NB Extra

The Times newspaper in the UK, in typical MSM style, labels US Envoy to the UN, John Bolton, a "right-winger" while UN Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown is just called a "former journalist" in a report about Bolton's reply to Brown's disparaging of "middle America's" citizens in a speech the later made a few days before.

Malloch Brown told a meeting of New York Democrats that there was “too much unchecked UN-bashing and stereotyping” by "Rush Limbaugh" and "Fox News". He also said that the role of the UN was a "mystery in Middle America" in an apparent criticism of the ability of average Americans to understand what it is the UN does or is supposed to do.

Steve Lopez of the LA Times wants a cookie from conservatives after [his claim] the newspaper "both gutted and fileted" two democrats.

I'm just wondering why the paper hasn't gotten huzzahs from the professional gas bags who worked themselves into a frenzy three years ago over our equally tough reporting on a candidate named Arnold Schwarzenegger.

First, the reason might have something to do with the fact that there were no republicans running in that race for the LA Times to "gut and filet." This was a primary. Let's see the Times do that when an election is at stake. Second, if you have to write an article pointing out that you finally took a pair of democrats to task, and beg for praise because of it, what does that tell us about your conscious and previous reporting?

Have John and Ken of radio fame weighed in on The Times' coverage? To be honest, I wouldn't know. I'd rather stick my head in a kettle drum and beat it with a soup spoon than listen to these guys... I called Ken Khachigian, my favorite GOP consultant, even though he worked with Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, to ask if he'd heard any Republicans complimenting The Times' tough coverage of Westly and Angelides.

So conservative pundits are "gas bags," you'd rather stick your head in a kettle drum and beat it with a spoon rather than listen to a conservative on the radio, and you called someone despite the fact that they worked for conservative Presidents. And with this dripping distain that flows newspaper-wide for anything right of MoveOn.org, you're looking for fairness accolades?!?!

Al-Zarqawi Tracked By Iraq Informants!

This is a great moral victory for the USA. We have eliminated one of the most active and high profile Al Qaeda terrorists in operation today. Yet, some in the MSM are already downplaying this victory and attempting to make it seem as if this is no big deal. We have already seen several of these instances recorded right here on Newsbusters, so I will not rehash them here.

But, one of the most important aspect of this situation is that Zarqawi was tracked and killed because of information from Iraqi informants.

"Tips from senior militants led U.S. forces to follow al-Zarqawi's spiritual adviser to the safe house, 30 miles outside Baghdad, for a meeting with the terror leader."

In March, I blogged about how some journalists who live in Chevy Chase, Maryland, were taking legal action to force their neighbors, Marc and Marianne Duffy, to tear down their home for violating zoning laws.

Washington Post editor William Hamilton, his wife Jane Mayer of The New Yorker, and former ABC correspondent Jackie Judd had complained about the Duffy renovations, which were erroneously approved by county bureaucrats.

Well, the Duffy's plight is back in the news as they lost another fight in their struggle to save their home.

On June 7, an appeals board affirmed the order issued in March to the Duffys. Buried in Miranda Spivack's article in the June 8 Washington Post is a factoid that goes to show how petty the complaint by Hamilton, Mayer, and Judd was:

ArtsJournal.com has a problem with the NY Times art critic Grace Glueck being on the board of the trustees for the Clark Art Institute. The Journal wants to know:

• Did Glueck's role at the museum in any way influence this past Sunday's Times story on the Clark?
• In June, 2005, the Times reviewed a Jacques-Louis David show at the Clark instead of at the originating institution, the J. Paul Getty Museum. Did the Times skip the Getty presentation in deference to a colleague's institution? The Times ran two stories on David at the Clark -- and none on David at the Getty.
• Why are there so many more stories in the NYT's arts section about the Clark than about virtually any other museum outside New York City that has a comparable (~$11 million per year) budget?

Good questions. And it's not as if this is business as usual for the Times. Their own ethics policy clearly states:

"[Times staff] may not join boards of trustees, advisory committees or similar groups except those serving journalistic organizations or otherwise promoting journalism education,"

Talk about losing your base! What say you, Pinch?

Normally I don't dabble in the liberal toils of Great White North newspapers, but this one I can't resist. The Toronto Star reporters that Maurice Strong, the lead architect of the Kyoto Protocol says that China is more progressive than Canada in tackling pollution and global climate change.

Really? Canadians wear masks because it's cold. The Chinese wear them because you can't breathe through all the pollution. Which city shuts down factories the week before dignitaries visit so you can see the sky, Toronto or Hong Kong? Which country has 7 of the 10 most polluted cities? Which country is exempt from having to curb pollution under the Kyoto Protocol anyway?

But don't take my word for it, let's go to the tape. In the picture here, from a NASA satellite, you'll see the cloud of filth that moves from factories and power plants in China throughout the rest of the world. Every day. Most of what you see is acid-rain causing sulfur dioxide belched into the air, but there's enough CO2 to keep Al Gore sipping lemonade all year 'round.

I don't recall ever seeing a cloud like that coming out of Canada. Is this what makes China progressive?

The next time someone starts about Al Gore, inconvenient truths, SUVs, or how horrible America is in the area of environmental protections, remember this picture. We aren't at the heart of the problem. And nothing is going to force China to change, not even the Kyoto Protocol.

By now I am sure you have heard of this incident between US Marines and Iraqi civilians in Haditha? It absolutely must be foremost in our minds that all the facts are not in. Still, the MSM are falling all over themselves saying that, when one of their own was killed by an IED and several more were injured, a squad of Marines lost their collective minds and murdered some two dozen Iraqi civilians.

If this really happened it is a horrible incident. It just should never have happened. And, further, those who did this deed will be tried and punished appropriately if found guilty. It is a black mark on the Marines and the USA. The criminality of this incident must not be diminished.

But, even if true, it is just one of some very few such incidents in this war. However, while regrettable, shameful even, it just cannot be said that this incident is indicative of a general US policy in Iraq. Nor can it be said to represent any kind of policy of the US military historically.

Liberal bias is nothing new to the weekly PBS program, This Week in California.  When reporters from the San Francisco Chronicle typically represent the right side of the political spectrum on the show's panel, viewers pretty much know what they're in for.

But the May 19 show took bias to a new level by shamelessly promoting Republican congressional candidate Pete McCloskey over his opponent.  Former U.S. Rep. Pete McCloskey is going up against incumbent Rep. Richard Pombo of Tracy in the upcoming GOP primary for California's 11th Congressional District.

Because of Pombo's position as Chairman of the House Committee on Resources and his vocal opposition to various environmental restrictions, he has become enemy number one to California's environmentalist movement.  Pombo is also being investigated for allegedly receiving funds from indicted former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and the Indian tribes he represented.

In an astounding ruling by a Nebraska District Judge Kristine Cecava,  a child sex offender is given ten years of probation instead of jail time.  The reason - the judge believes that the child sex offender is too short for prison!

Convicted child sex offender, Richard W. Thompson, is reported to be only a 5-foot-1 man and the judge fears that he will not be safe in prison.

This is just another outrageous example of a judge who has lost all common sense.  Did the judge consider the height of the child who Richard W. Thompson violated sexually?  Apparently, not!

Instead, once again, an innocent child of sexual abuse is denied true justice because a demented judge has more regard for the safety of the predator. 

District Judge Kristine Cecava also decided that Thompson would only be electronically monitored for the first four months of his ten year probation, and she  told the child predator  to stay away from using pornography and contacting under age children.