border. As all of you know, the drug-related crimes and violence are getting heavier and heavier in that area. First, do you consider that to be a national interest threat? And, secondly, what could we be doing with the Mexican government to help stop these drug cartels?”

This is a perfect set up to talk about Fast and Furious and just gunwalking in general. Wolf Blitzer went right to Mr. Perry and here’s Mr. Perry’s response:

PERRY: Well, let me kind of broaden it out. I think it’s time for a 21st century Monroe Doctrine. When you think about what we put in place in the — in the 1820s, and then we used it again in the 1960s with the Soviet Union. We’re seeing countries start to come in and infiltrate. We know that Hamas and Hezbollah are working in Mexico, as well as Iran, with their ploy to come into the United States.

We know that Hugo Chavez and the Iranian government has one of the largest — I think their largest embassy in the world is in Venezuela. So the idea that we need to have border security with the United States and Mexico is paramount to the entire western hemisphere.

So putting that secure border in place with strategic fencing, with the boots on the ground, with the aviation assets, and then working with Mexico in particular, whether it’s putting sanctions against the banks, whether it’s working with them on security with Mexico, all of those together can make that country substantially more secure and our borders secure.

As the President of the United States, I will promise you one thing, that within 12 months of the inaugural, that border will be shut down, and it will be secure.

Perfect set up to bring up Fast and Furious and Mr. Perry failed miserably. The candidates forget to attack the Obama administration during these debates and this was the exact moment Mr. Perry could have shined. Let’s examine Mr. Perry’s answer and compare it to his op-ed. When he brought up Iran in the debate he should have brought in his op-ed because he mentions Iran using the Mexican drug cartels to assassinate the Saudi Arabia ambassador in Washington.

Perry should have mentioned how he wouldn’t allow guns to walk across the border. He should have mentioned how the Obama administration has to be blamed for the border violence because of Operation Fast and Furious. He should have mentioned how he would work with the Mexican government, unlike the Obama administration do-nothing promises. No mention at all.

The conversation steered to illegal immigration and this is where Mrs. Bachmann joined in. However, she didn’t seize the opportunity to go back to border security and talk about gunwalking or Fast & Furious. Mr. Perry went back to border security, but once again, failed to bring up Fast & Furious.

(more…)

After last night’s Republican debate over national security and foreign policy, CNN called upon Tom Foreman to check some of the facts asserted by the candidates, in a segment entitled “Keeping Them Honest.”

It soon became clear that Foreman and CNN were not interested in checking the candidates’ facts–which were correct in each case–but in checking their opinions, while misleading viewers about the candidates’ honesty.

First, Foreman checked Mitt Romney’s list of the Obama administration’s proposed defense cuts. Foreman had to admit that “He’s got all the numbers right. All of those cuts are correct, the ones he named.” Yet he objected to Romney’s alleged exclusion of “context” such as the fact that the U.S. spent $700 billion on defense, “more than the next 17 nations combined.” Hence he rated Romney’s statement “true, but incomplete.”

That’s not fact–that’s Foreman’s own apparent opinion that Obama’s defense cuts are irrelevant as long as the U.S. remains the world’s pre-eminent military power. Foreman begged the question of whether we are spending as much as our potential enemies, rather than considering America’s existing commitments and unique leadership role. It was, essentially, an anti-war critique of Romney’s view–not an analysis of his facts. (more…)

Time Magazine: [emphasis added]

George Soros, billionaire investor and grand patron of the American institutional left, has just failed in his attempt to have his 2002 conviction for insider trading in France overturned. He plans to appeal.

The Soros result has gone virtually unnoticed in the U.S. media, which has paid more attention to a rather lame attempt by Bloomberg Markets magazine to develop the Koch brothers conspiracy theory into a tale of global corruption.

How bad was that article? The Atlantic summed it up nicely:

The article purports to be a hard-hitting exposé on the giant multinational, run by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. According to Bloomberg, 14 reporters around the globe worked for six months on the story. What did they turn up? Really, shockingly little. And what’s worse: from the very outset, the reporters’ bias against the Koch brothers is utterly clear.

Meanwhile, Media Matters for America–the Soros-funded, self-appointed would-be censor of conservative opinion–continues hankering after the Koch brothers.

And just in time to catch the Astroturf fever of #OccupyWallStreet, Democrats are rumored to be heading to this weekend’s Sunday news shows armed with talking points about the Koch brothers’ alleged past dealings in Iran through a foreign subsidiary.

Yet Rahm Emanuel, who will appear on NBC’s Meet the Press, and Nancy Pelosi, who will appear on ABC’s This Week, received campaign contributions from companies alleged to have operated in Iran through subsidiaries–including Honeywell, for example, which has contributed to both. (more…)

The New York Times does it again and again—endangers the lives of those operating abroad. This past Sunday, the New York Times released an article titled U.S. Underwrites Internet Detour Around Censors. This article is not the first written by the New York Times where anti-American propaganda crossed numerous lines of freedom of press. The New York Times can very well be construed as the next Wikileaks.

This specific article attacks young academics and entrepreneurs who have taken serious risks to better the livelihoods of those living abroad. It also attacks U.S. initiatives overseas. Most disturbing, the New York Times specifically stated that some of the information obtained came directly out of “classified diplomatic cables.” When will the New York Times madness stop?

Historically, this is nothing new for the New York Times. On the 24^th of May 2010, the New York Times had written another article titled U.S. Is Said to Expand Secret Actions in Mideast. Within the 2010 article, it stated that an expansion of clandestine activities were to occur in the Middle East.

“The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region, according to defense officials and military documents.” (more…)

A nice, safe, inconsequential choice? Time couldn’t bring themselves to award information distributor, worshipper of hubris, self-styled rockstar Julian Assange the nod, though he dominated Internet voting. Of course, they couldn’t bring themselves to give the award to the tea party even though the tea party changed the course and discourse of a nation in a single year.

(more…)

Having spent much of the past 24 hours going through the State Department documents released by Wikileaks I can honestly say the most amazing revelation is the lack of revelations in the documents. Not that it isn’t shocking to see some of these reports in black and white, but most of the Wikileaks “bombshells” are simply confirmation of news reports discussed here, the other “Big” sites, on my blog The Lid, or other sites,  many times before. Here are some examples of the “old news”:

• Arab states see Iran as a danger:  The revelation that Israel is not the only nation in the Middle East suggesting that the “head of the snake” be cut off is nothing close to new. Even the fact that other nations in the Middle East want nuclear technology because Iran has been closing in on the nuclear weapons are have been discussed before. I would also note that the James Baker meme (subscribed to by Obama and Hillary Clinton) that solving the Iran problem is linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was totally destroyed by the Wikileaks release. There was not one mention of “linkage” by an Arab state in the released cables.

• North Korea is supplying missiles to Iran: Iran obtained 19 of the missiles from North Korea, according to a cable dated Feb. 24 of this year. Again this is old news. We also know that North Korea built a nuclear reactor in the Syrian desert.

(more…)

What the MSM is absolutely not interested in reminding you about:

DAVID GREGORY:  Our guest today on Meet the Press, CIA Director Leon Panetta.  Welcome, sir.

PANETTA:  Good Morning, Tim.  I heard you’d passed away. Glad you’re back.

GREGORY:  Uh, thanks.  How do you see the Afghan struggle playing out?

PANETTA:  Well, my wife insists on a wall covering, but I prefer a rug, say a Turkestan Kunduz in the Persian style.  We may need a mediator.

GREGORY:  Sir, would you embed journalists in CIA special ops teams?

PANETTA:  I resent that question, Tim.  I’m a happily married man.

GREGORY:  Sorry.  Do you employ Muslims at Langley, sir?

PANETTA:  I do, Tim.  I chose muslin with cheery Wide Ruffles® for my office windows.  I also ordered muslin backdrops for videographic contrast in our interrogation rooms.

GREGORY:  The ”ticking time bomb” scenario, sir. You capture a terrorist after he’s hidden a nuke in New York.  Now what? (more…)

The President’s recent commencement address to Hampton University students in Virginia counseled the young minds about the dangers of being bombarded by too much information, but who knew that Joe Lieberman was listening when the President said:

Meanwhile, you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t rank all that high on the truth meter. With iPods and iPads; Xboxes and PlayStations; information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment. All of this is not only putting new pressures on you; it is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy.

The President also schooled the kids on how difficult it is to sift through all of the information on the web.  Perhaps he thinks the government should help us by winnowing out some of the inconsequential information?

All of that mind-boggling information and the new pressures on our country and our democracy must have triggered a response in this “independent senator” from Connecticut (who caucuses with the Democrats of course, just like the other “independent senator,” Bernie Sanders of Vermont), as Joe Lieberman has offered legislation that he claims will “protect” America during an emergency by giving the President power to shut down the Internet. (more…)

Internecine strife, hurt feelings, jealousy, tears: no, it’s not a daytime soap opera but rather all in day’s work over at the cable channel nobody watches, MSNBC.  It seems that someone named Donnie Deutsch — whose claim to fame is what, exactly? — who’s been anchoring a week-long afternoon series called “America the Angry,” drew the wrath of the station’s resident angry person, Keith Olbermann, by displaying an image of the Howard Beale of our time as part of a general examination of the media’s role in fostering a climate of, well, anger.

Just so you can sort them out, here’s Beale (Peter Finch) from the classic movie, Network:

And here’s Olbermann.  Even their own mothers couldn’t tell them apart:

So let the fun begin!  From the New York Times: (more…)

From Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress.  This letter will appear as a full page ad in tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal and and Washington Post:

WJC_letter_wsj-r5 –

Barack Obama has found yet another way to express his special brand of anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel – while the mainstream media looks the other way. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Thursday dropped out of Obama’s 47-nation nuclear security summit, after discovering that Israel was going to be pressured there to sign on to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which would drastically weaken Israel’s defenses.

And you won’t find it in the American press, but the Israeli publication NRG/Maariv reported Wednesday that employees of Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor are now being denied entry into the United States. Do they have criminal records? Terrorist connections? Do they beat, murder and rape their people marching for freedom, as does Iran, a terrorist state Obama is effectively helping go nuclear?

No. These Jewish scientists and plant workers want to come to America to study nuclear engineering, chemistry and physics. But Obama won’t let them in, just because they work in a nuclear plant in the Jewish homeland. (more…)