With all the carping and whining about conservative talk radio these days, I’m beginning to wonder if this is indeed a larger cause of all the planet’s woes than global warming.
In fact, if you hadn’t noticed, there are a number of high-ranking political officials who believe the public’s opinion of illegal immigration emanates directly from radio talk show hosts that are enflaming the citizenry concerning this important issue.
Regardless of the sudden frequency of such publicly-aired sentiments, or their inanity, to hear them expressed on the floor of the Senate by the Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) Thursday was nevertheless entertaining (video available here courtesy of Allah at Hot Air):
One of the most well-known conservatives in the blogosphere is Glenn Reynolds, whose “Instapundit” website continually receives some of the highest traffic totals of all political venues on the Internet.
Due to his expertise on such issues, the folks at the largely liberal Mother Jones published an interview with Reynolds last week wherein the topic of discussion was how the new media are impacting political campaigns.
The first technological change addressed by Reynolds was that of fundraising (emphasis added throughout):
Anyone that has picked up a newspaper, or turned on a radio or television recently knows that liberals are once again mounting a campaign to subvert free speech, and eliminate conservative talk radio.
With this in mind, Congressman Mike Pence (R-Indiana) announced on the House floor Wednesday a bill he plans to introduce that would prevent Democrat efforts to reinstate what is somewhat hypocritically called the “Fairness Doctrine.”
What follows is the prepared text of Pence’s statement, as well as additional information supplied by the Congressman on a conference call held early this morning (emphasis added):
“Elizabeth Edwards should look close to home when it comes to ‘hatefulness and ugliness’ for it was her husband’s Democratic presidential campaign that hired two official bloggers who attacked ‘Christofascists’ and insulted Christians and their faith in the most repulsive words imaginable, which I won’t repeat here. Go Google Amanda Marcotte and Holy Spirit.
Update (Ken Shepherd): Maloney tells me he'll be on the John Gibson radio program on Fox News radio shortly after 6:20 p.m. to discuss this.
As NewsBusters reported here and here, liberals around the country are carping and whining about conservatives having too much control of AM radio.
In fact, just yesterday, the Center for American Progress issued an outline as to what needs to be done to counter what it views as an unfair dominance of the airwaves by conservatives.
With that in mind, Brian Maloney has taken a look at the data collected by the Center to identify just how bad things really are for those poor liberals trying to compete with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al.
What Maloney found – not surprisingly – was that the Center fudged the numbers a bit to make it look like things were much worse than they actually are (emphasis added throughout):
This information was relayed to radio host John Zeigler of KFI 640 AM Los Angeles by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) who witnessed the Senators talking about something that they heard on talk radio which upset them so that they said:
We’ve got to do something about this. These are nothing but far rightwing extremists. We’ve got to have a balance. There’s got to be a legislative fix to this.
For those interested, an audio of this discussion is available here, with the transcript to follow:
The supposedly “free speech” left are out in force trying to silence all voices in the media with views different than their own just in time for the 2008 presidential campaign.
Potentially more worrisome, one liberal advocate in the middle of this debate has close ties to the Clintons, although it is quite unlikely the press will convey such when its recommendations are disseminated with their predictable stamp of approval.
With that in mind, the left-leaning Center for American Progress published a report Thursday detailing how conservatives dominate the talk radio dial, and exactly what needs to be done legislatively for liberals to wrest control over this medium (emphasis added throughout):
Something interesting is happening between the new and old media: the more Democrats move to the left to please liberal bloggers, the more mainstream press members express disdain.
On Wednesday, following in the footsteps of the Washington Post’s David Broder and Time’s Joe Klein, and just days before Democrat strategist Bob Beckel, NBC’s Tim Russert jumped on the “Netroots Are A Danger to Democrats” bandwagon.
Appearing on Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes,” Russert seemed incredibly at ease with both co-hosts as he made statements that had to shock conservative and liberal viewers alike.
This one’s really tough to take on an empty stomach. So, you might want to eat something before proceeding.
In case you were concerned that the American public wasn’t being bombarded enough by grotesquely gooey gushings over Hillary Clinton by a fawning press corps, the Democrat presidential candidate has created a new website to assure her almost as much exposure as Paris Hilton.
As reported by Politico (emphasis added throughout):
Much to his chagrin, Time’s Joe Klein has become a Democrat that liberal bloggers love to hate, thereby making him the Joe Lieberman of journalism.
Of course, rightwing bloggers don’t care for him much either, conceivably making Klein more like Rodney Dangerfield.
Fortunately for our entertainment pleasure, since Klein isn’t a politician – actually, his frequent disabuses of fact lead one to believe he’s more of a comedian! – he doesn’t feel the need to take the attacks lying down.
Maybe more fortunate for us on the right is how Klein seems to be more offended by what those in his own Party are saying about him, making this whole thing that much more delicious.
With that in mind, Klein published a piece Wednesday that is guaranteed to put smiles on the faces of right-thinking Americans across the fruited plain (emphasis added throughout):
Actor and former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson is close to forming a presidential exploratory committee, according to numerous media outlets, citing people close to the TV star. Reporting that news, CBSNews.com ran with a less-than-flattering AP photo of Thompson, pictured at right.
"Former Sen. Fred Thompson attends the Prescott Bush Awards Dinner in Stamford Conn., on May 24, 2007," read the caption.
By contrast, ABCNews.com ran an AP photo that features a stern-looking Thompson. With skyscrapers in the background, it evokes his current TV character incarnation, New York County District Attorney Arthur Branch on NBC's long-running court drama "Law & Order." You can see that screen cap pictured below:
After the 2006 elections in November, I frequently wrote about the Democrats’ bait and switch campaign scheme whereby Party members had made promises to the electorate they never intended to keep, one of them clearly being an expeditious withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
On such occasions, I asserted that once folks realized they had been lied to, something with a foul aroma would hit the fan.
Well, on Friday evening, it was liberal actor Ben Affleck castigating his Party for caving in on the recent Iraq war funding bill.
On Saturday morning, one of the leaders of the antiwar movement, Cindy Sheehan, was so disgusted by the Democrats agreeing to this bill that she officially announced she's leaving the Party.
Critical Update: As of 10:07AM EST 5/27/07, according to Google News and LexisNexis searches, not one media outlet has covered this. More at end of post.
As she wrote at Daily Kos Saturday (emphasis added throughout):
In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations on Wednesday, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards rejected the “metaphor” of the “war on terror” that America has been fighting since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
But appearing on ABC News on September 11, 2001, just a few hours after the attacks occurred, Edwards left no doubt how he felt the country should respond to al Qaeda’s terrorism, declaring “We should treat it as an act of war.” Video: Real (398 KB) or Windows (442 KB) plus MP3 (65 KB)
I know. It’s only a cartoon. However, could these folks have been any more obvious about who they support for president?
NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” showed an animated short on May 19 depicting every possible 2008 presidential candidate, from both sides of the aisle, sitting down and having a tell-all chat with Oprah Winfrey.
As the frontrunners one by one told Oprah secrets that would surely cost them votes in the election, one thing became perfectly clear: Hillary Clinton was the only serious candidate that avoided saying anything even remotely embarrassing (video available here, h/t Allah at Hot Air).
By far the biggest target was Rudy Giuliani, Hillary’s main foe, who spoke up a total of ten times (the reader is warned that some of this stuff is pretty raw):
Scott Johnson at Power Line reported Saturday that attorneys representing the Democratic National Committee have sent a cease and desist letter to Free Republic due to a post at its website concerning allegations made on the “Quinn & Rose” XM Satellite radio show Thursday (h/t Glenn Reynolds).
Howard Dean appears to be doing another “I Have a Scream” speech, only this time through his attorneys.
Imagine for a moment that one of the leading Republican presidential candidates said that 10,000 people had been killed by the recent tornado that destroyed Greensburg, Kansas, Saturday.
Do you think this would have been easy fodder for the broadcast television news divisions that always seem fascinated with gaffes made by folks on the right?
If your answer is an unequivocal “Yes,” then why did ABC, CBS, and NBC completely ignore Sen. Barack Obama’s statement Tuesday wherein he accidentally exaggerated the death toll from the Greensburg tornado by 9,988?
If Democrats had accused former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) last year of earmarking funds that could help real estate investments owned by his wife, would the media have reported it?
Probably on the front pages of every newspaper, and as the lead story of all of the evening news programs, right?
Well, the Associated Press published a story Monday about current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) possibly earmarking funds that would benefit her husband's investments around the San Francisco Bay. Yet, the media showed virtually no interest (emphasis added):
After recent editorials condemning House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-California) trip to Syria, a good job covering the conviction of Harold Ford, Jr.’s (D-Tennessee) uncle, and a David Broder column harshly critical of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), the Post published a front-page story Saturday declaring the Democrats’ domestic agenda is languishing.
What must Jonathan Weisman and Lyndsey Layton have been thinking when they wrote the following lead paragraphs (emphasis added throughout):
It goes without saying that Fox News’s Sean Hannity is never one to mince words, especially when the subject matter is something he feels passionately about.
In such instances, one better strap oneself in tightly, for you're in for a bumpy, no holds barred ride.
Such was certainly the case Sunday evening when the outspoken conservative did a ten minute segment on “Hannity’s America” (h/t Tim Graham) about how the Democrat Party has been taken hostage by extreme left-wing forces on the Internet (video available here).
First, Hannity addressed the recent blog posting by Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) on the website that last year got itself into a bit of a brouhaha for publishing a blackfaced picture of Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Connecticut):
If Arnold Schwarzenegger, nominal Republican, wants to be allowed to run for president, why shouldn't Moktada al-Sadr be considered for a spot on the Dem ticket? After all, his views on U.S. withdrawal from Iraq put him firmly in the mainstream of the party of Pelosi The thought occurred to me while reading Moktada al-Sadr’s Gambit, an editorial in this morning's NY Times regarding the resignation of six members of al-Sadr's party as ministers in the cabinet of Prime Minister Maliki.
And what, according to the Times, was the gambit's goal?
"Mr. Sadr had his cabinet ministers resign in an attempt to bully the government into setting a timetable for the departure of American troops from Iraq."
Hmm. "An attempt to bully the government into setting a timetable for the departure of American troops from Iraq." Bullying the government? You mean like threatening to withhold funding for the military?
Those with delicate constitutions should avoid reading the Los Angeles Times's latest puff-profile of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, taken apart by Patterico. Here's an excerpt:
As the highest-ranking woman in elective office, Pelosi is as much a power player as the men who preceded her.
“She’s well-bred, a lady through and through,” said Rep. Anna G.
Eshoo (D-Atherton), Pelosi’s friend of 30 years. “But anyone who knows
her knows not to mess with her.”
With a father who was a Baltimore mayor and congressman who ran a
political machine out of the family’s brick row house, Pelosi
cultivates loyalty in ways large and small, much as her father did —
keeping careful political tallies, but still remembering birthdays.
Most people are probably not familiar with Joe Kernen, a morning anchor for the financial network CNBC. On Tuesday, he invited singer Sheryl Crow and “An Inconvenient Truth” schlockumentary producer Laurie David on to discuss their “Stop Global Warming College Tour.”
As Kernen tried to present the skeptics’ side of this debate, the ladies clearly got uncomfortable and, to say the least, a bit defensive with their interviewer.
So it seems the position of left-wing Democrats is to deal with the terrorist states of Syria and Iran -- but don't deal with Fox News because it just gives them "a platform." As noted in an earlier posting, Democratic candidate John Edwards had a fine time and voiced no complaints after participating in a pair of Fox News-sponsored debates in 2003, but now he's boycotting the highest-rated cable news network: (Updates added at the end.)
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on Friday pulled out of a second debate co-hosted by Fox News Channel, saying the cable network has a conservative slant.
Chris Matthews attacked campaign fund donations to Mitt Romney last night on Hardball, calling the entire system of political fund raising "unsavory" along with claiming that Romney's contributors in particular are all "rich people" and people who are "loaded". In fact, he didn't seem to understand at all why anyone would even donate to a Romney campaign because he thinks everyone sees him as a "stranger".
In a report that was supposed to be about this first round of fund raising of all the candidates, Matthews found no time in a ten minute segment to even mention the many millions of dollars raised by Democrats, focusing almost entirely on his distrust of Romney, even though Romney raised far less than Clinton.
Failed radio mouth and Senatorial candidate from Minnesota , Al Franken, told David Letterman on the set of the "Late Show" that the USA should reconsider approving the Kyoto Protocols because the treaty is good for the economy -- Despite that the ruinous treaty was voted down by a unanimous Senate vote in 1997 for the very reason that it would harm the economy.
To a fawning audience and a rapt host, Franken attacked Bush over the treaty that was voted down before he ever got to office, saying "One of the dumbest things that this president has said -- and that is a high bar -- is that if we abided by the Kyoto agreement, it would be ruinous to our economy. The opposite is true."
The double standard of Leftists who are ignoring the outrage of Bill Maher -- who alluded to his wish that Vice President Dick Cheney was assassinated – while at the same time are wildly fanning themselves in mock outrage as if they had the vapors over Ann Coulter -- for calling Democrat John Edwards a bad name -- was on full display in the MSM over the weekend.
If you are a conservative who stays up on the "happenings" in conservative news, you'd have by now heard that firebrand Columnist Ann Coulter called Democratic Candidate John Edwards a "faggot" at the CPAC convention the other day. You are also probably aware of all the lefty types wading into the waters of high dudgeon over her typically button-pushing remark and you'll have seen Democrats and their supporters coming out of the woodwork to claim astonishment at Coulter's comment, demanding that conservatives distance themselves from her.
It seems likely given the focus the media gave Ann Coulter's remark about John Edwards that most NewsBusters readers know the controversial, never at a loss for words writer spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., this past Friday.
What is it about the New York Times where they can't stay above their talking points even when trying to interest the people in a higher level of political discussion and debate?
The Times was bemoaning the current sad state of political discourse amongst political candidates today (and rightfully so, I might add) in a story reporting the interesting extended debate between Newt Gingrich and ex-Senator Mario Cuomo sponsored by New York's Cooper Union Hall, the great room in which Abraham Lincoln first came to national prominence prior to his running for president of the United States.