I'm so glad to see this. It's nice to have real corrections on CNN.
By Glenn Beck
CNN
Editor's note: Glenn Beck is on CNN Headline News nightly at 7 and 9 ET and also is host of a conservative national radio talk show.
Glenn Beck
Glenn Beck has some lines McCain can use in tonight's speech to articulate his vision for change
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Campaigns are ugly. Watching the way politicians act makes you long for the respect and self-control of the Sopranos. Throughout, there are legitimate attacks and outright lies.
Every once in a while, I get a call on my radio show from someone telling me that Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim, who admitted it in an interview with George Stephanopoulos, and has a fake birth certificate. No, no, and no. As I tell them, there are legitimate reasons not to vote for Barack Obama, no need to make them up.
But the newest target is Sarah Palin. Let's take a quick look at just a fraction of what she has faced in her first few days as John McCain's choice for vice president. iReport.com: Do you think Palin is being treated unfairly?
"Sarah Palin believes God told her to go to war with Iraq!"
There has been some hard-core journalistic malpractice on this one. The Associated Press ran this headline about a speech she gave at her church: "Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God'"
In the story, they omit the first part of the sentence they're quoting along with the entire previous sentence for good measure.
Here are her actual words: "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."
Palin is clearly praying that we're doing the right thing in Iraq, something sensible for an introspective woman of faith concerned about the lives of our troops to do. She's not saying that she just received a text message from heaven's BlackBerry ordering her to launch missiles. Sorry to disappoint you.
And for those of you who think politicians asking God for guidance is offensive, might I remind you of this famous politician's prayer:
"Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just. And make me an instrument of your will." --Barack Obama
"She has no experience!"
It's fair to assume that Barack Obama believed he was qualified to be in the White House when he announced he was running for president. At that point, he had been a U.S. Senator for 767 days. When Sarah Palin was announced as a vice presidential candidate, she had been the governor of Alaska for 634 days.
While I'm sure those extra 133 days were filled with personal discovery, I can't imagine anyone seriously trying to make the case that Obama is experienced and Palin isn't.
Unless, of course, you're Matt Damon, who said a Palin presidency would be a really "scary thing" because she has been "governor of Alaska for...for less than two years!" (Damon originally expressed his presidential preference for Obama in December 2006, when he had been a senator for less than two years.)
More importantly, Palin's career has been filled with executive experience. She's the only one of the four in this race who has run a business, town, and/or state (a state that gives her crucial energy experience in the middle of an energy crisis).
When Obama's campaign complains that Palin would be one heartbeat away from the presidency, they should consider that their candidate would be zero heartbeats away.
"But Obama is running a huge campaign -- Palin was just a small town mayor!"
Believe it or not, this one was actually trotted out by Obama himself.
"My understanding is, is that Gov. Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We've got 2,500 in this campaign. I think the budget is maybe $12 million a year. We have a budget of about three times that just for the month."
Apparently, Barack missed that she's become the governor of Alaska in the interim. Why would he compare his current duties with her former duties?
Well, since he announced his candidacy, Barack Obama has raised about $22 million a month. That's a large organization for sure, unless you are directly comparing it to Sarah Palin, who is handling state revenues that are about 61 times as large, or more than $1.3 billion per month.
"Palin only supports abstinence to be taught in sex-ed!"
This claim is usually followed by a super classy comment about her daughter and the use of contraception, but the premise is false. Palin hasn't said she doesn't want condoms discussed in sex-ed, calling their discussion "relatively benign."
"I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don't have a problem with that," Palin said. Hers is hardly an extreme point of view in America today.
"If she cares about children with special needs, then why did she cut spending on them by 62 percent?"
Actually, Palin almost tripled their funding in only three years from $26,900 per student to $73,840 per student.
Incidentally, the amount of government money you spend on a specific group doesn't equal the amount you care for that group, but that's another story for another column.
All of these represent just a small percentage of the bizarre collection of claims being thrown at Palin by her opponents and some in the media -- who are desperately hoping something will stick. I leave you with my favorite so far: The Internet rumors that she harbors racism against Eskimos. If true, she sure has a strange way of expressing it -- her husband, Todd, is half Yupik Inuit Eskimo.
To balance that out, she must really love his other half.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
In Honor of 9/11
Today is always remembered at our house as Grandma Grace's birthday. She passed on 10 years ago. Happy Birthday, Grandma, and rest in peace. I'm glad you didn't see this on tv three years later.
We must always remember
Terror attacks were an act of war, not simply a tragedy to be mourned
By DEBRA BURLINGAME
Tuesday, September 11th 2007, 4:00 AM
* Full list of the names of the victims
* Read the Daily News coverage of the Sept. 11 attacks
* Photo gallery: the front pages
* Photo gallery: a look back at 9/11
* Photo gallery: Susan Watt's 'Milestones to Recovery' exhibit
Six years ago, I turned on my television and saw the sickening image of an airplane flying directly into the south tower of the World Trade Center. I did not know that at precisely that moment, somewhere in the skies over the Ohio-Kentucky border, my brother was fighting for his life in the cockpit of his commercial airliner. It would be another 35 minutes before his plane crashed into the Pentagon's west side.
Though the term "9/11 family member" had not yet become part of the Sept. 11 lexicon, my first thought upon seeing the plane turn and slam into the World Trade Center was of the pilots in the flight deck and the added sorrow that their families would have to live with for the rest of their lives, seeing this video.
Until I was notified of my brother's fate, I was no different from everyone else that morning, horrified and overwhelmed by the shocking scene unfolding in lower Manhattan. After learning that people were jumping from the towers, I believe I began to depersonalize what I was seeing.
The human psyche can absorb only so much. Anyone who had been inside the World Trade Center towers or seen them upclose knew that jumping from that height was like leaping from the clouds. The day was only beginning.
A recent newspaper article suggested that the 9/11 commemoration "decibel level" should be "scaled back." Mourning the dead too loud and too long impinges on the living, the article said. Life goes on. I wouldn't disagree. But it is extremely important to distinguish between public mourning and public remembering; otherwise, the phrase that was as ubiquitous as the American flag six years ago, "Never Forget," and invoked with tearful or angry rectitude, is rendered hollow. We all meant it, whether the cause was revenge, retribution or simple recognition of our common humanity.
None of us wants this to happen again, but as time goes by, why can't we all agree, as we did then, about what took place that day?
There is a disturbing phenomenon creeping into the public debate about all things 9/11. Increasingly, Sept. 11 is compared to hurricanes, bridge collapses and other mechanical disasters or criminal acts that result in loss of life, with "body count" being the primary factor that keeps it in the top spot of "worst in the nation's history."
Misremembering is as dangerous as forgetting. If we must know one thing, it is that the Sept. 11 attacks were neither a natural disaster, nor the unfortunate result of human error. 9/11 wasn't the catastrophic equivalent of a 3,000-car pileup.
The attacks were not a random actof violence or insanity. They were a deliberate and brutal act ofwar committed by religious fanatics engaged in Islamic jihad against the United States, all non-Muslim people and any Muslim who wishes to live in a secular society. Worse, the people who perpetrated the attacks have explicitly told us that they are not done.
Sept. 11 is a date that comes and goes once a year, but "9/11" is with us every day. The body count keeps rising - Bali, Riyadh, Istanbul, Madrid, Beslan, London, Amman.
We now clearly know that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was part of the holy war against America. When we previously dismissed this as a random attack by crazy men and declared ourselves lucky that "only six lives were lost," we effectively disarmed ourselves. Eight years later, six became 3,000. While the comparison to other "tragedies" may help us cope with what has befallen us, we must resist being glib and intellectually careless.
Our fellow human beings were not "lost" in 1993 or on 9/11. They were torn to pieces. We must not give the enemy any quarter. We must confront the reality of their acts.
We must refuse to be fooled by their propaganda, which is meant to appeal to our own moral vanity - the belief that we can appease them by responding to their outrageous demands for accommodation, their open threats and their hateful rhetoric with even more forbearance.
Several months after the Sept. 11 attacks, I was asked to look through a thick, three-ring binder put together by the FBI, a catalogue of objects - photographed and numbered - that were the unclaimed personal effects of the 184 victims who perished at the Pentagon. They included things such as buttons, uniform insignia, house and car keys, wedding rings, shoes, personalized coffee mugs and, saddest of all, a miniature, hot-pink luggage tag with a flowery design meant for a little girl's travel bag.
These mundane objects, the commonplace detritus of lives cut short, were deeply moving to see, perhaps because they were not some grand eulogy or noble tribute, but simple reminders of the fact that people like you and me went to work or boarded those planes on that lovely Tuesday morning, never dreaming that this was the last clear blue sky they would ever see.
Perhaps it is human instinct to turn away from suffering that goes on too long. We should celebrate life rather than wallow in grief. But we should vigilantly guard against self-delusion and denial as a means of coping with the terrible reality that we all lived through six years ago. There was a reason that we felt unified then.
The horror of what we experienced, individually and together, stripped away all the things that divide us today. We clung to each other, forgave each other, and were kind to each other, knowing that, in the end, we would only persevere together. Today of all days, that is something we should never forget.
Burlingame is the sister of Capt. Charles F. (Chic) Burlingame 3rd, pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.
We must always remember
Terror attacks were an act of war, not simply a tragedy to be mourned
By DEBRA BURLINGAME
Tuesday, September 11th 2007, 4:00 AM
* Full list of the names of the victims
* Read the Daily News coverage of the Sept. 11 attacks
* Photo gallery: the front pages
* Photo gallery: a look back at 9/11
* Photo gallery: Susan Watt's 'Milestones to Recovery' exhibit
Six years ago, I turned on my television and saw the sickening image of an airplane flying directly into the south tower of the World Trade Center. I did not know that at precisely that moment, somewhere in the skies over the Ohio-Kentucky border, my brother was fighting for his life in the cockpit of his commercial airliner. It would be another 35 minutes before his plane crashed into the Pentagon's west side.
Though the term "9/11 family member" had not yet become part of the Sept. 11 lexicon, my first thought upon seeing the plane turn and slam into the World Trade Center was of the pilots in the flight deck and the added sorrow that their families would have to live with for the rest of their lives, seeing this video.
Until I was notified of my brother's fate, I was no different from everyone else that morning, horrified and overwhelmed by the shocking scene unfolding in lower Manhattan. After learning that people were jumping from the towers, I believe I began to depersonalize what I was seeing.
The human psyche can absorb only so much. Anyone who had been inside the World Trade Center towers or seen them upclose knew that jumping from that height was like leaping from the clouds. The day was only beginning.
A recent newspaper article suggested that the 9/11 commemoration "decibel level" should be "scaled back." Mourning the dead too loud and too long impinges on the living, the article said. Life goes on. I wouldn't disagree. But it is extremely important to distinguish between public mourning and public remembering; otherwise, the phrase that was as ubiquitous as the American flag six years ago, "Never Forget," and invoked with tearful or angry rectitude, is rendered hollow. We all meant it, whether the cause was revenge, retribution or simple recognition of our common humanity.
None of us wants this to happen again, but as time goes by, why can't we all agree, as we did then, about what took place that day?
There is a disturbing phenomenon creeping into the public debate about all things 9/11. Increasingly, Sept. 11 is compared to hurricanes, bridge collapses and other mechanical disasters or criminal acts that result in loss of life, with "body count" being the primary factor that keeps it in the top spot of "worst in the nation's history."
Misremembering is as dangerous as forgetting. If we must know one thing, it is that the Sept. 11 attacks were neither a natural disaster, nor the unfortunate result of human error. 9/11 wasn't the catastrophic equivalent of a 3,000-car pileup.
The attacks were not a random actof violence or insanity. They were a deliberate and brutal act ofwar committed by religious fanatics engaged in Islamic jihad against the United States, all non-Muslim people and any Muslim who wishes to live in a secular society. Worse, the people who perpetrated the attacks have explicitly told us that they are not done.
Sept. 11 is a date that comes and goes once a year, but "9/11" is with us every day. The body count keeps rising - Bali, Riyadh, Istanbul, Madrid, Beslan, London, Amman.
We now clearly know that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was part of the holy war against America. When we previously dismissed this as a random attack by crazy men and declared ourselves lucky that "only six lives were lost," we effectively disarmed ourselves. Eight years later, six became 3,000. While the comparison to other "tragedies" may help us cope with what has befallen us, we must resist being glib and intellectually careless.
Our fellow human beings were not "lost" in 1993 or on 9/11. They were torn to pieces. We must not give the enemy any quarter. We must confront the reality of their acts.
We must refuse to be fooled by their propaganda, which is meant to appeal to our own moral vanity - the belief that we can appease them by responding to their outrageous demands for accommodation, their open threats and their hateful rhetoric with even more forbearance.
Several months after the Sept. 11 attacks, I was asked to look through a thick, three-ring binder put together by the FBI, a catalogue of objects - photographed and numbered - that were the unclaimed personal effects of the 184 victims who perished at the Pentagon. They included things such as buttons, uniform insignia, house and car keys, wedding rings, shoes, personalized coffee mugs and, saddest of all, a miniature, hot-pink luggage tag with a flowery design meant for a little girl's travel bag.
These mundane objects, the commonplace detritus of lives cut short, were deeply moving to see, perhaps because they were not some grand eulogy or noble tribute, but simple reminders of the fact that people like you and me went to work or boarded those planes on that lovely Tuesday morning, never dreaming that this was the last clear blue sky they would ever see.
Perhaps it is human instinct to turn away from suffering that goes on too long. We should celebrate life rather than wallow in grief. But we should vigilantly guard against self-delusion and denial as a means of coping with the terrible reality that we all lived through six years ago. There was a reason that we felt unified then.
The horror of what we experienced, individually and together, stripped away all the things that divide us today. We clung to each other, forgave each other, and were kind to each other, knowing that, in the end, we would only persevere together. Today of all days, that is something we should never forget.
Burlingame is the sister of Capt. Charles F. (Chic) Burlingame 3rd, pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
What? We're not dead yet? (LHC)
The Large Hadron Collider went online today. That's a LARGE circle underground that is going to work on particle physics. Lots of people are warning that, as the speed of the particles approaches the speed of light, our whole planet is going to disappear down a black hole... or something like that.
Sounds sort of Y2Kish. But hey, I'm good with God. As good as I'm going to get, anyway, given the amount of time I've been alive. If the world ends, I'm as ready as I'll ever be.
Meanwhile, here's a very nicely done rap explanation of the fun LHC thing under Switzerland and France. Thank you to my DH, who posted it on his facebook after we enjoyed it much last night.
Sounds sort of Y2Kish. But hey, I'm good with God. As good as I'm going to get, anyway, given the amount of time I've been alive. If the world ends, I'm as ready as I'll ever be.
Meanwhile, here's a very nicely done rap explanation of the fun LHC thing under Switzerland and France. Thank you to my DH, who posted it on his facebook after we enjoyed it much last night.
OUCH.
Why even have a constitution to argue about, then?
Thanks to the Common Room for the link.
Full details below:
Rasmussen: Only 29% of Obama supporters think Supreme Court should decide cases based on Constitution
posted at 12:30 pm on September 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
A friendly reminder from the Enlightened of how much more profound their respect for the rule of law is than yours, to be filed away for the next time one of them deigns to lecture you about Bush’s constitutional apostasy.
During his acceptance speech last night at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota, John McCain told the audience, “We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench.” Most American voters (60%) agrees and says the Supreme Court should make decisions based on what is written in the constitution, while 30% say rulings should be guided on the judge’s sense of fairness and justice. The number who agree with McCain is up from 55% in August.
While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree.
Better yet, file this away for the next time some conservative asks you why he should turn out to vote for a guy who supports amnesty. So alarming is it that even TNR’s wringing its hands: “Now, since it seems unlikely that many Americans spend much time weighing the relative merits of different methods of judicial decisionmaking, it’s a fairly safe bet that voters are largely reflecting the rhetoric they hear from political elites…” Exit question: What rhetoric from The One could his disciples possibly be “reflecting” here?
Thanks to the Common Room for the link.
Full details below:
Rasmussen: Only 29% of Obama supporters think Supreme Court should decide cases based on Constitution
posted at 12:30 pm on September 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
A friendly reminder from the Enlightened of how much more profound their respect for the rule of law is than yours, to be filed away for the next time one of them deigns to lecture you about Bush’s constitutional apostasy.
During his acceptance speech last night at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota, John McCain told the audience, “We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench.” Most American voters (60%) agrees and says the Supreme Court should make decisions based on what is written in the constitution, while 30% say rulings should be guided on the judge’s sense of fairness and justice. The number who agree with McCain is up from 55% in August.
While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree.
Better yet, file this away for the next time some conservative asks you why he should turn out to vote for a guy who supports amnesty. So alarming is it that even TNR’s wringing its hands: “Now, since it seems unlikely that many Americans spend much time weighing the relative merits of different methods of judicial decisionmaking, it’s a fairly safe bet that voters are largely reflecting the rhetoric they hear from political elites…” Exit question: What rhetoric from The One could his disciples possibly be “reflecting” here?
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Life update
I figured I was overdue for a rambling email about our family life right now. I wonder what I'll say? Hmmmm....
Well, we had a wonderful homeschooling week last week, because I (gasp) didn't go anywhere at all. At least it felt like that. I went nowhere from 9-12 and then it was lunch and naps, so I still didn't go anywhere til soccer practice at 5:30pm. On Friday, however, I really did go somewhere. I went to Rikki's house, and I babysat so she could volunteer at her daughter's kindergarten class and go see her husband after work, maybe even have a conversation or something.
We had nap time, clean up time, and then we did something completely unprecedented. We cleaned the garage so well, you can no officially park TWO CARS in it. Comfortably, even. That has NEVER happened. Not even close. We ordered pizza and the grandparents and another family arrived, so it was party city, and we were all tired at the end. Triumph!
Soccer went well. Both the boys' teams won on Saturday, and they were thrilled.
Brandon will be six on Wednesday, and his party is on Saturday, but don't you dare tell him. He is already much too excited.
I spent some time in the church library today, organizing books and also adding the homeschooling group's collection to our library. We keep storing our collection at people's houses, which means none of us actually use it, but now that it will be in a central location, I hope folks will start using it. Maybe people will see the cool things in the library, too. It has amazing books and videos in it, yet no one ever comes when I open it on first Sundays. I must need to advertise better. I even found a book by Archbishop Chaput today, who, by the way, is on the NY Times Bestseller List right now. The one I found is "How NOT To Share Your Faith". I have been meaning to read that one and look forward to it. The good news about the library is that people are using the bookcase "outpost" in the hallway of one of the churches, so I have a box of things I'm going to put in there to refill it. Hooray! I don't see the people, but they are using the library after all!
The garden did well this year, but I hope everything gets good looking before the frost hits. I'm worried I'll have another green tomatoes year, so I'd better buy some plastic, quick. The raspberries and strawberries are bearing right now, which is weird and cool.
We are planning a couple of trips this fall: Sept 17-19 I'm going to Astoria to see my parents and sisters, since they will all be in range at the same time, probably staying in a tent if the weather holds. On the first weekend of October is my 10th Gonzaga Reunion, which I'm totally excited about, and will have babysitting for and a place to stay. Yay!
I guess that's it for now! I'm praying for a nice, mild September to make up for June.
Well, we had a wonderful homeschooling week last week, because I (gasp) didn't go anywhere at all. At least it felt like that. I went nowhere from 9-12 and then it was lunch and naps, so I still didn't go anywhere til soccer practice at 5:30pm. On Friday, however, I really did go somewhere. I went to Rikki's house, and I babysat so she could volunteer at her daughter's kindergarten class and go see her husband after work, maybe even have a conversation or something.
We had nap time, clean up time, and then we did something completely unprecedented. We cleaned the garage so well, you can no officially park TWO CARS in it. Comfortably, even. That has NEVER happened. Not even close. We ordered pizza and the grandparents and another family arrived, so it was party city, and we were all tired at the end. Triumph!
Soccer went well. Both the boys' teams won on Saturday, and they were thrilled.
Brandon will be six on Wednesday, and his party is on Saturday, but don't you dare tell him. He is already much too excited.
I spent some time in the church library today, organizing books and also adding the homeschooling group's collection to our library. We keep storing our collection at people's houses, which means none of us actually use it, but now that it will be in a central location, I hope folks will start using it. Maybe people will see the cool things in the library, too. It has amazing books and videos in it, yet no one ever comes when I open it on first Sundays. I must need to advertise better. I even found a book by Archbishop Chaput today, who, by the way, is on the NY Times Bestseller List right now. The one I found is "How NOT To Share Your Faith". I have been meaning to read that one and look forward to it. The good news about the library is that people are using the bookcase "outpost" in the hallway of one of the churches, so I have a box of things I'm going to put in there to refill it. Hooray! I don't see the people, but they are using the library after all!
The garden did well this year, but I hope everything gets good looking before the frost hits. I'm worried I'll have another green tomatoes year, so I'd better buy some plastic, quick. The raspberries and strawberries are bearing right now, which is weird and cool.
We are planning a couple of trips this fall: Sept 17-19 I'm going to Astoria to see my parents and sisters, since they will all be in range at the same time, probably staying in a tent if the weather holds. On the first weekend of October is my 10th Gonzaga Reunion, which I'm totally excited about, and will have babysitting for and a place to stay. Yay!
I guess that's it for now! I'm praying for a nice, mild September to make up for June.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Some very good questions
I am saying this as loudly as I can:
CHECK THIS BLOG DAILY: www.heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com
if you would like some real news. I could copy and paste practically everything, or I could send you there to read and watch video for yourself. Please do!
I will copy and paste a "teaser" here from today's posts.
We have several members of the press, suddenly fans of sahmotherhood, asking if Sarah can really be a good mother and Veep at the same time. They do not ask if Obama can really be a good father when he's home ten days a year. They did not ask that question of Edwards when his wife's cancer recurred and their sons were 10 and 8 at the time and he continued to run for office.
We have HOward Kurtz uttering this remarkable, and previously unknown, standard for covering the children of candidates:
It is perfectly fine to showcase your family as you introduce yourself to America. But then you can't turn around and slam the press for writing about your family in a less flattering light than you would prefer to present them.
Obama's children, of course, were much in evidence when he spoke at the Democratic convention, and they are equally adorable and deserve to be with their father on that historic night. That does not give the press the right to write about the children in any unflattering light, and when it comes to their candidate, they understood that perfectly well.
Kurtz also says:
Have we Fourth Estate types gone too far? Roger Simon weighs in:
"On behalf of the media, I would like to say we are sorry. On behalf of the elite media, I would like to say we are very sorry.
"We have asked questions this week that we should never have asked. We have asked pathetic questions like: Who is Sarah Palin? What is her record? Where does she stand on the issues? And is she is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?
"We have asked mean questions like: How well did John McCain know her before he selected her? How well did his campaign vet her? And was she his first choice?
"Bad questions. Bad media. Bad."
Those are not the questions you asked. You asked about whether or not Trig was her child, and why was he out in public, anyway, and how could a mother of five be a vice-president, and did she take proper prenatal care, and did she have an affair, and who is the father of Bristol's baby and you made false and sly insinuations and accusations about the vetting process, reporting as facts things that weren't true (no vetting, only met once, member of a secessionist party) and when you report on taser-gate, you neglect to mention that the person she is accused of firing because he would not dismiss the ex-brother in law has plainly told the press before that nobody pressured him to fire the guy, and you almost never mention that this brother-in-law is the sort of cop who tasered his stepson, threatened to murder his father-in-law, and drank from an open container in his patrol car, among other unsavory things, and nobody in their right mind would want him holding a badge and a gun.
Meanwhile, there is a long list of questions regarding Obama about which I can't tell that the press has ever displayed much interest.
Did Obama keep any sort of schedule or calendar during his seven years in the Illinois general assembly that the press (or anybody) has looked at, vetted?
What legislation did he write during that time? Write- as in author, not co-sign or simply sign as author, but legislation he truly authored himself.
During his time as a civil rights lawyer, what cases did he litigate?
What is his paper trail during the time he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago? Did he publish anything- a pamphlet, a letter to the editor, an article for a scholarly journal, anything?
Has he released his academic records from college? What do they show?
Do we have any papers or articles he wrote while in college?
What did Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour have to do with getting Obama into Harvard, and why?
What happened with the funds he was in charge of with the Annenberg challenge? Why did he get away with saying that terrorist Bill Ayers is just some guy in his neighborhood? Why did he choose to launch his political career from the home of an unrepentant terrorist?
Since the press has clearly decided families are off limits, would somebody in the press ask Obama why he says he is his brother's keeper and yet his brother lives in a cardboard box?
What does he mean by being his 'brother's keeper?'
These two lists could go on and on- the one a list of nonjournalistic questions and actions against Sarah Palin, and the record of journalistic omissions in favor of Obama.
But the press is not that stupid. They know this. They just hope that you don't.
CHECK THIS BLOG DAILY: www.heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com
if you would like some real news. I could copy and paste practically everything, or I could send you there to read and watch video for yourself. Please do!
I will copy and paste a "teaser" here from today's posts.
We have several members of the press, suddenly fans of sahmotherhood, asking if Sarah can really be a good mother and Veep at the same time. They do not ask if Obama can really be a good father when he's home ten days a year. They did not ask that question of Edwards when his wife's cancer recurred and their sons were 10 and 8 at the time and he continued to run for office.
We have HOward Kurtz uttering this remarkable, and previously unknown, standard for covering the children of candidates:
It is perfectly fine to showcase your family as you introduce yourself to America. But then you can't turn around and slam the press for writing about your family in a less flattering light than you would prefer to present them.
Obama's children, of course, were much in evidence when he spoke at the Democratic convention, and they are equally adorable and deserve to be with their father on that historic night. That does not give the press the right to write about the children in any unflattering light, and when it comes to their candidate, they understood that perfectly well.
Kurtz also says:
Have we Fourth Estate types gone too far? Roger Simon weighs in:
"On behalf of the media, I would like to say we are sorry. On behalf of the elite media, I would like to say we are very sorry.
"We have asked questions this week that we should never have asked. We have asked pathetic questions like: Who is Sarah Palin? What is her record? Where does she stand on the issues? And is she is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?
"We have asked mean questions like: How well did John McCain know her before he selected her? How well did his campaign vet her? And was she his first choice?
"Bad questions. Bad media. Bad."
Those are not the questions you asked. You asked about whether or not Trig was her child, and why was he out in public, anyway, and how could a mother of five be a vice-president, and did she take proper prenatal care, and did she have an affair, and who is the father of Bristol's baby and you made false and sly insinuations and accusations about the vetting process, reporting as facts things that weren't true (no vetting, only met once, member of a secessionist party) and when you report on taser-gate, you neglect to mention that the person she is accused of firing because he would not dismiss the ex-brother in law has plainly told the press before that nobody pressured him to fire the guy, and you almost never mention that this brother-in-law is the sort of cop who tasered his stepson, threatened to murder his father-in-law, and drank from an open container in his patrol car, among other unsavory things, and nobody in their right mind would want him holding a badge and a gun.
Meanwhile, there is a long list of questions regarding Obama about which I can't tell that the press has ever displayed much interest.
Did Obama keep any sort of schedule or calendar during his seven years in the Illinois general assembly that the press (or anybody) has looked at, vetted?
What legislation did he write during that time? Write- as in author, not co-sign or simply sign as author, but legislation he truly authored himself.
During his time as a civil rights lawyer, what cases did he litigate?
What is his paper trail during the time he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago? Did he publish anything- a pamphlet, a letter to the editor, an article for a scholarly journal, anything?
Has he released his academic records from college? What do they show?
Do we have any papers or articles he wrote while in college?
What did Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour have to do with getting Obama into Harvard, and why?
What happened with the funds he was in charge of with the Annenberg challenge? Why did he get away with saying that terrorist Bill Ayers is just some guy in his neighborhood? Why did he choose to launch his political career from the home of an unrepentant terrorist?
Since the press has clearly decided families are off limits, would somebody in the press ask Obama why he says he is his brother's keeper and yet his brother lives in a cardboard box?
What does he mean by being his 'brother's keeper?'
These two lists could go on and on- the one a list of nonjournalistic questions and actions against Sarah Palin, and the record of journalistic omissions in favor of Obama.
But the press is not that stupid. They know this. They just hope that you don't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
