Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 21, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama Targets Fox News
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Matt Hadro's blog
  • After Terrible Storm, ABC Devotes 10 Minutes to Crime, Botox and Entertainment, Skimps on IRS
  • ABC and CBS Ignore Obama Administration Investigating FNC's James Rosen
  • NBC's Gregory Scolds GOP for Comparing Obama to Nixon
  • CBS Highlights Ex-IRS Staffer Who Declares There Were No Politics at Cincinnati Office
  • Monday's Amnesia: CNN Covers Powerball Jackpot Winner as Much as IRS, AP, Benghazi Scandals
  • The Obama Scandal the Big Three Networks Aren't Telling You About
  • WashPost 'Express' Tabloid Cover Laments: How Can Obama 'Break from the Storm' of Scandals?
  • It Gets Worse: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News

CNN's John Avlon Spins 'Birther' Issue Into 'Very Concerning' Problem for GOP In 2012

By Matt Hadro | April 21, 2011 | 15:47

A  A

CNN contributor John Avlon, labeled an "independent," was all but sounding the death knell for 2012 Republican presidential hopes on CNN Thursday. Avlon took Republican criticism of notable figures such as Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann and spun it to tout that the GOP is in trouble.

"This is the sound of Republicans getting nervous," Avlon ominously sounded. "It really hurts the Republican Party in the long-term."

Anchor Carol Costello opened the segment with a clip of Bush's former senior advisor Karl Rove dismissing Donald Trump as an "inconsequential candidate" over his "embrace of the 'birther' issue." Costello added that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and Sarah Palin are under fire from other Republicans and conservatives for some of their own views.
 

Instead of reporting that the GOP has a problem on its hands with "birther" rhetoric from the fringe-right, Avlon took matters a step further and announced that the "responsible Republicans"should be "very concerned," and was quite foreboding about the 2012 election promises for the GOP.

When anchor Carol Costello told Avlon that possible Bachmann has stepped away from the "birther" issue on ABC's "Good Morning America," Avlon deemed it too late for her to garner support from independents. "I think you've got a certain problem where your brand is just deeply, fundamentally tarnished by the rhetoric that's gotten you to this point," he declared.

Avlon also hammered the Republicans for not denouncing the members of their base who believe the "birther" conspiracy. "I don't want to let Republicans off the hook too easy about this," he self-righteously trumpeted, "because this is a problem that they can't simply throw the victim card on."

A transcript of the segment, which aired on April 21 at 9:33 a.m. EDT, is as follows:

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN anchor: The fight for independents is on and it's taking an odd twist thanks to Donald Trump. There is an effort, it seems, by some on the right to discredit the Donald for the good of the Republican Party, and it's coming from the former senior advisor to President Bush and political consultant Karl Rove.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARL ROVE, POLITICAL CONSULTANT: He is an interesting candidate who had a business background and could have contributed to the dialogue but his full embrace of the birther issue means that he's off there in the nutty right and is now an inconsequential candidate. He is now, you know, a joke candidate. Let him go ahead and announce for election on "The Apprentice." The American people aren't going to be hiring him and certainly, the Republicans are not going to be hiring him.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COSTELLO: And it's not just Donald Trump, but Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. They're all targets now by some conservative voices.

John Avlon is a CNN contributor and an independent, and he joins us now. Welcome, John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Good morning, Carol.

COSTELLO: Good morning. So it's interesting. Rove and other conservative voices are actively turning against Donald Trump, and not only Trump but Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin Why do you suppose that's happening?

AVLON: This is the sound of Republicans getting nervous. They realize that they've got a real problem. That responsible voices are being drowned out by folks that pander to the outer reaches of politics. And that may work in the narrow term. But it really hurts the Republican Party in the long-term, especially if they have any hope of winning over those independent voters and translating it to a general election victory.

They've been playing a dangerous game trying to inflame anti-Obama feeling without having it careen into the realm of absurdity. And with Donald Trump and Michele Bachmann and other folks you just mentioned, that's a clear and present danger for the electability of the Republican Party going forward.

COSTELLO: OK. So clearly the Republicans need independents and maybe that's what they are after by trying to get rid of this rhetoric out there, because, you know the Republicans want to beat Barack Obama. They need independents to do that.

So the whole birther issue is not popular among independents like you. And maybe some of these potential presidential candidates are realizing this. Listen to Michele Bachmann on "Good Morning America."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), MINNESOTA: I take the president at his word and I think -- again, I would have no problem and apparently the president wouldn't either. Introduce that. We're done. Move on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: So Congresswoman Bachmann seems to be stepping away from the issue. So will Independents start listening again?

AVLON: No. I think you've got a certain problem where your brand is just deeply, fundamentally tarnished by the rhetoric that's gotten you to this point. I don't think I want to speak too gracious about Republican candidates who say, "Oh, I take the president at his word," as if this was an issue of honor and debate, rather than pure nonsense and conspiracy theory.

But you're dealing with 41 percent of the American electorate (ph). A new poll came out showing 41 percent of Americans now self-identify as independents. Republicans can make a strong claim for their vote based on reducing deficits and the debt. Here's the deal though. Independent voters overwhelmingly dislike the angry, hyper- partisanship we've seen from Washington. They don't like this extreme rhetoric. They want to try to figure out --

(CROSSTALK)

COSTELLO: But it's been like that for a long time, John. We heard that during the campaign. So why is it still so loud?

AVLON: Because the extremes have become very effective at hijacking our political debates and sucking up all the oxygen. And we the media tend to cover a car crash rather than a constructive conversation. But I don't want to let Republicans off the hook too easy about this, because this is a problem that they can't simply throw the victim card on.

When you've got 51 (ph) percent of Republican primary voters saying they doubt whether the president was born in the United States, that's a problem with your base. That's an education problem. And you need responsible Republicans to stand up and condemn the fringe and separate that from the base. When those two things start blurring, then you open the door to candidates who pander to the lowest common denominator and get a short-term bump. It should make responsible Republicans very concerned.

COSTELLO: Well, maybe that's why Karl Rove is speaking out.

John Avlon, many thanks. Joining us live from New York.

About the Author

Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow Matt Hadro on Twitter.
  • 2012 Presidential
  • Media Bias Debate
  • Carol Costello
  • Donald Trump
  • John Avlon
  • Michele Bachmann
  • Sarah Palin
  • CNN
  • CNN Newsroom
  • Video
  • Matt Hadro's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

Manufactured problems

Submitted by nkviking75 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 3:55pm.

Meanwhile, the MSM has a credibility problem because they keep trying to manufacture problems for the Republican Party.  Please, GOP, nominate a conservative who will go into this campaign with both guns blazing.  Multiple smear machines will be aimed at your candidates.  You need to bring nuclear weapons to Obama's proverbial knife fight.

“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

  • Login to post comments

Who?

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:40pm.

"Please, GOP, nominate a conservative who will go into this campaign with both guns blazing"

In despondency, I write, at this point, who is that conservative running for the nomination?

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

Well

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:52pm.

Herman Cain
Bachmann?
Barbour?
DeMint?
Palin?
Or bust

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Nice names, but, besides

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:33pm.

Nice names, but, besides Cain, I'm not certain any of them are running as of yet. At this point this is like fantasy league baseball. As for myself only, I don't want to get into the position the libs did in projecting all their fondest hopes on the blank canvas that was Obama. I agree that whoever the GOP nominates, it would be great if he or she was able to give as good as they get. Please, not another "roll-over and play deader"

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

No-one wants to face the slime machine

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:52pm.

All by themselves. Although it is hard to imagine them smearing Palin , Bachmann and a few others any more then they do. There is only 24hrs in a day after all.

God forbid someone brings up Obama's BC, destructive policy making, or transparency. Thats when the real water carriers come out!

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

No, they don't. To our

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:58pm.

No, they don't. To our distress, most of them seem to want to make nice, as if expecting - in the face of overwhelming history - that somehow the Demedia will reciprocate. Sigh.

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

If the birth certificate

Submitted by dscott on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 3:57pm.

If the birth certificate issue is such a non issue to Obama, then why do libs continue to give the story legs? Even on this website, every time a comment is made on it, the libs increase the number of comments to keep the dialog going. Here's a hint, stop commenting, i.e. defending Obama and then the issue would simply die IF there was nothing to it. Let it go libs otherwise you by commenting give credence that there just maybe an issue there. Which is why the real blame for continuance of the birth certificate issue is squarely in Obama's lap, he could end the issue today, JUST SHOW THE LONG FORM and we are done.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
  • Login to post comments

I fixed the title. See Below.

Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:14pm.

CNN's John Avlon Spins 'Birther' Issue Into 'Very Concerning' Problem for MSM In 2012

  • Login to post comments

Matt - John Avlon has a colorful history - what a turncoat

Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:13pm.

Matt - John Avlon has a colorful history - what a turncoat 

Here's an excerpt from Avalon's piece in the "Daily Beast," Feb. 8, 2010, titled, The Birther's began on the Left:

  • But there's an inconvenient truth liberals are going to have to confront: The Birthers began not on the right, but on the left.
  • Investigations for my new book, Wingnuts, revealed that the Birther conspiracy theory was first concocted by renegade members of the original Obama haters, Party Unity My Ass, known more commonly by their acronym, the PUMAs. They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to give up the ghost after the bitter 50-state Bataan Death March to the 2008 Democratic nomination.

Further, it was Democratic operative, Philip Berg, who took it viral on YouTube, and filed the lawsuits attempting to keep Obama from being allowed to run for POTUS.

Is it not interesting that none of this comes up in this CNN spot with Avlon?

The only "hammering" that needs to be done around here is "hammering" on the national MSM for hiding the truth of this saga, and then for turning around and using it against only the Republicans.

(;~/ gary

  • Login to post comments

The truther/birther

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:25pm.

The truther/birther professional nutjob, Philip Berg, started it and the legions of the right took it and ran with it.

Do you honestly think this craziness is being driven by the left? It's hyped on Fox News, potential GOP candidate "the Donald" has invigorated the movement, Limbaugh makes jokes about Obama's birth certificate, Republican state lawmakers are scurrying to introduce citizenship certification legislation before the next election, the right-wing blogosphere can't control its fixation with it, Drudge breathlessly announces a blockbuster book by the Big Birther himself, Jerome Corsi, 45% of Republicans firmly believe Obama was born in a foreign country and another 22% of Republicans believe he may have been--in other words, 67% of Republicans have questions about whether their President is an American...but the NewsBusters meme is that it's just the left that's yelping about Obama's place of birth, and if they would shut up it would all go away.

Whoever crafted that message has jumped right through the looking glass.

Jer

update.  The Donald says the number of doubters in the GOP concerning Obama's citizenship is actually 75%.

  • Login to post comments

So Jer,

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:41pm.

Obama is the guy who cant give a simple answer to a question without lying. So please Jer, explain to us all why we should believe anything this guy says?

He has asked his AG to investigate oil Co for price gouging, when it's his very own policies that are to blame for high Gas prices.

He told a bunch of kids yesterday that he was the product of welfare and food stamps when his G-mother was a President of a bank and Food stamp legislation had not been passed. Pre 77"

Obama himself is promoting the birther meme, all questions asked of him are screened. He thinks it help him!

But were to take your word about what? Whats your word really worth Jer, when your carrying Obama's water.

Maybe you would like to explain to all of us why Obama's lies and destruction are justified?

Jer, it has not gone un-noticed by me, that you refuse to defend a single policy of this corrupt Admin, but sit on your high horse and beat your chest about supposed failures of the right.

So go ahead and call me names again, while trying to sneak past the 800lbs gorilla.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

You should realize, Boudin...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:01pm.

that statements/questions like "What's your word really worth Jer, when your carrying Obama's water" and "Maybe you would like to explain to all of us why Obama's lies and destruction are justified?" are hardly phrased in a manner so as to invite productive dialogue.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

What I realize

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:45pm.

Is you cant walk the walk.

hardly phrased in a manner so as to invite productive dialogue.

So you have taken another pass eh. Like Obama said of Ryans budget yesterday,

I wouldn't call it particularly courageous

As if you have anything to offer yourself. Your gonna need a bigger bucket Jer, no 2 way's about it.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Okay Boudin, I'm willing to let you show me how it's done.

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:15pm.

Boudin, explain how the lyin' POS George Bush was able to completely screw up the country in the eight years he was in office?

I frankly just don't know how to respond to questions like that or the ones you asked me. So, please, Boudin, you have the floor. Show me.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

What lie Jer?

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:23pm.

Name it?

Jer, I always have the floor,,,,,,,,,,, and the walls and the ceiling, because you never have anything!

Just more ignoring your very own ideology, because you cant defend it, or those who carry it out.

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

jer...

Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:11pm.

  • The truther/birther professional nutjob, Philip Berg, started it and the legions of the right took it and ran with it.

Well, Berg didn't start it, if you read Avalon's piece that I linked.. but yes, he made it a frenzy. Yes, elements on the right took it and ran with it.

  • Do you honestly think this craziness is being driven by the left? It's hyped on Fox News,
     

First - it is not hyped on Fox News.  That's the biggest load I've every heard from you. It's hyped on MSNBC - it's a lead story - for 2 years now on a rotating basis on many of their shows. You know that. Fox covers it here and there - as it is in the news. Fox does not push the story as an agenda item. Now - you may be able to find one or two lone examples where one of the opinion folks went leading it a bit.. but nothing on Fox would ever compare to the frenzy on MSNBC and the left wing outlets.

My complaint with the national MSM, is that they decidedly never established for the discussion, that it was born out of the Hillary camp, and that Berg took it viral. That should have been on the table from the beginning, and they should still  - on a regular basis - be dragging that part of the story into the picture. They should also be demanding answers from the Secretary of State, and from Berg, etc. And, CNN should have dragged  Avalon thru the mud today over this disgrace. This is a complete sham that he can play this role with CNN and disclose none of what he knows to be true.

Any person in the US that is upset about this birther issue, and wants to complain about it, should first have been informed about, and familiar with, from where birth was given to it.

I'm going to leave at that. Have a life, food, wiine and a movie tonight.

(;~/ gary

  • Login to post comments

Well, of course, Gary...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:26pm.

inasmuch as I hang out at NB a great deal, I've only noticed about a hundred references to the origination of the birther issue. That said, I've never read a decent summary of exactly how, who, why, and to what extent it was pursued by the Hillary Clinton camp. Do you know of one?

I'll concede there has been a recent frenzy of sorts on the MSM networks, but, it was Trump who induced it--although the reaction has been excessive.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer..

Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:52pm.

Ok, I snuck back in for one more. LOL.

Well, did you read the John Avalon piece I linked? That's 1/2 of my point. There it is - he nailed it. And not a soul in the national MSM is going to bring up the tale. Wow! Imagine that happening if the shoe was on the other foot?

Secondly, yes, a few weeks back Trump blew it out of the water.

However (and I disagree with you immensely here), it's only upped the frenzy on MSNBC, and others - it's been out there for months - long before Trump, trumped it again. And it was out there long before that. I've been saying for two years that the MSM was keeping this thing alive - keeping much more attention to it -- "bringing it up" hundreds of times, as if it were in the news that day - when it was not. They do it because they understand how to get the stupid Republicans. And, I do mean stupid.

Cheers,

(;~> gary

  • Login to post comments

Well, to be honest, Gary...

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 12:03am.

I was too busy being snotty to even notice the link. I'll check it out now.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

but Jer..

Submitted by Gary Hall on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 1:23am.

..that was the conversation!

(;~> gary

PS - thanks for the straight response.

  • Login to post comments

Okay, Gary...I spent the last twenty minutes

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 1:42am.

making a fruit smoothie, but between then and the time of my previous post I've read Avlon, learned all there is to know about PUMA, Philip Berg, and of course he beating heart of darkness for the birther movement: The World Net Daily.

I'll report back tomorrow. But l'll leave you with this teaser: I don't care what Avlon says, when it comes to getting the nuts rolling, it's hard to beat the WND.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer.. on WND..

Submitted by Gary Hall on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 12:33pm.

Well, I'd tend to agree with you from a bias POV. However - I'd surely trust their research as much as MSNBC's?

I remain balanced in my recommendations to everyone. To anyone who would read Newsweek, Time, Mother Jones, or The Nation, or The Rolling Stones (and I do regular scanning - some reading - at all) - you've got no right to criticize those who read WND, NewsMax, Drudge, The Weekly Standard, or National Review.

Read em all - expound one's horizons.

I'm confident you agree.

Once again - my driving point with the CNN/Avalon spot - was .. well, thru an example.

Let's say that 2-3 years into Bush's 1st term, the left - in an every increasing thunder, was believing that Bush was behind 9/11 (yes, I understand that there are elements of truth in that -- hee hee), and as the election season got going, a Democratic candidate came out swinging saying that indeed he believed it too - that Bush needed to produce proof that it wasn't so.

Now in the background - there'd been a conservative pundit/writer out there, who'd published his version of the proof long time ago (although deeply flawed and probably in error) - that within Paul's campaign a story had come out with evidence that indeed it were true.

Naturally - the MSM would not notice that story for two years, and then, as the campaign season got going, they'd invite that person on for a spot to attack those who were going after Bush, and just would never bring up the fact that he was the person, in the first place who'd broke the story and did the investigative leg work.

Sure.

in reality, that pundit would have been in a bidding war for who got him on the air first, from the get-go. It would have been a feeding frenzy.

Just the other day, I had heard that Ben Stein had come out and expressed that he supported raising the taxes on the super rich. My very first thought was that he'd be on MSNBC the next day - they never miss the opportunity.

When Helen Thomas came and went rabid at the Obama White House saying that not since - and not even Nixon tried to control the press as does this bunch - that they should be hanging their heads in shame, not only did the MSM snuff the news (I don't think anyone reported it - and it was a scene in the WH Briefing room) - and certainly, not a soul would be anxious to get her on, to talk about it.

(;~> gary

  • Login to post comments

Great post Gary

Submitted by Boudin on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:07pm.

But Jer need's time to nickle and dime? Whoa, I sound like JJ

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Gary...I not only agree with you about expanding one's

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:25pm.

[ideological] horizons, I've been practicing what you preach virtually all of my life. Our house was filled with books, newspapers, and magazines of every political stripe, and many more were virtually stacked to the ceiling at my dad's newspaper office. At magazine stands, I would always make it a point to grab the conservative National Review as well as the liberal The New Republic. Bill Buckley's Firing Line was my favorite politically-oriented show on television.

Briefly returning to the origin of the birther "movement", I read a good bit about "PUMA" Democrats [Party Unity My Ass] and learned they were not at all occupants ot the left-wing of the party. They were comprised primarily of Hillary-supporting, female Democratic traditionalists and centrists who were distressed with the leftward shift which they perceived Obama was taking the party. Many even vowed to vote fort McCain. And still others decided Sarah Palin might prove a worthy beneficiary of their support!

According to Avlon, the real ferment for birtherism developed in the mid to late Summer of '08, and the "truther" maverick attorney Philip Berg was contacted to pursue it legally. Furthermore, ads were placed in the far-right Washington Times, and Berg was a guest of the righty radio talker, Michael Savage, to promote his birther views. Yes, Berg is a Democrat and did file the first lawsuit, but it's a little misleading to say it was completely spawned by and [initially] exclusively promoted by the "left".

It's interesting to note that in June--immediately before to the aformentioned period of PUMA activity in the Summer of '08, the World Net Daily had already commenced publishing what was to become literally scores of birther-related articles--which continue with head-spinning frequency to this day. Its initial website offering that June cited a piece which had appeared in the National Review shortly before which raised the issue of Obama's birthplace and citizenship. As such, the timing, sequence and source of events leave some questions unanswered with respect to the actual origins of "birtherism".

Jer

  • Login to post comments

"Our house was filled with

Submitted by dscott on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 10:46am.

"Our house was filled with books, newspapers, and magazines of every political stripe, and many more were virtually stacked to the ceiling at my dad's newspaper office."

Jer, do you have hoarding issues? :-)

If a stack fell on to you, would you be seriously injured?
Does your ceiling sag at the center of the room from all the books stored in the room above?
Do you have to eat on a TV tray because your kitchen and dining room tables are stacked with books?

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
  • Login to post comments

dscott~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 10:53am.

LOL. I trust Jer will find that funny as well.:)

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

I'm not laughing, GG...

Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:00am.

My thousands of priceless periodicals accumulated over the years were meticulously boxed and stored in the basement until my wife decided to consign them to a landfill so she would have room for more of her worthless junk.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

She didn't get your Victorian Wood Nymph engravings, did she?

Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:10am.

LOL

  • Login to post comments

Not a chance.

Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:28am.

Secured at Class A Level Concrete Reinforced Storage Vault as described here.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:30am.

I'm too afraid to click on that.

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

It's okay, GG....

Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:37am.

Believe me...I'm very careful about what I make clickable these days.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:40am.

Yeah, that one was okay. :)

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

well done folks*

Submitted by cajun2 on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 11:58am.

Laughs are a nice way to start the day.   Thanks

  • Login to post comments

Caj~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 12:04pm.

And it helps balance out all the news that makes us want to cry. {{*_*}}

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

Which is why I can joke with

Submitted by dscott on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 12:21pm.

Which is why I can joke with Jer, he has a good sense of humor.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
  • Login to post comments

dscott~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 12:32pm.

Yeah, he does. And did you know that he's actually a conservative? He just likes to argue with people.

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

Me? Argue?

Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:22pm.

You gotta be kidding. Just more baseless accusations. It's unbelievable what I have to put up with at this place.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Jer~

Submitted by GG_NB on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:42pm.

Huh, I thought for sure you'd deny the conservative thing -- not the arguing thing. So you really ARE a conservative who is just arguing liberal points? Hmmmmm...

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

Wow Giggles*

Submitted by cajun2 on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:52pm.

Bait, hook, LUNCH.    LOL

  • Login to post comments

Jer.. to follow up

Submitted by Gary Hall on Tue, 04/26/2011 - 1:37pm.

Jer - I'd grant you that you're more than a willing open mind. And that's true in comparison to most any host on MSNBC - and to right-wingnuts. I always respect one's right to lean one way or the other, as long as they demonstrate tolerance to the views of others and the willingness to engage in an intelligent exchange of ideas.

I don't disagree - on your thoughts on the birther issue. I do remind you that I'm approaching this from the vantage point of bias in the national MSM. I understand where it came from, how it progressed, and where it landed.

It's the job of a non-biased news media to inform the public of all of that. They are pathetically biased here - and have promoted this story from day one (but only in regards to one side of the isle) for the purpose of using it against the R's.

For comparison, they could have done the same thing with the 2000 election ; presenting and smearing the constant stream of nuts who claimed that Bush stole the election - that Gore won the recounts - that FL had roadblocks preventing blacks from voting, etc. But they didn't come close. Instead they not only allowed the conspiracy theories to flourish - they still promote many of them.

Same for WMD's - After Clinton, Cohen, Sen. John Edwards, and many others - in the summer of 2003 - came out swinging in defense of Bush's view on WMD's, the MSM could have chosen to tell their story to the American people and end the damn shrill hate mongering. Instead, they entirely censored the views (still do) from the public, and promoted the division and hate mongering. I believe their partisanship here - the media - was a serious contributing factor to the horrific quagmire that Iraq fell into - the media divided us, and empowered the terrorists who moved into Iraq. We advertised to them - that we were deeply divided.

Same for Immigration reform. Same for healthcare reform. Same for solving the budget crisis. Same for understanding how the housing bubble was created by Clinton and Cuomo - and led to the recent crisis. Same for reminding the public that Bush inherited a crash and disappearing budget surpluses. Same for reminding the public that the late 1990's were the most deadly in the world since WW II (counting the millions who died in civil war and genocides).

If the birther issue would have come out of the left - against a Republican candidate/President - the national MSM would have driven the ship - demanding of the WH - not attacking the nuts.

Cheerios,

(;~> gary

  • Login to post comments

What's interesting is which party keeps the birther

Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:22pm.

story alive... Wonder why? It's great to marginalize their opponents. After we get BO out of office, we MAY be able to lay it all to rest, not before.

hbnolikeee
  • Login to post comments

Keep listening to guys like

Submitted by mostlymoderate on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:30pm.

Keep listening to guys like Karl Rove and we will never win in 2012. This is why we have the Tea Party. I think more and more people are wondering where the hell Obama came from and what rock he crawled out from under. His hatred of American ways of life are obvious; therefore, people wonder if maybe something is strange about this guy.

  • Login to post comments

I'll listen to Karl, and most others will too

Submitted by TheHistorian on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 6:51pm.

If you remember, Karl got George Bush elected twice. McCain dissed him, and where is McCain? My suggestion is that you quit trying to demonize Karl, and try to understand him. Karl understands politics like no one I have seen. I don't like his lack of conservatism, but facts are facts.

“Liberals tend to put the onus of your success on society and conservatives on you and your family.”

Dennis Prager

  • Login to post comments

Greta on her Thursday night show

Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:15pm.

discussed that Rove also drove Bush's approval down the toilet and in so doing helped push people to vote for BO.

hbnolikeee
  • Login to post comments

Absolutely!! You took the

Submitted by mostlymoderate on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:45pm.

Absolutely!! You took the words right out of my mouth. There is no way a nobody like Obama would have won over the country if Rove would have taking care of Bush's reputation in his second term. Something should have been done about all the lies and smears that were being told about Bush. Where was his public relations? Where was Karl Rove? Certain lies and distortions about Bush were not handled with care like they would have if Bush was running for another reelection. It's like Rove couldn't give two $#1ts what happened to the country after Bush was out.

The GOP screwed up too. Somebody smarter than me HAD to have known McCain had no chance in hell of winning because he is a RINO. If I could see it I know others could have too. My fear is we will make the same mistake this time: get a RINO to be frontrunner and lose again. We still don't have a contender and that scares me.

  • Login to post comments

Melania Trump VS Joy Behar

Submitted by im41 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:38pm.

Moonbat vs Melania

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/04/melania-trump-takes...

  • Login to post comments

Bachman's openness

Submitted by The Irishman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:50pm.

To the Obama birth certificate's authenticity coupled with the story of top republicans turning their support away from her makes me think her motives are less than honest. Looks to me like she's going all out to appease the boys.

  • Login to post comments

The BC is a red herring

Submitted by NL207 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 7:04pm.

A distraction designed to preoccupy weak minds with a non-issue. The real problem is simple. Obama is not a natural born citizen regardless of where he was born.

  • Login to post comments

So, maybe you're right, NL...

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:18pm.

What then?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

What next?

Submitted by NL207 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:08pm.

That is a real problem. There is a lack of precedent. No one has ever challenged the Constitutional qualifications of a sitting President before. Of course, we have never had a sitting President prior to Obama who did not satisfy the 1874 SCOTUS definition of 'natural born citizen'. Not even Chester Arthur failed that test. The first 8 Presidents were all residents of these states at the adoption of the Constitution. The rest were born in the US of parents who were citizens themselves.

I think we have no choice but to remove Obama and remove ALL, every last one, of his Judicial appointees. If it's done now, there is the question of whhether Biden is legitimately the Vice President. Today we elect the Vice President as a ticket with the President. When the Constitution was orginally ratified, the Vice President was elected independently of the President. Assuming Biden is the VP, then he would succeed to the Presidency. If he is not, then Boehner succeeds according to the Constitution's rules of succession.

  • Login to post comments

NL..I just can't envision the consequences being anything more

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:44pm.

serious or punitive than prohibiting a second term. My opinion would be otherwise if it turned out Obama in fact were born in a foreign country and was the perpetrator of or a participant in the most elaborate and diabolical fraud in history.

But an ineligibility ruling based on a future SC decision which finally addresses and resolves the Constitutional conundrum associated with the "natural born citizen" provision would only have prospective application, I'm pretty sure.

BTW...why do you say the Arthur case is inapplicable? His father was still an Irish citizen at the time of the future president's birth.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

I cant envision

Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 11:06pm.

Anyone in this corrupt Admin asking any questions of Obama. Holder is a racist scumbag, And the rest of em are commies.

Maybe Jer would like to take this opportunity to explain why Obama and his Admin are above approach?

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Arthur's father was not an Irish citizen.

Submitted by NL207 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 11:20pm.

He was a British subject. Irish independence ended at the Boyne in 1690 and did not re-emerge until 1921. Both he and his son resided in the United States for Arthur's entire minority. Obama did not. Arthur Sr. naturalized as a US citizen when Chester Arthur was 14. Barack Sr. did not.

The original intent of the framers was to prevent anyone with dividied loyalties from becoming President. Clearly, the Arthurs were US Citizens and loyalists through and through as they demostrated by their actions. Obama on the other hand is the bastard son on a Kenyan marxist and an American mother who was opposed to her own Country. Obama was clearly adopted in Indonesia by Lelo Soetoro and spent a significant part of his minority there. It is likely that Obama at various times in his early adult life claimed to be an Indonesian citizen.

We are not speaking of a future Supreme Court ruling. Part of the majority opinion in Minor v. Happersett of 1874 defined what the term 'natural born citizen' meant. The definition espoused by the Chief Justice was a person born in the United States to parents who were citizens of the United States. Any other interpretation would be overturning the precedent.

  • Login to post comments

Touche` re British subject, NL..

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 11:58pm.

I'm going to check out Minor v. Happersett and get back with you tomorrow.

If his America-hating mom married the Kenyan Marxist, Obama was not a bastard. Nothing personal, but your editorializing is irrelevant [and unnecessary as well in view of my thorough familiarity with your sentiments]. But we can deal with that tomorrow, too.

Later,

Jer.

  • Login to post comments

"If his America-hating mom

Submitted by NL207 on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 1:18pm.

"If his America-hating mom married the Kenyan Marxist, Obama was not a bastard"

Some people think the date of this event relative to the date of Obama's conception is relevant. Others consider only the date of Obama's birth relative to the date of marriage. Yet others consider only that the parents did marry, regardless of when. Bastard is the word used by all who frown on these practices. In the society I grew up in, Obama's mother is a scarlet woman, a whore, someone to be shunned. Given the pornography featuring her that has since surfaced, there can be little doubt as to her moral stature.

You will find that Minor v. Happersett was about whether or not the 14th Amendment conferred voting rights on women as citizens through the equal protection clause. The fact that the Chief Justice elaborated upon what 'natural born citizenship' meant was ancilliary to the issue. He merely used this to affirm that Minor was indeed a citizen with the full constitutional rights of a citizen although he did explicitly mention that it was a requirement for the office of President.

  • Login to post comments

NL, I have not heard of the

Submitted by bassndude on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 3:01pm.

NL, I have not heard of the porn angle on Obama's mother. What gives there?

 

Save a SeAL, club a liberal/troll!!

  • Login to post comments

bass...I believe the porn angle

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 4:33pm.

may relate to the often-overlooked language appended to Article Two of the Constitution which provides that...

"No person except a natural born Citizen at least thirty-five years of age and who is not the progeny of a woman of lewd and lascivious predilections, including but not limited to, exhibiting a wanton lust for the 'Negro', or dancing with, on, around, or in close proximity to, a 'pole', shall be eligibible for the Office of President."

The Organization to Oust the Kenyan Vulgarian is ready to fill the void once the birthers are laughed out of existence.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

This is not the birther issue.

Submitted by NL207 on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 6:46pm.

Obama, is not a natural born citizen as the framers conceived of it.  That is independent of the question of his birthplace.

That the left will attempt to redefine natural born into what the founders would have called native born will come as no surprise. Recall that these are the same folks, some of whom have proposed that foreign nationals be allowed to vote in US elections.

  • Login to post comments

I understand the distinction, NL...

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 7:14pm.

But I think it's not inappropriate to include both in the boader category of birtherism. Each are intimately related to the circumstances of Obama's birth and his birth parents, although the 'natural born citizen' theory is not dependent upon the locus [domestic or foreign] of the birth.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

It is most innappropriate to conflate ....

Submitted by NL207 on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 8:47am.

the phony birther issue with very real natural born citizen question.

I believe Obama's handlers carefully considered this situation years ago, 2004 at the least. They knew full well Obama was not qualified to be President based on his origins. They know he was born in the US, regardless of whether it was in Hawaii or in or around Seattle. So Obama is advised to spend millions, literally, to 'hide' his birth certificate and create a red herring for his opponents.   Even if the birthers force out his BC, all that will accomplish is to completely discredit those who challenge his qualifications to be President.  The Birthers are distracted fools sucking up valuable oxygen.  The kill shot against Obama is the natural born citizenship issue.

Obama is not a natural born citizen owing to his paternity and he is likely not even a citizen at all owing to his own actions in his early adult years.

  • Login to post comments

NL...in re Minor v. Happersett

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 04/24/2011 - 11:31pm.

I had read this decision before, although the name didn't immediately ring a bell when you mentioned it. It addresses--but is in no way dispositive of--the meaning of "natural born citizen" language, inasmuch as it was merely a threshold question to the more central issue under review: women's suffrage as a right guaranteed by the "privileges and immunities" clause of the Constitution.

With respect to citizenship, the Court notes as follows:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. [My emphasis in italics]

The facts presented to the Court included the woman's birth in the United States to parents who were both citizens of this country.  The Justices had little trouble in finding she was unquestionably a "natural born citizen" under any construction of the term.  However, it would be a misreading of that recognition to further conclude it explicitly or implicitly excludes all other possible scenarios by which "natural born citizenship" requirements could be satisfied for the purposes of presidential eligibility.     

Jer

  • Login to post comments

It is the only reference of its kind in the

Submitted by NL207 on Mon, 04/25/2011 - 11:54pm.

jurisprudence is it not?

If you return to the original intent of the framers : to prevent any man of conflicted national loyalties from occupying the Presidency, I think there is only one way you can read 'natural born citizen' and that is as Minor herself was found to be. It is clear from the Chief Justice's remark about 'some authorities go further ....' that he regards those authorities as holding opinions different than his own about what constitutes natural born citizenship.. It is also clear that Obama has conflicted loyalties. He considers himself a citizen of the 'world' first and the US second. I attribute this to his foreign breeding, others attribute this to liberal / progressive brainwashing.

If you have read this decision in the past, why have you not mentioned it before?

  • Login to post comments

Google for nude photos of

Submitted by NL207 on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 6:06pm.

Google for nude photos of Anne Dunham. You will find them. This was some kind of amatuer work, probably taken around 1960. Their only saving grace is they are at least not as cras and tasteless as the stuff that abounds today.

  • Login to post comments

Bachman's openness

Submitted by The Irishman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 4:49pm.

To the Obama birth certificate's authenticity coupled with the story of top republicans turning their support away from her makes me think her motives are less than honest. Looks to me like she's going all out to appease the boys.

  • Login to post comments

~

Submitted by GG_NB on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 6:09pm.

.

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"
~Ronald Reagan

  • Login to post comments

Once is never enough.

Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 6:17pm.

.

  • Login to post comments

I think he has something to hide

Submitted by richb313 on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 6:19pm.

I think he has something to hide, but what is it? We may never know for sure. One does have to wonder though, what if it is true, how do we handle this? Some say Joe Biden would be President, but how can he be if Obama was never a legitimate candidate and therefore should never have been allowed on the ballot? To me this is just an interesting thought excercise and I hope it stays that way. This country does not need a Constitutional crisis, especially now.

  • Login to post comments

John, I think who should be worried is you and your friends

Submitted by TheHistorian on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 6:49pm.

about the birther issue. The question is, what do 10 states with 100 electoral votes (in 2012) have to do with the birther issue? All 10 are requiring affidavits, or birth certificates, to be elected by that state. Guess what? If Obama loses these electoral votes (about 50 of them went to him) in 2008, and if he loses the close states, he throws the election into the House and Senate because he would only have about 236 electoral votes which does not give him the election. How do you think the Republican house will vote? I would love to see what would happen if the Democrat Senate would vote for Joe Biden while the Republican House voted for Rand Paul. Biden would finally have a boss worthy of respect.

You had better get YOUR President to recognize that he has a problem that is going to require him to address the requirements of these states, should they vote it in. Obama was NOT a landslide President; there were six states that he won fairly closely and without those state only had 286 electoral votes to start. Go see the map at http://www.270towin.com/.

So much for the birther issue; you libs potentially have a BIG problem.

“Liberals tend to put the onus of your success on society and conservatives on you and your family.”

Dennis Prager

  • Login to post comments

Trump auditions for media apprentice

Submitted by TerryWest on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 7:25pm.

A bit of wishful thinking on the part the "Independant" (dose he have any proof he's an Independant? )

I really don't think the birther issue will cause any problem for the Republicans, its not the Republicans who are so easily baited into a fanatically focused frenzy over it.

  • Login to post comments

Isn't it amazing

Submitted by Patriot II on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 7:54pm.

That all these ignorant A.H.'s that bad mouth so called "birthers" conveniently forget oblahmas little speech when running for the senate in Illinois where he said he couldn't run for Prez because he wasn't a citizen.......look it up dumb asses......!!

  • Login to post comments

I believe that was actually a

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:09pm.

I believe that was actually a quote by John McCain while he was touring the Canal Zone in the 90's.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Maybe you should take a break, Jer.

Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:01pm.

I think you know what I mean, and it has nothing to do with McCain.

  • Login to post comments

Does it have anything to do with my birthday and a very

Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:09pm.

special surprise in store for me?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Special Surprise?

Submitted by Rukus on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 12:38am.

May 21st, hmmm... isn't the Earth supposed to blow up or something like that? My birthday is 15 days before yours so at least I'll get to wear my new socks and tie. ; )

_____________________________________________________________ I'm not too drunk to dance! It's just that people keep stepping on my hands!
  • Login to post comments

Indeed it is, Gary...

Submitted by Jer on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 4:46pm.

and is precisely why I am commencing the serious partying very early in the morning on said date since the denouement will be kind of a downer. I have stipulated that all my gifts be of the type which are immediately consumable.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

I stopped taking suggestions

Submitted by Thoreau on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:16pm.

I stopped taking suggestions from the Communist News Network when Hanoi Jane was selling her commi muff to Ted "bipolar on a good day" Turner.

  • Login to post comments

Hillary Clinton Was The Original Birther

Submitted by HardRightTurn on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:22pm.

Bill was the original Obama racist. Remember the 2008 primary campaign for the Demagogic Pity Party of Woe-Is-Me nomination?

To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html

  • Login to post comments

Bill & Ted's excellent conversation.

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:26pm.

Would you be referring to the statement Bill Clinton made to Ted Kennedy about Barack Obama?

“a few years ago this guy would have been getting us coffee.” - Bill Clinton.

  • Login to post comments

→ Or maybe

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 8:32pm.

Or maybe it was the Liberals getting so hacked off when Bill pointed out that Jesse Jackson also won primaries.

  • Login to post comments

"We the media...

Submitted by GregE on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 9:32pm.

....are going to make sure that the birther thing is a problem. If someone won't bring it up, we will."

  • Login to post comments

Just askin'...

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:17pm.

Without second-tier cable news networks like CNN, who can't seem to book more consequential guests, would people like John Avlon even exist?

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

If you had any doubts as to why the liberals are pushing

Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:03pm.

this birther talk. It's not because they're angry and want to vent or prove it's not so. They want to marginalize. Without an argument to address their failed agendas, this is all they have.

Notice that Trump doesn't need to mention the topic. George StinksOfCowFlopAGus kept asking Trump about this. As much as Trump said it was not his focus the Flopster kept hammering the same question. Quite humorous how Trump pushed back watching little Flop flop though.

hbnolikeee
  • Login to post comments

Small and yucky

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:15pm.

I like to think of George as more Streptococcus or Staphylococcus or one of those bacteria...

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

Something about

Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:23pm.

cow flop and george though. It just smells right.

hbnolikeee
  • Login to post comments

If cow flop hosts

Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 10:31pm.

If cow flop hosts streptococci, we could both be right! I know that Stephanopopolopolopol - oh, hell - sure hosts cow flop :)

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

Who is a "conservative?"

Submitted by big.league.slider on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 1:08am.

"Rove and other conservative voices are actively turning against Donald Trump, and not only Trump but Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin...."

I don't know any real conservative that would consider Karl Rove or Don trump to be a conservative.  On the other hand, most conservatives I know agree with Palin and Bachmann's positions.

As for "birthers", these are the  same media dolts that blindly accepted CBS news and Dan Rather's fake documents about GWB prior to the 2004 election.

Let the MSM attack Trump, Palin and Bachmann.  The GOP candidate will be a real conservative like Christie or West.

  • Login to post comments

Chris Christie

Submitted by Chris Norman on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 9:22am.

If "real" conservatives wouldn't consider Karl Rove a conservative, they would hardly consider Chris Christie one either, because he holds some liberal positions. That's the problem when one starts trying to pick "real" conservatives for an ideal pure as driven snow ideology. It becomes a flavor of the week choice until that flavor says or does something that gets people angry and they are declared "RINOS". For the record, I like Christie and I remember when Karl Rove was a hero to most here on NewsBusters - until he had the effrontery to offer his opinion on Christine O'Donnell's chances in the DE senatorial election.

Let's make the 2012 campaign: "The War on Error"
  • Login to post comments

And we all know that spins......

Submitted by Patriot II on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 10:55am.

is another cute little politically correct term for lying......therefore John Avlon is another stinking ass liberal liar...imho!!!

  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • Study: Christians who tithe have better finances than those who don't (TGC)
  • The media are willing accomplices to Obama (PolitiChicks)
  • FBI has suspects in mind in Benghazi; Obama prefers to try them in court (AP)
  • The folly of 'do something' liberalism (Patriot Update)
  • DOJ targeted more Fox News reporters than Rosen (Twitchy)
  • WashPost vs. WashPost on IRS probe (Ed Morrissey)
  • Media too prone to fall sway to Obama's referrent power (Salena Zito)
  • Five reasons to keep government out of Internet governance (Eli Dourado)
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: Why Tim Tebow Is an Ultimate Clutch Player
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
David Limbaugh's picture
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh Column: Partisan Obama Culture Spawned a More Abusive IRS
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Gosnell's Just the Tip of the Iceberg
more cartoons
  • NYT Gets Sen. Cruz's Opposition to Marketplace Fairness Act Dead Wrong
  • Oops! CNN Commentator Falsely Accuses Okla. State Rep While Trying to Score Liberal Points on Tornado
  • Sen. Whitehouse Blames GOP For Okla. Tornado, Storms, Rising Seas, Etc.
  • On Leno: Kids Ask Obama the Darndest Questions
  • Morning Joe Meteorologist: Tornado Averted 'By The Grace of Whatever'
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use