***ADDED: Something else the Blaze didn’t bother to share was this.
You have to wonder what’s going on with Glenn Beck.
Beck’s fall from grace started when his site, The Blaze, falsely attacked James O’Keefe — to the delight of the very people who used to attack Beck. Then Beck, of all things, betrayed the Tea Party in the worst way any conservative could. I thought he’d hit bottom with that. After all, how much lower can you go than selling out to the mainstream media?
Well, yesterday, what I thought had been a rhetorical question was answered when The Blaze went full Andrew Sullivan, full Politico,full Wonkette, and and attacked Sarah Palin over a situation involving her family.
The Governor’s sin? Composing what amounts to a touching article about her family’s life with Trig – Todd and Sarah Palin’s youngest son with Down Syndrome.
To understand how misleading the Blaze attack is, you first have to read what Beck’s writer, a piece of work named Eddie Scarry (more on him below), wrote:
What’s the first thing that came to mind when you heard that Rick Santorum‘s special needs child was in the hospital with pneumonia late last month? I bet all of Mitt Romney‘s money it wasn’t Sarah Palin unless you are Sarah Palin. …
48) I’m in, like, dating Babylon. Like, I go on dates with men and, literally, like Sarah Palin will come up in like the first 20 minutes, and that doesn’t put me in the mood. Like, talking about Sarah Palin. And they just want to know gossip, and I’m just kind of taking a little hiatus from dating right now, because I just don’t want to talk about Sarah Palin. —Meghan McCain
If Meghan McCain turned around tomorrow and said “Bam America! I got you! What you have been witnessing for the past four years is a study in irony!” I’d be impressed.
There’s Internet tough guy Tim Wise:
11) [Andrew Breitbart]…I want that bastard destroyed. Now.[...] when I say I want him destroyed I am not kidding. I want to see him penniless, homeless, begging on the street for money to buy food[...] he can die on the street so far as I’m concerned[...] let you and your rich ass Brentwood family suffer. — Tim Wise
Alan Colmes earlier today made a despicable remark about how the Santorum family grieved over their child, a remark for which he had to later apologize.
Colmes faced off with National Review editor Rich Lowry, who responded to a question on whether or not undecided voters will truly stick by Santorum when it’s time to cast a vote. Colmes answered, saying that his rising support will stop short once people “get a load of some of the crazy things he’s said and done, like taking his two-hour-old baby when it died right after child birth home and played with it so that his other children would know that the child was real.”
Lowry cut off Colmes, calling the statement “a cheap shot.”
“To take something that is that personal and that hurtful as losing a child and mocking it like that … that is beneath you, Alan,” he said. “What you’re saying is contemptible.”
It was more than a cheap shot, it was using someone else’s tragedy to make a political point. The flippant way he described taking baby Gabriel home was an attempt to make light of a horrific time for the Santorum family. They did not take the child home to ”play with him” but because they felt before they sent him to his eternal resting place he should become a “real human being” to his siblings.
He and his wife, Karen, have seven children – including, as Santorum puts it, “the one in Heaven.” Their fourth baby, Gabriel Michael, died in 1996, two hours after an emergency delivery in Karen Santorum’s 20th week of pregnancy. The couple took Gabriel’s body home to let their three other young children see and hold the baby before burying him, according to Karen Santorum’s book of the ordeal, “Letters to Gabriel.”
Santorum’s wife described the aftermath to Gabriel’s death in a heart breaking way.
Gabriel Michael Santorum was born at 12:45 AM on Friday, October 11, 1996. He was a beautiful boy. He did not give a cry or open his tiny eyes. We baptized him, bundled him, and held him ever so close. We sang to him, held his little hands and kissed him. Gabriel lived for two hours. In those two hours something simple but profound happened. Rick and I became parents to a newborn baby and welcomed him into our family. That was all….but it was everything. His life was so brief, yet his impact so great. In two hours we experienced a lifetime of emotions. Love, sorrow, regret, joy—-all were packed into that brief span. To have rejected that experience would have been to reject life itself.
I pray that Colmes never has to face the pain of losing a child to learn what he would do in the face of such a horrible tragedy. He has no right to make light of the pain of others.
Then again, this is the same Alan Colmes who accused Sarah Palin of causing her son’s Downs Syndrome. via Prenatal neglect Not only does that belay genetics at the time it was the most disgusting thing I have ever heard from a liberal commentator. But today Colmes topped himself.
Apparently even Colmes realized he went too far. Santorum appeared on Hannity later in the day and said Colmes apologized.
Democrats, in full class warfare mode, have taken to calling Gov. Mitt Romney “Willard,” apparently in the belief that his given first name is elitist.
Al Sharpton, for example, referred to Romney as “Willard” on MSNBC on Dec. 14, in a segment attacking him for his Wall Street connections.
Sharpton also called Romney “Mr. Monopoly Man,” to emphasize the point.
Democrat strategist and convicted felon Robert Creamer–no stranger to the elite lifestyle–has tried to pull the same stunt, mocking Romney at the Huffington Post:
Creamer wrote:
Earlier this week, Republican Presidential candidate Willard Mitt Romney delivered a speech framing the 2012 presidential election as a choice between an “entitlement society” and an “opportunity society.” It really takes chutzpa for a guy who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth to rail against an “entitlement society.” Here is a guy who got his start in life the old-fashioned way–he inherited it.
Last month, Democrat Brent Budowsky even claimed in The Hill that “Willard M. Romney, better known as Mitt” had changed his first name because “Mitt” had “presumably [been] tested by polling and focus groups in which Mitt performed better than Willard.”
The level of cruelty with which the leftist media attacks conservative women never seems to hit bottom. Again and again, we’re told by leftists that the sexual revolution liberated women to be women. Burn your bras! Sleep around! What they forgot to tell women, though, was that there would be a price for straying off the Liberal Plantation and daring to think for yourself. For if you do, Missy, we will use the power of our platform and words to publicly and sexually humiliate you.
Case in point, Fishbowl DC’s Peter Ogburn, who rips into the Daily Caller’s Michelle Fields for the unpardonable sin of being an attractive young woman who dresses like one.
To understand how vicious and sexist Ogburn’s attack is, first I want you to read what he wrote, and then below the fold, you can watch the “Skinemax” video he references:
ALL of the videos with the women feature shots above the waist. Some even go out of their way to show off cleavage. Because when I think Keynesian economics, I think Titty City. Pretty weird, I know.
What’s weirder? The latest video is hosted by Michelle Fields, from the Daily Caller. It’s no secret that Michelle knows that she is gorgeous and has great hair, but this is super weird. The camera work seems to be largely inspired by the early works of the Al Qaeda hostage tapes. A nervous and awkward Fields, who clearly has NO IDEA what she is talking about, rattles on about “How the New Deal Was a Failure.” We get it, Michelle. You think you’re hot. But, if you want to be taken seriously, maybe just be good at reporting and stop showing off your legs and cleavage. Do you remember that time Diane Sawyer showed off a bunch of cleavage while reading the news? No? Because it didn’t happen! See Michelle’s low budget Skinemax video below.
There is growing criticism of Sarah after the shooting of congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Texas. Sarah had published a map placing the crosshairs of a gun over Democratic areas supporting President Obama’s healthcare plans. Mrs Giffords, a Democrat, had warned there would be consequences. And there were. She was shot.
We decide that the only way of reaching Sarah is to attend a rally. We find one billed as a ‘question and answer’ session. The questions are all scripted. With some difficulty, I shout: ‘Do you think your political career is over?’
This is met with an audible gasp from the packed auditorium. Sarah looks startled. And I am escorted from the building.
The DLC also targeted Giffords’ district on a map. And she was shot. Cue thriller music.
Meghan McCain is turning into the female Al Sharpton. MSNBC must feel proud, the same pride a father feels when he first realizes that his son sucks at sports.
I spoke with Newt Gingrich on my show earlier today and asked him about his Climategate remarks, immigration (we agree to disagree on the means to the end), and informed him of the story where a Washington Post blogger is asking readers to crowdsource Gingrich’s private life.
Big Government breaks the news that Bill Ayers hosted a fundraiser for Barack Obama; well, this was broken by Ben Smith in 2007, but still.
I call it a “snark” because the word “lie” feels a little harsh during this holiday season. However, it’s just a fact that Big Government didn’t position the piece as “breaking news” and as far as I can tell it wasn’t even a featured story. But you have to admire a guy like Weigel who poses as an objective journalist and yet sees no news value whatsoever in new video of a notorious domestic terrorist speaking openly about his relationship with a sitting President of the United States.
But is it really that Weigel saw no news value in it or that he knows that Obama’s re-election could be in even more trouble were he to receive the kind of vetting Journolisters like Weigel did everything in their power to prevent in 2008?
Naturally, Weigel isn’t alone. Here’s Politico’s Ben Smith joining in on the wrist-flicking of the new Ayers video:
Oh, and did you know Ben Smith was also a member of Journolist and that something he didn’t find at all, uhm, “footnote-y” was the possibility that Sarah Palin might own a tanning bed.
On January 8 2011, a criminal named Jared Loughner opened fire on a crowd outside a Safeway grocery store in Tucson, Arizona. As a result, six people were killed and many others injured: among them, U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).
What happened that day was a crime and a tragedy. And while it reminded sensible, salt-of-the-earth Americans of the need to arm ourselves to protect our families from criminals like Loughner, it has taught the left nothing. This is demonstrated by the fact that they have spent the months since January calling for more gun control while also doing their best to spare Loughner from prosecution because of his mental state.
Moreover, from the moment the shooting happened till now, they have continued to blame it on Sarah Palin. (I have no doubt they would also be blaming Charlton Heston, were he not already in heaven where their machinations cannot harm him.)
But as it is, wimpy leftists like Piers Morgan are still trying to demonstrate that Palin had some culpability in Giffords’ shooting because she had marked certain congressional races with crosshairs on a map to show tea partiers which races needed to be focused on. (To my knowledge, Morgan has yet to say anything about the fact the left was targeting certain conservative congressional districts with bulls-eyes at the same time that Palin was using crosshairs.)
As a matter of fact, just this week—over 11 months since Giffords was shot—Morgan wasted another entire segment of his unwatched show expressing outrage over the fact that Palin has yet to apologize for the fact that Giffords was shot.
Talking to Giffords’ husband, Mark Kelly (who is doing his shameful best to sell books in the wake of his wife’s shooting), Morgan said:
In her haste to take no responsibility, [Palin] didn’t even bother to pick the phone up, to write, to do anything. I find that extraordinary.
Since when is Palin obligated to call members of congress who face some extraordinary hardship? Even the hint that should she have called demonstrates just how divorced from reality Morgan really is.
- NYT under fire from its readers for the casual use of both “rape” and “sex” in their Penn State stories:
Times Ombudsman Arthur Brisbane said the word “rape” is in flux, and that the Times’ Stylebook says it should be used to mean “forced intercourse, or intercourse with a child below the age of consent.” Brisbane talked with sports editor Joe Sexton about the issue:
[He] told me the paper had “no reluctance to use ‘rape’ ” and was not trying “to somehow shy away from the graphic nature of the allegations.” He said the charges included a variety of acts, so the paper had used “sexual assault” to cover the range. Further, he said, the paper’s reporting on Penn State officials’ accounts of their actions required careful wording, as none of them besides the graduate assistant had acknowledged that rape was involved.
Brisbane said journalists should be as specific as possible.
-David Frum says he’s blacklisted from Fox because of his Limbaugh comments.
Frum gets his digs in.
- The New York Press Club announces its forming a new group to monitor relations between the NYPD and the press. They’re calling themselves The Coalition of the First Amendment.
a University of Missouri study found that 50 percent of newspapers derive only 9 percent of their revenue from online editions. What the heck’s the problem?
The answer, it turns out, may just be that newspaper advertising costs too darn much.
According to this analysis by comScore, the average CPM for online advertising is $2.52. Social media – by far the hottest and one of the most effective and targetable categories – CPM rates come in at $0.56. Newspapers on the other hand had an average CPM of $6.99…277 percent greater than the national average!
If you look at CPM rates across media (a notoriously-difficult comparison), print newspapers look even worse. According to these 2008 figures from Borrell Associates, which compare local ad costs across all major media, newspaper CPMs come in over $60…almost three times more than primetime broadcast TV, almost six times more than non-premium cable, and around 20 times more than online advertising!
Yesterday First Lady Michelle Obama and Jill Biden appeared at the last NASCAR race of the season to serve as co-grand marshals and shout “Gentlemen, start your engines!” The appearance was part of the Joining Forces initiative and yesterday, according to the White House, FLOTUS was joined by “5,000 active duty and retired military personnel and families and thousands of NASCAR fans” and was loudly booed when her name was announced over the loud speakers.
At an event with such an apparently unifying theme, the crowd’s reaction was an ugly reminder of how personally some have taken the political divisions in our country.
It’s not a recent occurrence, and to my memory, this is the first time that a Democrat has been publicly booed. I certainly don’t recall progressive media condemning how Sarah Palin was booed at a hockey game in Philadelphia:
For those who argue that “Palin wasn’t a First Lady,” what about when progressives booed George Bush at Obama’s inauguration?
Chris Matthews, who recently blasted Obama, seems to have made the only condemnation of the thousands booing.
I’ve always said that respect for public office is a two-way street, and the ultimate failure of this is when the individual holding said office doesn’t themselves demonstrate respect for it.
And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
If we’re to discuss manners, I’d say here are several instances where etiquette was breached. If we’re to discuss manners, I’d say etiquette was also breached with the White House’s sanctioning via a corrupt DOJ the murder of border agents with our own federally-funded guns program, Fast and Furious. If manners are sacred, then I’d say etiquette was defiled when the White House took half-a-billion dollars of public money and funneled it to a failing green energy company belonging to his biggest fundraising bundler. I see little in the way of headlines concerning these.
Frankly, I’ll not be lectured to about civility by people who endorse this:
In her exclusive interview with Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D, AZ), ABCs Diane Sawyer began with a retrospective of the terrible crime committed against the Congresswoman by a mentally disturbed, a-political gunman. But true to her left-wing agenda, Sawyer could not resist illicitly linking tea party activists, anti-Obamacare sentiment, and even Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to what was perpetrated against Rep. Giffords on that terrible day.
Yes, even though these calumnies against conservatives and Sarah Palin have been thoroughly discredited, Sawyer links them anyway to the shocking crime that took the lives of six people, injured others, and delivered a debilitating head wound to Representative Giffords.
It was only hours after the shooting occurred on January 8, 2011, that left-wing activists, purported journalists, and Democrat operatives alike began blaming the shooting of Rep. Giffords on “Tea Party hate” and the “violent rhetoric of the right.”
The false narrative was picked up by nearly every Old Media outlet and disgorged from their talking points sheets over and over again. It was days before everyone learned that the killer, one Jared Lee Loughner, had been stalking Giffords for several years before the tea party, Obamacare or Sarah Palin became national news.
In fact, killer Loughner was not interested in politics at all. He was just a sick-minded, lunatic that had a crazy infatuation with Rep. Giffords.
The media ultimately stopped bandying about its discredited theory that the shooting was spurred by conservatives, the tea party and Gov. Palin, but no apologies were ever uttered by the spinmeisters in the press.
At least we thought that the discredited theory that the Giffords shooting was the fault of conservatives had disappeared. Now, with Sawyer’s new interview, we are once again treated to scenes of tea partiers unhappy at townhall meetings in the days before the shooting. We also get a brief scene of Gov. Palin addressing a crowd. So, once more we are visited with the lie that conservatives are at fault for Giffords shooting. Sawyer didn’t say so directly, of course. She’s too slick for that. But by showing tea partiers, conservatives, and Palin and painting them as a hostile force against Giffords, Sawyer was obviously linking them to the crime. Sawyer slyly floated irate conservatives as the reason the “atmosphere” of the days before her shooting were so filled with portent of the dangers to come.
Only it’s all a lie. The tea party, the dislike the nation has for Obamacare (which is still extant, by the way), and the political activism of Governor Sarah Palin had precisely nothing to do with Giffords’ shooting. Giffords was in Jared Lee Loughner’s gunsights regardless of the political situation in the country in the days leading up to his crime.
In the wake of former Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ death from pancreatic cancer, much of the mainstream media has resisted the urge to take partisan potshots over the occasion. However, MSNBC’s Martin Bashir apparently could not help but connect Jobs’ demise to Sarah Palin’s announcement she would not seek the GOP Presidential nomination, made shortly before Apple’s announcement concerning Jobs.
We’ve marked two important stories: the tragic and sad passing of a true creative genius at the age of just 56 and hopefully the end of a charade that’s been going on for three years. One individual represents the very best of American exceptionalism– brilliant, determined, creative. The other represents the very worst form of American opportunism– vacuous, crass, and according to almost every biographer, vindictive, too.
Tacky Andrew Sullivan spins off Steve Jobs’ death with a bitter post about Sarah Palin’s negative on running for President. I will condense because I know it kills brain cells without the benefit of alcohol to read Sullivan:
I know which one will get the bigger headlines tomorrow. And there is some comfort in knowing it will pain her.
Palin talks to Mark Levin here (her voice is the deeper one). [...] But the idea that this person is protecting her family – after putting them all on a reality show, after deploying an infant with Down Syndrome as a book-selling prop …
ZING! Good one, Andrew! Making fun of her family and doing it off the death of a visionary, you sassy necromancer. Babies are easy targets because they generally suck at hitting back. Of course, Sullivan would attack her if she didn’t have her son with her while she was working, too, so it’s damn her either way scenario. I mean, I realize that it’s only 2011 and some males of the progression persuasion haven’t yet come to terms with women being all out in the open, free-range, and doing crazy things like voting (gasp!) and working (OMG!), but for someone who presents himself as such a forward thinker, I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Even more shocking: women have babies sometimes. And women are actually able to work and raise children at the same time.
I can’t wait to delve into Never Never Land and see all the articles where Sullivan excoriates male candidates for daring to raise children while working. The Obama girls on the trail with then-presidential candidate Obama? The lack of such a balance would be repulsively sexist and Sullivan is too much of a progressive, forward thinker to betray his poseuriffic posturing as an equal-rights kinda guy while chaining women to some BS patriarchal stereotype, right?
The most unbelievable part of this article was when Sullivan wrote he was at the gym.
I was at the gym when the news broke, hence the late post.
Hank Williams, Jr., the voice famous for asking millions of football fans whether they’re ready for some football, has been pulled from tonight’s broadcast of “Monday Night Football” over a comment he made on Fox News this morning.
Williams, who sings the lead-in song to the game each week, criticized the president for his golf summit with House Speaker John Boehner this summer.
“It would be like Hitler playing golf with (Israeli leader) Benjamin Netanyahu,” Williams told “Fox & Friends.”
USA Today, among others, picked up the quote, speculating on whether the comparison would get Williams booted from the broadcast .
This afternoon, ESPN released a statement to the affirmative:
“While Hank Williams, Jr. is not an ESPN employee, we recognize that he is closely linked to our company through the open to Monday Night Football. We are extremely disappointed with his comments, and as a result we have decided to pull the open from tonight’s telecast.”
On my Twitter account, I follow a few hundred mainstream media-types (keep the enemy closer, right?), and unless I've missed it (and I hope I have), not a single one has spoken out in defense of Roland Martin. Not one. How scary is that. The politically correct Groupthink...
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
