Dropping pebbles of thought into our conservative echo-chamber

Posts tagged ‘Fox News’

Did McCain Make Hillary Toxic?

Lately I have had a sinking feeling in my gut.

Is he on his way out now?

Joe Biden has been running around the country making gaffes, which is fairly normal for him.  What isn’t normal is the number of gaffes made in a row, or the willingness of the media to cover them, however briefly.

Why does this matter..?

In politics, it is very hard to remove someone from a ticket without seeing a substantial backlash, unless there is a good and well-known reason for doing so.

To me, this all looks like a politically calculated set up.

The Obama campaign is stagnating.  They’re out of ideas, and have gone fully negative.  With no achievements to crow about, they have nothing positive with which to hang their hats upon.  Joe Biden doesn’t add anything for the Obama team this year.  In fact, he almost certainly represents a net loss for the campaign as a whole.  He keeps taking them off of their message.  He is seen as a buffoon everywhere except for the most liberal of circles.

He just isn’t good old “Uncle Joe” anymore.  He’s a liability.

Barack Obama does not like liabilities.

Enter Hillary Clinton.

Many pundits and politicians have made comments recently about the notion of replacing Biden with Clinton.  Seriously, I wish they would all shut the hell up!

I have nightmares about this scenario.

The Democrats would almost certainly win under this scenario.

After 4 years on the world stage, does Hillary still have presidential ambitions? Or has she set her sights elsewhere?

Like it, or not, Clinton’s positives are through the roof for a politician; higher than anyone currently in the race, regardless of the fact that she is one of the most corrupt figures in American political history.  Absence makes the heart grow fonder, I suppose.

If she still holds ambitions for the presidency, her best shot in 2016 would be from the catbird seat of Vice President.  Still, Clinton might be inclined to turn down such an offer, were one extended to her.  By all accounts, she just isn’t very fond of Barack Obama, and who could blame her after the tactics that Obama’s handler David Axelrod used against her in the last presidential primaries?

But her ambitions were enough to allow her to overcome those negative feelings and take the job as Secretary of State.  It isn’t a stretch to think that she would put her ambition for power ahead of everything else, given that she has done exactly that her entire life.

But will Obama even offer her the job?

Recently, I have been feeling it in the political winds that such a storm was brewing.

John McCain may have provided shelter from that storm.

During a recent interview on Fox News, McCain said that he would drop Biden and replace him with Hillary.  He also said that Hillary was not likely to go along with that plan, but I don’t trust that notion very much, and it isn’t really pertinent here.

What does matter is that the liberal blogosphere was completely apoplectic about the notion of taking advice from that rotten, evil bastard John McCain.

Ah, good old childish liberals.  So very predictable.

Was McCain being a Jedi Master of reverse psychology?  Probably not.  He was most likely just vocalizing what many of us were thinking.  Again, I wish some people would shut the hell up!  But in this case, I am actually glad he did it.  McCain, wittingly or not, has shored up support for Biden to remain on the Obama ticket.

And John, if this works, I forgive you for everything!

Advertisements

Nothing Right-wing About Neo-Nazis

In the wake of the recent Wisconsin Sikh Temple shootings, the airwaves were filled with so-called journalists rushing to the air to proclaim that the shooter was a “far-right extremist” and a white supremacist.  Something that troubled me about this initial rush was that it was based upon information from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) which should never be taken at its word for anything.  But there I was, watching as even Fox News jumped on to their bandwagon.

In this case, I would have to say that the SPLC was right.  This guy does appear to have been a white supremacist and a Neo-Nazi loon.   But it still troubles me that sensationalism takes precedence over all else, especially after we’ve seen what can happen when people like ABC’s Brian Ross rush to the air with information they haven’t bothered to verify.

And now we all get to hear how this guy was supposedly a right-winger.

Well, what was right-wing about him?

The original Nazi movement certainly wasn’t right-wing.  Far from it.  Every aspect of that old and thankfully dead movement holds common hallmarks with the modern left.

So, what is new, or “neo”, about the skinheads that makes them right-wingers?

About the only thing I can see in common is that they like guns.  But then, socialist dictators on the left LOVE guns, as long as they’re the ones holding them.

For the life of me I can not think of a single other thing that these people have in common with the American right at any moment in our history.

For people to assume it is so would be the result of left-wing propaganda that dictates that only white people are racist and all racists are right-wingers.  That’s the lie told often enough that it has become accepted as so-called common knowledge.  The American left learned much from Goebbels, it seems.

But the American right did not create the KKK that these Neo-Nazi freaks call brothers.  The left did that.  The left to this day works to segregate people by race, and has done so throughout their entire history.  Keeping people from actually joining into the American melting pot is the only thing that allows them to retain any power.

This needs to be challenged when it happens, and it dismays me that no one in the media raised any objections, apart from some that I saw on Fox News’ The Five, when Bob Beckel started in on how this shooter was a right-winger, and the other hosts objected to his characterization.

We have got to stand against this kind of thing more vociferously, because letting the charge go by without challenge is to confirm its validity in the minds of the public.

That’s just unacceptable.

Krauthammer Wins Battle With White House

The man the White House loves to hate

Anyone who has followed President Barack Obama at all with even an ounce of objectivity knows that he has a serious problem when it comes to honesty.

In fact, this president has been so pathological with his deceptions that a list of instances where he has been honest would be a much shorter one to create, and those rare moments of truth are nearly always political miscues that he and his campaign would prefer never to have happened.

Among his latest and greatest hits is the whole “I didn’t really say what you quoted me saying even though I quoted myself saying it in my own campaign ad” fiasco, which has the Obama campaign in full damage repair mode.  Sadly enough, the Obama campaign is so cynical that they have released another series of ads that says the exact opposite of the entire speech that was met with such a negative reaction.  Really, it was Obama’s version of the “I’m Not a Witch” ad, made famous by Christine O’Donnell.

What is more sad is that many people will believe him, and his sycophantic supporters will likely go right along with the deceit, willingly.

But the newest “how stupid does he think we are” moment, for me, came just yesterday.

Syndicated Washington Post columnist and Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer wrote an article in which he rightly points out that the Obama administration returned to the British Embassy a valued and respected bust of Winston Churchill soon after Obama moved into the White House.  This was never a secret.  Anyone paying attention to politics at the time knew about it.  It made national news everywhere except for the lap-dog media.

Apparently, the Obama administration saw their chance to re-write history–again.

Dan Pfeiffer

White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer wrote a rebuttal to attack Krauthammer, saying that his claims were “ridiculous” and “100% false”.  Mediaite covered this part of the story in a Friday afternoon piece.  Within two hours they received confirmation from the British Embassy that Krauthammer was indeed correct.  The bust of Churchill had been returned to the British Embassy and currently resides in the British Ambassador’s residence in Washington, DC.

Krauthammer asked for a retraction and an apology from Pfeiffer:

Not going to happen, Charles.  A brilliant man such as yourself would know that they will never admit to spreading falsehoods.  They will either ignore it and hope it goes away, or they will double down on the stupid.

The real question is, why does this administration feel the need to make such an obvious lie?  The only answer I can propose is that they are so thin-skinned that they can not bear any criticism of their actions, no matter how accurate the criticism may be, or, perhaps their reaction is in direct proportion to the accuracy of their critics.

Either way, we have got to rid ourselves of this craziness and send Obama packing back to Chicago in November.

Update – Apparently Pfeiffer has apologized!  I stand corrected.  According to the brief blurb I saw from Charles in passing on Fox a bit ago, he received a mea culpa from Pfeiffer.  He was almost as surprised as I am.  Who knew..?

Update #2 – Okay, so apparently Pfeiffer’s apology was not quite so genuine as I thought.  Yes, he did send Krauthammer an email apologizing, but…  The email was sent quietly so as to attract as little notice as possible.  Pfeiffer’s “rebuttal” is still up at the link I posted above.  He did include an addendum to “explain away the confusion”, which, in liberal terms apparently means to lie your ass off while spinning as much as humanly possible.  Pfeiffer portrays the whole incident as an innocent misunderstanding.  He claims that the bust of Churchill was lent to the Bush administration at the start of his term and they sent it back with all of the other art from Bush’s Oval Office.  In reality, as Krauthammer originally wrote, the bust was sent to us as a show of solidarity after the events of September 11, 2001, and the British were less than pleased that we unceremoniously returned it.  They were offended, and rightfully so.

Honestly, I have to return to my original belief that Pfeiffer’s only intent in all of this was to deceive and run cover for his boss.

Obama’s Mute Button and MSNBC

President Obama tells supporters in Florida to hit the mute button.

“Conservatives seek to expose liberals, while liberals seek to silence conservatives.”

I don’t know who first said it.  Hell, maybe I did.  But, either way, I have been saying that phrase for as long as I can remember.  To me, it has always exemplified a crucial difference between the liberal and conservative philosophies.  We conservatives believe that liberal doctrine wilts under the light of scrutiny, while they seem to be terrified that the tenets which conservatives value will resonate with people.  That is why I was unsurprised by President Barack Obama’s recent remarks in Florida:

“Just press the mute button. That’s the good thing about the remote. Or you can use the DVR, and just fast-forward.”

Clearly he does not want anyone, especially not his current supporters, to hear what we have to say.  But he isn’t the only one…

The lap-dog media and Obama’s most sycophantic supporters are also mortified by the notion of conservative ideals being heard, lest they gain traction among the general populace.  Liberals constantly decry “Faux News” and talk radio, and even, ironically, the internet, not because these things are sources of disinformation, but because they are largely successful at breaking the liberal stranglehold on the information that gets disseminated by the public at large.

Before cable TV and the internet became staples of American life, liberals were content to silence conservative voices with the so-called “fairness doctrine”.  This misnamed doctrine required those who held a broadcast license and aired views on any controversial position to give airtime to contrasting positions, regardless of the station owner’s profit considerations.  Since liberal ideology has never found a voice in talk radio, and their shows have been unprofitable, and even costly, to station owners, the fairness doctrine squelched would-be popular conservative shows that were able to turn a profit because station owners were unwilling to risk airing them if they would also be forced to air the liberal contrast at a net loss.  The landscape changed when Reagan’s FCC eliminated vital parts of the fairness doctrine in 1987.  The move gave rise to hosts like Rush Limbaugh, a popular liberal boogeyman, and many others, but it also saw the rise of liberals warning all of us not to listen.

Since that time, liberals have largely had to forfeit the notion that they can completely eliminate conservative voices.  Sure, they have tried to silence us with boycotts, and they still tell people not to listen, but they’ve moved on to another approach; trying to compete.  One of their obvious first attempts was the disastrous “Air America”.  The radical left-wing radio network was never profitable, and never attracted many listeners, but it was just a start.

The real threat is MSNBC.

I know that many of you will laugh at that notion, but hear me out.  MSNBC doesn’t attract many viewers, but it does attract enough to keep its head above water.  Their hosts get exposed on a daily basis for fraudulent reporting.  They’re the butt of jokes, not just by conservatives, but by others in the industry.  But journalistic integrity, respect, and even profit has never been their motive.

The true goal of MSNBC is to re-position the publicly perceived news spectrum, once again placing the old-guard media in the center.

Whatever anyone might say about Fox News, they have more liberal hosts and commentators on a regular basis than there are conservatives on all of the other networks combined.  Thus, Fox is indeed the most “Fair and Balanced” among the networks, despite the fact that Fox commentary shows are almost universally biased toward conservative viewpoints.

MSNBC is often portrayed as the liberal alternative to Fox News.  This is the perpetuated lie.  ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, and CNN are all already every bit as liberal as Fox News is conservative.  MSNBC might as well be placed on the dial next to Al Gore’s Current TV.

Their main goal is to further marginalize and silence conservative viewpoints, not by convincing the people that their views are correct, but simply by existing.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: