Story #1 looks at lies told by liberals that are organized and deliberate. #2 has a specific example of how someone in the field of the arts lies or uses literary license to make a point that may or may not be justified by it. It reminds me of Dan Rather’s comment about the GWB story, when he said “Fake but accurate.” #3 is a different look at the so called war on women. #4 gives you the not politically correct prediction for 2012. #5 names names and tells you what the next BIG scandal in the Obama Administration will be. #6 looks at what happens to the Republican primary if Newt drops out of the race (hint it isn’t what you might think will happen).
1. Liberal lies
When you see a tree with a bunch of apples on it, the logical conclusion is that you are looking at an apple tree, right?
But what if you are looking at a political movement that claims to represent “the people,” yet constantly gets caught manufacturing the appearance of popular support?
That’s called an Astro-Turf tree and it’s found mainly - though not entirely - on the Left, from the grassroots all the way to the nation’s capital. If you doubt me here, consider these recent stories:
· A headline in the feisty New Hampshire Journal proclaims: “Dems caught staffing group posing as GOP-friendly gay marriage organization.”
Standing Up for Families, an activist group touted as Republican by the pro-gay marriage forces in the Granite State, is being staffed by folks from local and state Democratic committees.
Trevor Chandler, the guy orchestrating it all, including the fake group’s red, white and blue elephant logo, just happens to be “a Democratic political operative who once worked for Rep. Paul Hodes, D-NH, whose Senate candidacy was rejected by Granite State voters in 2010,” according to the NHJ….
This story is worth your time reading. It compiles a number of phony stories that the left has used in the past to try to fool all of the people all of the time.
2. Is it Art or just another example of Liberal Lies
Daisey’s one-man show The Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs outlines his trip to an Apple manufacturing facility in China. It’s run by a company called Foxconn, which doesn’t only make Apple products—it makes an incomprehensibly huge array of electronic products. But Daisey, a longtime fan of Apple, singled out Foxconn specifically because it produces most of Apple’s iPhones and iPads.
What Daisey relates in the show is jarring; he describes seeing abusive working conditions, disfigurement, child labor, illness. The story is so powerful that This American Life, the popular weekly show distributed by Public Radio International, asked Daisey to adapt the monologue into an hourlong episode. That episode ended up being This American Life’s most popular ever, and served as the catalyst for a broad examination of Foxconn’s business practices by mainstream media outlets, as well as promised changes by Apple.
On Friday, This American Life retracted the entire story. And the unfolding tale of how this con job got on the air should be troubling for anyone who cares about good journalism.
The retraction was prompted by Rob Schmitz, a reporter for American Public Media’s Marketplace who is based in Shanghai. For 18 months, Schmitz has been reporting on Apple’s Chinese supply chain. That experience made him very skeptical of Daisey’s claims. “Certain details,” he reported in a Marketplace segment, “didn’t sound right.”
Schmitz and Ira Glass, the host of This American Life, confronted Daisey. He admitted the falsehoods, describing his conduct as misguided. “My mistake,” he said, “the mistake I truly regret, is that I had it on your show as journalism. And it’s not journalism. It’s theater.”
When the story became public Friday, Daisey echoed that argument on his website: “My show is a theatrical piece whose goal is to create a human connection between our gorgeous devices and the brutal circumstances from which they emerge. It uses a combination of fact, memoir, and dramatic license to tell its story, and I believe it does so with integrity.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/17/the-conning-of-this-american-life-leads-to-an-embarrassing-retraction.html
Like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar, Daisey now says he was getting the cookies for someone else rather than he didn’t take any cookies at all.
3. The War on Women
There is a war against women. It is something comparatively new in our national life, and we have to start noticing it.
It is not a "Republican war on women." It has nothing to do with White House attempts to paint conservative efforts to protect religious liberty as a war against women's rights to contraceptives. That is a mischievous fiction, and the president's polls this week suggest it isn't working. Good.
But the real war is against women in American public life, in politics and media most obviously, but in other spheres as well. In this war, leaders who are women are publicly demeaned and diminished based on the fact that they are women. They are the object of sexual slurs, and insulted in sexual terms. The words used are vulgar, and are meant to tear down and embarrass….
…All this has devolved into a political argument about who's worse, the right or the left. I don't think that's the most important question, but since it's on the table the answer is the left. We all know about Bill Maher, David Letterman, Ed Schultz. A liberal radio host a while back accused the Republican lieutenant governor of Wisconsin of performing "fellatio on all the talk show hosts in Milwaukee."
Two nonconservative columnists recently nailed it. Karen Tumulty in the Washington Post wrote that what Rush Limbaugh said two weeks ago—Sandra Fluke was a "slut" and a "prostitute" who owed the public videotapes of her having sex—was bad indeed, but "Some of the more blatantly sexist attacks I have personally felt have come from the left."
Prize pig is left-wing journalist Matt Taibbi who becomes emotional and can't control himself when writing about women. Here he is on a conservative media figure: "When I read her stuff, I imagine her narrating her text . . . with [male genitals] in her mouth."…
…Why would the left be worse? Let me be harsh. Some left-wing men think they can talk like this because they're on the correct side on social issues such as abortion. Their attitude: "I backed you on the abortions you want so much, I opposed a ban on partial birth. Hell, I'll let you kill kids at any point until they're 15, I'm cool. And that means I can call women in public life t - - - s, right? Because, you know, I think of them that way."
Peggy Noonan writes a pretty middle of the road article claiming the problem is the degeneration of public discourse. I posted this because there is huge hypocritical streak in leftist commentary. To them conservatives are racists, sexists, and homophobes, yet when times get tough you hear they calling conservatives queers, uppity #$##, etc.
4. The Not Politically Correct Predictions for 2013
As readers know, I have no pecuniary interest in the Rush Limbaugh show, which I seldom have the chance to listen to, although I do read his transcripts from time to time. About 20 million Americans do listen at least once a month and good for him. He earned it. This slut controversy is costing him some big bucks in the short term, but in the long term he will prevail.
My prediction: On January 21, 2013, Barack Obama will be out of the White House and Rush Limbaugh will be on the radio.
I second this prediction.
5. Will Fiskers be worse than Solyndra?
Automotive and green technology advocacy Web sites are abuzz with a story about a former employee of Fisker Automotive who claims the company released its $102,000-plus Karma electric sport sedan prematurely, in order to meet targets set forth by the Department of Energy so Fisker could access funds from a $529 million loan award.
This followed reports from all over the Internet that Consumer Reports purchased a Karma in Connecticut for $107,850, only to see it totally disabled before the magazine could run it through its tests.
And the hits just keep a coming at Obama and the Democrats.
6. What would happen if Newt dropped out of the race?
…Romney takes 40 percent of Newt’s voters versus 39 percent for Santorum. As noted yesterday, when Fox News polled a hypothetical head to head race between Romney and Santorum a few days ago, they found Mitt leading 49/44. Has there been any poll to date showing a surge for Team Sweater Vest if Gingrich drops out? If not, then the best argument for Newt quitting isn’t that it would help stop Romney but rather that by staying in he’s needlessly impeding the coronation of a candidate who is, unfortunately, inevitable. If you want to beat Obama and think there’s no way realistically that Romney, as the leader in delegates, won’t be chosen at a brokered convention, then your best option now is to hope that the field clears ASAP so that he can concentrate on the general…http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/16/gallup-gingrichs-voters-split-evenly-between-romney-and-santorum-as-second-choice/
I disagree only with the aspect that the author thinks that the continuing campaign hurts the Republicans. I don’t. I think the candidates are getting more seasoned and better. And the issues they are dealing with now will make them much better in the general election.
No comments:
Post a Comment