As media in America fall all over themselves with glee at the thought of the Global Warmingist-in-Chief winning a Nobel Peace Prize, Wednesday's findings by a British judge that Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" contained nine material falsehoods has prompted a request to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to strip the movie's producers of the Oscars they received in February for "Best Documentary."
NewsBusters reported Tuesday that a British court rendered an opinion concerning Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" citing eleven inaccuracies in the supposedly factual presaging of imminent planetary doom.
As it turns out, the judge, Michael Burton, announced his ruling Wednesday, and he listed only nine key scientific errors in this piece of detritus that should never have been allowed by the Motion Picture Association of America or the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to be marketed as a documentary.
According to the British Telegraph, Burton claimed these "errors had arisen ‘in the context of alarmism and exaggeration' in order to support Mr Gore's thesis on global warming."
Pretty much what climate change skeptics around the world have been claiming since this abomination was first released in 2006, wouldn't you agree?
Here were the nine pertinent errors reported by the Telegraph Thursday:
Just when you thought it was safe to turn on your radio again, a major media advocate has issued a strong warning to companies thinking about hiring Don Imus: Don't you dare!
For those that have been out of the country since the beginning of the year, one of the original shock-jocks got himself in trouble in April when he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."
After being fired by CBS Radio and NBC, Imus has been mounting a comeback, and is in serious talks with two leading radio outlets.
Unfortunately, as measured by its press release Tuesday, the National Association of Black Journalists isn't pleased (emphasis added throughout, h/t Dan Gainor):
This is an organization founded by soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore designed to train mindless automatons the Global Warmingist-in-Chief’s factually flawed slideshow so that they can travel around the world inciting hysteria about manmade global warming.
And, of course, make Al Gore more money!
Maybe most deplorable, their lectures are given at community centers, senior facilities, coffee houses, and other places members of the public go to meet, greet, and eat.
Would you like a schmear of propaganda with your bagel this morning, Mrs. Silverman?
With that disturbing visual adroitly planted, this is TCP’s defined mission (emphasis added for your enhanced reading displeasure):
As NewsBusters reported, MSNBC's Dan Abrams pointed an accusatory finger at Fox News Monday claiming, "The Republicans have had Fox News, and O'Reilly in particular, in their pocket on the Republican talking points since 1996."
Clearly not pleased, the "Fox & Friends" crew took Abrams to task for his statements Tuesday, especially co-host Gretchen Carlson (file photo above right) who seemed to be doing her darnedest to hold back her anger.
Here's something American media are virtually guaranteed to not report: a British court has determined that Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods.
It seems a safe bet Matt Lauer and Diane Sawyer won't be discussing this Tuesday morning, wouldn't you agree?
In the wake of MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews's deplorable comments regarding the Bush administration having "finally been caught in their criminality," many conservatives are wondering if this clearly left-leaning pundit should be allowed to moderate GOP presidential debates including this Tuesday's.
To address the growing controversy, Fox News's "Fox & Friends" invited media members from both sides of the aisle Monday morning to debate the issue. On the left were Ellis Henican of Newsday and Ellen Ratner of FNC; on the right were radio host Herman Cain and Jim Pinkerton of Newsday (video available here courtesy Johnny Dollar).
In the end, I strongly agree with Henican and Cain who felt that candidates should be willing and able to answer anybody's questions regardless of political leaning if they want to attain the highest office in the land.
Last Sunday, NewsBusters introduced readers to Media Matters for America, the left-wing organization behind the recent smear campaigns against conservative personalities Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.
In the days that followed, although news outlets and leading Democrats continued to reference articles written by this shadowy group, few details were offered about the organization behind them, and virtually nothing was shared concerning its founder, David Brock, who in a short period of time a decade ago remarkably went from a staunch enemy of the Clintons to one of their strongest supporters.
As National Review's Jonah Goldberg wrote in Sunday's New York Post, "Brock was once a right-wing hatchet man, penning a book, ‘The Real Anita Hill,' and some articles in the American Spectator on the Clintons that for a time earned him considerable notoriety on the right and hatred on the left."
Despite the influence Media Matters currently has with the mainstream media, Brock's extraordinary political metamorphosis ten years ago, though obviously a journalist's dream, has received little recent attention from press representatives typically clamoring for such juicy dish (emphasis added throughout):
As CNN's Howard Kurtz accurately pointed out on Sunday's "Reliable Sources," few media outlets seemed at all interested in giving much attention to the great news out of Iraq last week regarding September's sharp decline in casualties.
To Kurtz's obvious frustration, his guests - Robin Wright of the Washington Post and Barbara Starr of CNN - both supported the press burying this extremely positive announcement.
I kid you not.
*****Update: Wright responds to reader e-mail message at end of post.
After introducing the subject, Kurtz asked, "Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?"
Are media members finally getting comfortable expressing skepticism about climate change?
Just days after CNN meteorologist Rob Marciano practically spoke heresy by stating "There are definitely some inaccuracies" in soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth," a British nature-loving journalist said "I wish we could grow up about" global warming.
You gotta love it.
As reported by the British Telegraph Saturday (emphasis added throughout, h/t Marc Morano):
Media's power was on full display last week when a popular rock singer published a song about the Jena 6.
The lyrics angered the embattled Louisiana city's mayor so much that he wrote a letter to the Associated Press complaining about how his town has "for months been mischaracterized in the media and portrayed as the epicenter of hatred, racism and a place where justice is denied."
The latest episode in this bizarre story began with the posting of this video at the website of John Mellencamp featuring his most recent song "Jena." In it, Mellencamp sings:
Oh oh oh Jena Take your nooses down
The town's mayor, Murphy R. McMillin, wasn't pleased by this, and wrote the AP:
Assume for a moment that a new study by NASA proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that manmade global warming was indeed responsible for the recent ice melts in the Arctic. Think media would have reported it?
In reality, that's a bit of a trick question, for in the past several weeks, television newscasts, papers, and magazines have been filled with hysterical assertions about decreasing Arctic ice levels destined to cause imminent flooding to coastal regions around the world.
As such, it certainly was no surprise when NASA released a report Monday claiming "the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds," virtually no media outlets shared the information with the citizenry, and those that did still blamed the melting ice on - you guessed it - global warming.
The largely boycotted announcement out of NASA stated no such thing (emphasis added):
Climate change skeptics around the world are painfully aware that the Global Warmingist-in-Chief, soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore, despite his supposedly vast knowledge on the subject, has refused every invitation to debate his theories concerning man's role in making things hot for the planet.
Fearing the globe's foremost warm-monger will never step up to the challenge - why should he...the debate's over! - top scientists from everywhere you can imagine have decided to debate the former vice president the only way seemingly possible: on YouTube.
Americans willing to look at the manmade global warming debate with any degree of impartiality and honesty are well aware that those spreading the hysteria have made a lot of money doing so, and stand to gain much more if governments mandate carbon dioxide emissions reductions.
In fact, just two months ago, ABC News.com estimated soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore's net worth at $100 million, which isn't bad considering that he was supposedly worth about $1 million when he watched George W. Bush get sworn in as president in January 2001.
Talk about your get-rich-quick schemes, how'd you like to increase your net worth 10,000 percent in less than seven years?
Fortunately for the world's foremost warm-monger - a term I'd love to see become part of the parlance concerning what, in the long run, will likely be viewed as the greatest con ever perpetrated on the American people - his current wealth represents a mere pittance of what it will be if governments around the world are scared into all of his preposterous recommendations.
With that in mind, Deborah Corey Barnes published a marvelous piece at Human Events Wednesday that would be rather sobering for folks on both sides of the aisle if only a global warming obsessed media would be willing to share the information with the citizenry (emphasis added throughout):
On Monday, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) stepped onto the floor of the Senate and strongly denounced talk radio host Rush Limbaugh for what have proven to be out of context statements made by the conservative personality on his program last Wednesday.
As NewsBusters reported Sunday, the leftwing organization responsible for the recent smear campaigns against Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, Media Matters, has direct ties to the Clintons.
To be sure, folks on the left, and in the media that support them, will either deny this connection, or ignore it.
In the end, that's going to be hard to do, for on August 4, while speaking at the YearlyKos convention in Chicago, the junior senator from New York boasted of "institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress."
Our friend Mike Church has been kind enough to provide the following audio of this segment of her speech that day (partial transcript to follow). Those interested can also view the video available here (relevant section at 2:20):
This is really hysterical, folks, and definitely requires all drinking vessels be properly stowed before continuing.
Just days before Rush Limbaugh was attacked by a number of press outlets for discussing "phony soldiers" on the air, ABC's Brian Ross did a segment on "World News with Charles Gibson" dealing with "phony heroes...scam artists...posing as the war heroes they never were, claiming credit for acts of courage in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Marvelously, this story was aired on Monday, September 24, just two days before Limbaugh made his comments. And, as noted in a NewsBusters posting by the MRC's Brent Baker, the report even mentioned the same "phony soldier," Jesse Macbeth (pictured to the right), that Limbaugh did on his program Wednesday.
The smear campaign against conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh will take a dramatic turn Monday if Greg Sargent of TPM Election Central is correct.
According to a blog posting by Sargent Friday evening, "Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) will be introducing a resolution in the House of Representatives on Monday condemning Rush Limbaugh for his ‘phony soldiers' remark."
Last week, two of the leading conservatives in the media, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, were dishonestly and unprofessionally attacked by press outlets that cherry-picked out of context remarks from lengthy radio broadcasts in order to vilify outspoken personalities whose opinions they don’t agree with.
Unfortunately, as folks around the country saw this play out on their television sets and newspapers, few were at all familiar with the organization behind the smear campaigns, or that this same group started the firestorm which ended with radio host Don Imus being terminated by NBC and CBS in April.
Maybe more importantly, even fewer citizens are aware that this organization is linked directly to Bill and Hillary Clinton, as well as billionaire leftist George Soros.
For some background, John Perazzo wrote a column for FrontPage Magazine in July entitled “Media Matters: Hillary’s Lap Dogs,” that should be must-reading for all citizens interested in who's targeting America’s leading conservative personalities (emphasis added throughout):
Here's something you don't see every day on the front page of a major American newspaper: an article about how the rising demand for ethanol has sent corn and grain prices so high that it's resulted in more people around the world going hungry.
Even more shocking: the article in question was on the front page of Saturday's New York Times.
In a piece entitled "As Prices Soar, U.S. Food Aid Buys Less," author Celia W. Dugger shockingly presented the dirty little secret about soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore's grand solution for manmade global warming that NewsBusters has been writing about for months while most in the media remained silent (emphasis added, h/t Glenn Reynolds):
It has been regularly reported by NewsBusters that media are doing everything in their power to withhold from the public the financial ramifications of global warming alarmism.
Be it the marketing of totally useless carbon offsets, or proposals for additional taxes on consumers and corporations, press outlets have been seemingly coordinated in their silence regarding such matters.
Another fine example of such a boycott occurred last week when House Energy and Commerce Committee chair John Dingell (D-MI) discussed a rather elaborate tax plan with the Associated Press Wednesday that virtually no major media outlet outside of Detroit bothered to report (emphasis added throughout):
Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama might have talk show host Oprah Winfrey in his corner, but a new study from the Pew Research Center found that such celebrity endorsements have little impact on voting habits.
In fact, state governors carry more weight with potential voters than celebrities.
On Friday, the host of HBO's "Real Time" once again proved he has, for in coming to the defense of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Maher rationalized the Iranian president sending munitions to kill American soldiers in Iraq by asking, "Doesn't Bush have American blood on his hands?"
Maybe worse, Maher said that Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust, and statements that "Israel should be wiped off the map," are just "things he says to get elected," and "are the equivalent of when the Republicans in this country say, ‘Gay marriage will lead to death.'"
After introducing his panel, Maher began the discussion with Ahmadinejad's visit to New York City stating (video available here, relevant sections at 1:28 and 5:00):
One of the most disgraceful assertions from global warming alarmists such as soon-to-be-Nobel Laureate Al Gore is that a scientific consensus exists concerning man's role in climate change.
Of course, skeptics around the world accurately counter that science isn't accomplished by a show of hands, and that until it can be proven that man is indeed responsible for the slight increase in global average temperatures in the past 100 years, the percentage of people who "feel" that way is totally irrelevant.
With that in mind, a new study published Wednesday in the journal Nature (subscription required) tears apart the "scientific consensus" regarding the cause of a hole in the ozone layer, and should act as a warning to folks claiming that the climate change debate is over, assuming of course the media pay any attention to this paper.
For those interested in science rather than consensus-driven hypotheses, here were some of the paper's astounding findings a global warming obsessed press are guaranteed to withhold from the public (emphasis added throughout, h/t Benny Peiser):
People who are sick and tired of the smear campaigns against conservatives emanating from the left take heart, for it appears that last night's "O'Reilly Factor" was a foreshadowing of things to come.
Just hours after Bill O'Reilly came out strongly against media representatives parroting factually inaccurate statements promulgated by leftwing websites and organizations, the host of the "Radio Factor" issued a strong warning Thursday to press outlets participating in such smear campaigns.
Fasten your seatbelts, because this is really delicious (audio available here courtesy Johnny Dollar):
In the wake of the recent media-created scandal concerning statements made by Fox News host Bill O'Reilly on his radio show, a rather enlightening discussion has ensued regarding the existence of a well-organized campaign to demonize every television and radio personality whose political opinions don't march in lock-step with the left.
A rather frank and candid conversation concerning this matter occurred on Wednesday's "The O'Reilly Factor" between the host and outspoken radio talk show personality Tammy Bruce.
As NewsBuster Jake Gontesky reported, an editorial in Investor's Business Daily Monday claimed one of billionaire leftist George Soros's foundations gave $720,000 in 2006 to the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, James Hansen.
Since this editorial was published, according to LexisNexis and Google News searches, not one major media outlet has reported these allegations.
Maybe even more shocking is that had press outlets looked into this matter - you know, acted like journalists instead of advocates! - they would have found Hansen's name prominently mentioned in the 2006 Soros Foundations Network Report (relevant section on page 123):
Assume for a moment that one of the world's leading oil companies was identified to be using child laborers in various countries in order to cut payroll costs. Do you think that would be front page, headline news in the States?
Well, it appears that the carbon offset scam, devised largely to assuage the environmental guilt of wealthy people, is resulting in the exploitation of children in India. Yet, it seems a metaphysical certitude that global warming obsessed media won't bat an eye.
Why might that be?
As reported in Britain's Sunday Times (emphasis added, h/t Marc Morano):