Savage has expanded his lawsuit against CAIR.  I am not particularly a Savage fan, but I do find this lawsuit very interesting. The link I provide opens near the comments portion of the article, so you have to scroll up to read it.

See here:  http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/019380.php#comments

As part of a series promoting excerpts of leading conservative books, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on Sunday ran an excerpt Brent Bozell sent from the MRC book "Whitewash" by Bozell and Tim Graham. These paragraphs explained some of the publicity surrounding Hillary's 2003 memoir:

Time magazine excerpted the book, and senior editor Nancy Gibbs interviewed Senator Clinton with kid gloves. When Hillary said the Bush administration was conspiring to defund the federal government's "ability to do anything other than fund defense," Gibbs followed up: "Would you call Bush a radical?" Hillary replied, incredibly, that the Bushies "are certainly more radical than Ronald Reagan." Gibbs also asked about the VRWC--but her question presumed that the charge was true from the beginning! "Is the 'vast right-wing conspiracy' bigger than you thought when you brought the term into our vocabulary?"

As shown in this video, Chris Wallace and FOX News Sunday decided to misrepresent the words said by Fred Thompson by partially quoting them out of context.  Notice in the quote below of FOX, the use of the multiple dots.  This kind of covers people in misquoting folks in a legal manner. 

 "I like to say that I'm only consumed by very, very few things and politics is not one of them....I'm not sure in the world we live in today it's a terribly good thing that a President has too much fire in his belly."

However it is obvious how mis-leading it is when his actual quote is put into context.  USA Today started this mis-quote meme as Newsbuster's Tom Blumer points out very well.

On a lazy December 30th Sunday afternoon, I flipped on the television, on which the previous evening I had left the History Channel (they were then doing a military analysis of the Bible, which was at once interesting and uninfuriating).

This time the tubes warmed to display a replay of Clear and Present Danger, the film based upon the Tom Clancy novel.  Co-hosting the rerun were the Channel's in-house liberal historian, Steve Gillon, and guest liberal political commentator Neal Gabler (though of course neither was identified in any sort of ideological way).

As a conservative,I have tuned in on the debates over the past few months and especially talk radio.Conservitave information needs to get out to the masses.Michael Savage is his own voice.Some like him,some don't.He takes what is known by millions of Hannity and Limbaugh listeners and turns up the heat.No democratic candidate would dare appear on the savage nation and also,the GOP has declined to appear.Why?After Michael has invited the GOP front runners to appear on the savage nation many times.Just makes me question why? Gullianni,Thompson,Rommni and the others have talked extensively to Hannity and Michael Medved.Scared are they? Who knows.

 Update:  So I'm wrong...Lets get those boycotts rollin!

URGENT MESSAGE! CALL OFF THE BOYCOTTS!

Rumors went out that Ron Paul was being excluded from a FOX Debate and his fans freaked out, as they have become famous for doing. They called for boycotts and protests, etc. Turns out that he was never even excluded from any debate, and that the debate in question didn't even exist. Oops! Panic buttons off.

Is America ready to be led by a New Age pundit? There's been much scrutiny of the respective religions of Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. But do we need to reconsider Maureen Dowd's fitness for op-ed office in light of her revelation that she has apparently embraced New Age spirituality, even undergoing a New Age "exorcism" complete with swinging crystal?

I kept waiting for Dowd to say it was all a joke -- but she never did. Her column of today, "Am I a Karma Karma Karma Karma Karma Chameleon?", describes her experience, conducted by one Faith Green: "a pretty, curvy 31-year-old green-eyed blonde, [who] says she has studied tribal shamanism, rolfing, Pilates, tango, movement and stretching."

In a year when a charlatan -- one that has done absolutely zip, zero, zilch to solve the various wars raging across the globe, several involving his native country -- can win a Nobel Peace Prize, nothing should come as a shock.

Yet, when a major American newspaper offers the illegal immigrant as its person of the year, one has to wonder whether or not the sun really has begun rising in the west, and if Keith Olbermann isn't sticking his foot in his mouth every time he opens it.

To drive home the point, consider the following published in Saturday's Dallas Morning News (emphasis added throughout, h/t NBer motherbelt):

Erick at Red State reports that USA Today reporter Jill Lawrence distorted what she reported Saturday on a statement made by Fred Thompson to a Burlington, Iowa audience.

Here, per Erick, is how Thompson actually responded to the question, "Do you want to be President?" --

The first place, I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t. I wouldn’t be doing this. I grew up in very modest circumstances. I left government and I and my family have made sacrifices to be sitting here today. I haven’t had any income for a long time because I figured to be clean, you’ve got to cut everything off. I was doing speaking engagements and I had a contract to do a tv show. I had a contract with ABC radio…and so forth. A man would have to be a total fool to do all those things and to be leaving his family which is not a joyful thing if he didn’t want to do it.

I am not consumed by personal ambition. I will not be devastated if I don’t do it. I want the people to have the best president they can have.

But here is what Lawrence posted:

Bill Theobald of Gannett News Service has been following Republican Fred Thompson around Iowa. In a dispatch today from Burlington, Bill quotes the former Tennessee senator as saying he doesn't like modern campaigning, isn't that interested in running for president and "will not be devastated" if he doesn't win.

This makes it appear as if Thompson is just going through the motions, doesn't it?

Sunday thread for political shows, football games and whatever else...

The New York Times confirmed the buzz that it's hiring conservative William Kristol as a weekly op-ed page columnist. (As opposed to the early liberal gnashing of teeth.)The Times story began by noting Kristol is a "vigorous supporter of the Iraq war" and has even vigorously attacked his new newspaper home:

Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of The Times. In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting The Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions.

In a 2003 column on the turmoil within The Times that led to the downfall of the top two editors, he wrote [in The Weekly Standard]  that it was not "a first-rate newspaper of record," adding, "The Times is irredeemable."

This came up recently, and I'm sure many times in the past, and I hoped we could expand upon it. A member here informed me that they were soon going to Iraq to defend my freedom. I argued that going to a foreign nation that we invaded and now occupy, even though they never attacked us and posed no threat, was not defending my freedom, and might even be jeopardizing my (and your) freedom. Anyone want to take this one up? Hopefully staying specifically on the subject of Iraq, and how it relates to our freedom.