Conservative blogger Pamela Geller thinks she has a new, explosive scoop: Louis Farrakhan, Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright visited the White House! The visitors log says so!
There are consequential, disturbing revelations while flipping through the visitors list at the White House. Bill Ayer is there no less than three times, Louis Farrakhan, at least once but there is also a separate visit for his familyand the infamous hater Jeremiah Wright,at least five times. (four times under Jeremy, one under Jeremiah.Contemptuously, Farrakhan's visit is tagged as "MEETING WITH SCIENCE CLUB MEMBERS"...Al Sharpton is there twice and Jesse "hymietown" Jackson is a regular (six times.)
It bears noting that despite solid evidence that Obama was tight with these haters, inciters and revolutionaries and traitors, he distanced himself from them during the campaign and outright lied about his ties to them. Mr. Ayers for example, was dismissed as "a guy who lives in my neighborhood" and "somebody who worked on education issues in Chicago that I know."
Obama lied about his friends and nefarious colleagues because he he knew it was deadly. He knew these were bad characters and it would not sit well with the American people. He knew. And so he lied. And now they are regulars at the White House (while the Dalai Lama and Netanyahu who are begrudgingly ushered it in the side door or seen chilling with the trash.)
These are terrorists, inciters to genocide, America haters, the underbelly of an ugly America - and they are the House.
Had Geller spent 5 seconds doing a simple Google search, she would have found out that this was debunked long ago: the Farrakhan, Ayers and Wright listed in the logs are different people. As Obvious Logic Quarterly explained in its spring 2010 issue, different people can have the same name.
We've long documented the right-wing blogosphere's curious inability to get its facts straight, and the striking tendency of their stories to collapse under scrutiny. Today, however, it's time to give them credit: They (almost!) got one right.
It started last night, when Instapundit Glenn Reynolds commented on the Seattle Times' "implausible report" that "A rock was thrown through the window of [Rep. Steve] Driehaus' [D-OH] Cincinnati office Sunday," a paraphrase of a comment from Driehaus' spokesman.
According to Reynolds:
Justin Binik-Thomas emails from Cincinnati that Rep. Driehaus' office "is on the 30th floor of a skyscraper downtown." He also says that he spoke to Driehaus' office today and they said this never happened.
Throughout the health care debate, the Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the legislation proposed by Congressional Democrats would extend insurance coverage to 30 million people without increasing the federal budget deficit. Their most recent estimate -- for the bill that President Obama signed and the package of fixes that has now passed both the Senate and House -- stated that the proposals as written would "produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010-2019 period," and would "reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law" by around "one-half percent of GDP."
Needless to say, this was unacceptable to Fox News, which openly opposed Democrats' reform efforts from the start. So when they weren't cluelessly rejecting the basic proposition that legislation could both spend $940 billion and reduce the deficit, they were portraying the CBO estimates as unreliable, suggesting that CBO was influenced by pressure from the White House, or ignoring CBO entirely.
Fox's latest claim: CBO is incompetent.
If you've ever wondered how instrumental the dishonesty of the conservative press is to Republican electoral hopes, consider the curious case of Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) crusade to deny Viagra to sex offenders.
As part of the (ultimately futile) effort to delay the passage of the health care fix in the Senate, Republican lawmakers introduced a slew of hot-button amendments to be individually voted down, such as Coburn's amendment prohibiting sex offenders from obtaining Viagra through their health insurance coverage. As Talking Points Memo explained, their purpose was twofold: first, to gum up the works, and second, to turn the Democratic votes against the amendments "into negative campaign ads ahead of this November's election." In case you doubt the purely political motivations behind Coburn's amendment, his own health care proposal does not include the Viagra provision.
Enter the Washington Times, whose staunchly conservative and devoutly dishonest editorial page published an editorial this morning denouncing "Obamacare's subsidy for the sexually depraved." The Times attacked Senate Democrats for voting "almost unanimously Wednesday night to ensure the right of rapists and child molesters to have guaranteed access to government-subsidized Viagra," and accused Democrats of playing politics with the issue for not wanting to force the House to vote on any Senate changes. The Times wrote: "Apparently, saving the House from an embarrassing vote was more important than protecting the public from chemically empowered predators."
In typical Fox & Friends fashion, Steve Doocy hyped the Tea Party Express's cross-country tour that is kicking off in Searchlight, Nevada this weekend, with the stated goal to "kick Harry [Reid] out of the Senate" in the November mid-term elections. Following a segment with Bernie Goldberg -- who discussed how the mainstream media "tarred the entire [Tea Party] movement" unfairly -- Doocy set out to portray the Tea Party movement as being unfairly "marginalized" and discredited. He challenged this "mainstream media biased coverage" by hosting "former 'Saturday Night Live' star" and Tea Partier Victoria Jackson.
Unfortunately, Doocy appeared to be unaware of what Jackson has been up to since she left SNL in 1992 -- you know, how she's said that Obama "bears traits that resemble the anti-Christ" and shares "so many similar qualities" with Adolf Hitler (i.e.: "Obama's current attitude toward Israel is in question. Hitler did not support Jews.").
Not surprisingly, the interview went south in record time:
DOOCY: So, are you ready to join the tea party people?
JACKSON: I am the tea party people. We're beginners at this political activism and it's all new to us and it's kind of cute 'cause we're shy, we hold up our signs like this, you know, despite what they say about us, I have never done anything like this, but we have to because the president is a Communist.
For months, we at Media Matters have been pushing back against the media myth that the Senate health care reform legislation's language on abortion -- recently enacted into law -- would expand federal funding for abortion beyond what had previously been permitted under the law. We noted that the bill bans federal funding for abortion except in cases currently allowed under the Hyde amendment: rape, incest, and conditions that endanger the life of the pregnant woman.
Earlier this week, the Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking website Politifact.com confirmed our findings:
At the climax of the health care debate from the floor, House Republican Leader John Boehner said that even with the executive order from the president, the Senate bill would provide "taxpayer funding of abortions for the first time in 30 years."
We don't agree. It's understandable that abortion foes opposed a proposal that gives more people the opportunity to obtain insurance that cover abortions. But it's another thing to say those abortion services would be paid with federal dollars. The Senate bill states very clearly that public funding through tax credits and government subsidies for elective abortion services offered in the exchange is prohibited. But more than that, the bill sets up a mechanism to ensure that abortion services offered in the exchange are paid entirely from patient premiums, premiums paid by people who have chosen a private plan that covers abortion. The executive order puts the weight of the president's word behind providing a way to ensure two checks go to insurers every month, so that abortion dollars and federal dollars are not co-mingled.
We think that's enough to back up Stupak's claim that, "There will be no public funding for abortion in this legislation." But that's a conclusion we reached before the president promised an executive order, back when Stupak disagreed with us and insisted the bill would have had federal dollars subsidizing abortions. We don't understand how the executive order changes Stupak's logic on this issue, but no matter how he arrived as his conclusion, we think he's right now. And we rule his claim True.
The media has a responsibility to get the facts right on this issue. We will be watching to make sure they do.
Last night on his show, Glenn Beck took a quick break from his over-the-top ranting to deliver a heartfelt message to President Obama:
Barack Obama said he wouldn't use the fear of politics [sic] like George W. Bush did. America, I have to tell you, this man has violated every single campaign promise he has made - except those to the labor unions.
This is a big one, because that's exactly what he's doing now. He is breaking the one that really, America, really wanted to stop. Just do anything for politics: that's the change we wanted. And here he is, using the politics of fear, to rally his base.
See, President Obama has broken his promise that he wouldn't use the politics of fear. And that just breaks Glenn Beck's heart, because he hates the politics of fear so much. Right.
Let's rewind the clock a few days, and take you through just one week of Beck's non-stop fear mongering.
Fox News' America's Newsroom kicked off their broadcast this morning with some breaking news -- the GDP grew at an annual rate of 5.6 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009. Good news, to be sure. But, the president being a Democrat and this being Fox News, they had to immediately give you the bad news -- we're in debt!
When the promised report with Stuart Varney came along, co-host Martha MacCallum kicked it off thusly: "We just brought you those GDP numbers -- what if we told you that in just ten years, our country's debt would total 90 percent of the nation's GDP?" Well, that would certainly keep me from dwelling on that positive economic news you so brusquely cast aside.
And, sure enough, the ensuing segment with Varney was all about the latest debt projections from the Congressional Budget Office (an outfit with which the network has something of a love/hate relationship):
None of this is to say that the nation's debt isn't a serious problem worthy of mention by news personalities, but it's absurd that Fox News' position on this is essentially: "Good economic news? Whatever -- WE'RE ALL IN DEBT AND WE'RE GOING TO DIE!!!"
Other than that things are looking great for the 14-month-old Democrat administration, which is still celebrating Sunday's passage of a massive healtcare bill that most Americans don't seem to like.
More Americans now favor than oppose the health care overhaul that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds — a notable turnaround from surveys before the vote that showed a plurality against the legislation.
On Thursday, conservative Ann Althouse unloaded on Democrats for trying to make political hay out of the recent rash of violence and incidents of threats and intimidation unleashed by conservatives in the wake of the health care vote. Althouse was quite clear that Democrats were guilty of "self-victimization." And no, to be honest, she didn't really believe the stories she was hearing about threats and violence were true.
Althouse issued this warning:
[W]e should all be vigilant about the way the Democrats and their friends in the press are leveraging these stories for political purposes, exaggerating and failing to check facts.
As I noted yesterday though, that was before Republican Eric Cantor, perhaps trying to deflect the story, stepped forward and claimed on Thursday he had been the target of violence because somebody had shot a bullet into his Richard campaign office.
But uh-oh, based on Althouse's definition, wouldn't that qualify as "self-victimization"? And wouldn't Althouse have to condemn Cantor, too?
It turns out it's even more awkward: Richmond police announced the bullet that hit Cantor's office had "been randomly fired skyward," and the GOP Congressman -- unlike Democrats in the wake of the health care vote -- was not the target of the attack. (First clue: the bullet struck an office window on the way down.)
So now it appears that a Republican leader in Congress was guilty of trying to fudge the facts in order to use an act of violence for purely partisan reasons; to portray himself as the victim.
Ann must be fuming.
UPDATED: Surprise! Althouse now covering for Cantor:
His point is that violence is serious, but it's random and somehow separate from the real political debate and should be dealt with in a neutral way, not exploited to make rhetorical points.