The Associated Press is continuing to report that Democrat Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland supports stem cell research despite the fact that his recent voting record contradicts such claims.
Fox, who supports research on embryonic stem cell for a potential cure for Parkinson's, also has lent his celebrity to Democrats Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, running for the Senate in Maryland, and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who is seeking re-election. Both politicians also back stem-cell research. [emphasis added]
Plan B is getting under way as the mainstream media starts writing to the election fraud template in preparation for the November post election analysis.
First out of the gate is Reuters.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Long lines and long counts threaten to mar next month's U.S. congressional elections as millions of Americans put new voting machines and rules to the test, election officials and experts say.
The result could be delays in knowing whether Democrats capture one or both houses of the U.S. Congress, or whether President George W. Bush's Republicans keep control.
"In close elections, it may be days and weeks before a winner is known in a particular race," said Paul DeGregorio, chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, created to oversee a 2002 election law overhaul.
If the Republicans come out with a successful strategy to motivate Republicans you can expect the New York Times to be in favor of it, right? Yeah sure. Hence we get the pleasure of reading the New York Times love letter to Tony Snow in “Bush’s Press Secretary Is Raising Money, and Some Eyebrows.”
You can tell the New York Times is worried about Mr. Snow’s reputation. It only took 2 sentences for the reporter to inject the word conspiratorial into the article; all in jest of course. (all emphasis in all quotes mine).
Tony Snow draped his lanky frame across a wooden lectern, leaned forward and gazed out at 850 adoring Republicans who had paid $175 apiece to hear him speak. There was a conspiratorial gleam in his eye, as if he was about to reveal some deep inner secret from his new life as the White House press secretary.
No big deal of course; it’s just a simple play on words and I must be overly touchy so close to the looming Democrat takeover. But seriously, the New York Times must be fighting for filler. This is the silliest most contrived attempt at news blogging that I have seen in some time.
Did you happen to go home from work this evening and miss this AP Exclusive?
Funny, the following AP story broke this afternoon at 2:13 P.M. on the Forbes website yet it doesn't appear that any of the big mainstream newspapers covered it until well after most people left for home from work.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn’t personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show.
In the process, Reid did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company, according to records and interviews.
Now that the most recent scandal appears to be losing steam we should expect that the AP and others will return to reporting the news in an objective manner based on facts rather than speculation right? Wrong.
A news story that first circulated in 2004 is being put back into circulation because a researcher at Johns Hopkins has updated a study that was originally panned because of its high margin of error.
The New York Times is doing its best to convince Republicans that they should stay home on Election Day, because after all, “With four weeks left before Election Day, the poll indicates that the scandal involving Mr. Foley, a former Republican congressman from Florida, is alienating Americans from Congress, and weakening a Republican Party that was already struggling to keep control of the House and Senate.”.
The New York Times comes to this conclusion based on the recently released NY Times – CBS opinion poll despite the fact that that two-thirds in the poll said the Foley matter will make “no difference” in how they vote (as reported by Brent Baker earlier).
Rep. Barney Frank gave an interview to Advocate.com yesterday where he compared gay Republicans in
Congress to "secret Jews".
In what is billed as an Advocate.com exclusive Rep. Franks stated that the Foley scandal will result in a purge of gays from the Republican Party.
What do you think was the role of gay Republicans in all this?
Apparently, Kirk Fordham, Foley's ex–chief of staff and Rep. Thomas Reynolds's chief of staff, is a very active gay Republican [and] also had some role in the hush-up. [As of Wednesday, Fordham is no longer on Reynolds's staff.] There are others who were involved that I can't mention since they aren't out. They are all more like secret Jews.
How do the gay Republicans reconcile their consciences?
A lot of them chose between their gayness and their party. I'm sure the group of gay Republican staffers hid Foley's actions as best they could.
This is a real crisis, since before, gays in the Republican Party were willing to be tolerated, but Republicans will now be more nervous having gay people in positions of power. They have been critical of people who are out and gay—there could be a real purge of gays in the Republican Party now. It's probably just enough for people to be perceived to be gay.
ABC news mistakenly released the IM identity of the page who exchanged IM messages with former Rep. Mark Foley. Bloggers Wild Bill from Passionate America and Ms. Underestimated tracked the AOL profile from the unredacted IM message and are reporting that the person is a 21 year old Deputy Campaign Manager for Congressman Ernest Istook in Oklahoma.
The current age of the person would put him at 17 or 18 years of age at the time of the IM exchange although ABC released a statement saying that the messages took place before and after the man's 18th birthday.
CNN has been hyping the Mark Foley scandal by emphasizing the damage that it will have on Republicans in the upcoming November elections. In doing so CNN is repeatedly using Minnesota Democrat Patty Wetterling’s campaign commercial that attacks Congressional leaders head on with the following opening statement.
"Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a Congressman who used the Internet to molest children". - Patty Wetterling Campaign Commercial
We can put aside the record speed in which the network picked up this campaign ad to concentrate on the actual statement by Wetterling that is being used in these reports. Note how quickly a scandal about e-mails and instant messages is now being presented as a case of child molestation that was covered-up by Congressional leaders.
I haven’t posted much about the Foley Follies since this scandal erupted because I wanted to get a clearer picture of what exactly was going on.
As October Surprises break there is a tendency for the press and various political entities to hype up the leading story while neglecting the various stories behind the story.
Usually by the time the story has run its course the full picture is brushed aside in the wake of the lead. The damage is done and the press has moved on to the next item of the day.
NewsBusters gives us the opportunity to look beneath the scandal and dissect the way the media approaches these stories in real time. This post is my take.
Foley is gone. That’s good. If any laws were broken then I hope he gets what is coming to him. Lock him up; throw away the key. The same goes for anyone who is shown to have covered it up.
However, the Democrat and MSM attempts to paint this as a full blown Republican scandal is transparent and obvious. I find it hard to believe that these events just happened to unfold in a perfectly timed fashion a month before Congressional elections. Whoa, what are the chances?!
If I was an odds maker I would have bet on this sort of thing happening.
One of the most e-mailed articles on the New York Times website this weekend is an op-ed by novelist Robert Harris titled “Pirates of the Mediterranean”. In this essay Mr. Harris claims that history is mutable.
But there are some troubling aspects that arise when one treats history as a mutable entity. It allows people to rewrite history through a new lens; picking and choosing certain events to draw conclusions from within the vacuum of new or limited contexts. Thus, what was once considered immutable may take on new meaning depending on your point of view.
The New York Times allows Mr. Harris to use this mutability of context as a device to draw parallels between the fall of the Roman Empire and that of the United States under the dictatorial rule of President Bush.
For instance, the comparison of al-Qaeda to a loosely unorganized group of disaffected pirates from 68 BC is a prime example of mutating modern day history for the purpose of editorial validity. While al-Qaeda may not have a traditional hierarchical chain of command we know for certain that the al-Qaeda leadership operates within the framework of coordinated planning, funding, training and material support. The fact that these operations are carried out by clandestine sleeper cells in no way should be read as being unorganized.
Likewise, comparing last Thursday’s Senate vote that clarified the President’s powers over terrorism detainees with the passage of the Lex Gabinia in 67 BC is not only an invalid comparison but it is applied in the wrong context altogether. For the comparison to be valid President Bush would have to yield absolute powers and declare all citizens of the United States as enemy combatants to become the left’s version of an American dictator.