Friday, August 31, 2012

Quick Hits - August 31, 2012

A Blue Moon is the second full moon in a single month.  It's a relatively rare event, and tonight we will experience a blue moon...

... miss tonight's and you will have to wait until 2015 for the next blue moon.

The big news is the wrapping up of the Republican National Convention for 2012, Mitt Romney's acceptance of the GOP nomination for President, moving testimonials about Mitt Romney, and some strong speeches to highlight the Republican / Conservative vision for the future of our country.  Running an abbreviated schedule because of the cancellation of the first day because of Hurricane Issac, the convention was marked by a few dismal speeches, many very good speeches, a compelling vision and path for our future, and a reprehensible and despicable performance by far too much of the mainstream media who remain unable to be objective or respectful as their political views are cogently sliced and diced.

As was the norm for the previous three days, the self appointed guardians of 'truth'  in the mainstream media, the 'fact-checkers', began to parse, spin, snark, and denigrate the speakers - many before they even finished their remarks.

Unsurprisingly, the WaPoo's biased 'fact-checker', Glenn Kessler, again breaks into a Clintonesque parsing of Romney's acceptance speech on the pages of one of the largest media entities shilling for Barack Obama. Kessler offers tortured logic elements at all turns of his criticism of the Romney speech.

He condemns Mitt Romney's noting of President Obama's April 2009 'apology tour' - by trying to spin that no apologies really took place because all of the claims of Obama apologies were either all taken out of context or misquoted, and besides, George W. Bush did go on the record for apologizing for some actions of the Untied States.

Because Mitt Romney failed to directly use the word 'underemployed' when he spoke about the dismal employment rates of the young today - according to Kessler, Romney lied.

He also cites Romney as a liar over his references in his speech to Barack Obama seeking to cut over a trillion from the defense budget, citing that some (but not all) of these cuts are the result of the 2011 Debt Ceiling agreement made between Congressional Republicans, Congressional Democrats, and the White House.... and since the Congressional Republicans agreed to sequestration, they aren't Obama's cuts.

Kessler rushes to defend the DNC talking point that Obama has 'cut taxes broadly for the middle class', citing the temporary extension of the 2001-2003 tax reductions and the temporary 2% payroll tax reduction which saved an average family about $40 per month.  Lost in Kessler's logic failures is that maintaining a tax rate at the same rate it was the previous year is not a tax cut.  Lost in that failed logic is also that within President Obama's key legislative achievement, Healthcare reform, are multiple tax increases on the middle class.  I suppose to Kessler, they don't count yet since they aren't being collected yet.

Finally, Kessler returns to the same lame DNC parsing over soaring gas prices....right out of the playbook of David Axelrod and Stephanie Cutter - and based entirely on the presumption that his readers are just 'effin stupid people.

The Investors Business Daily and The Weekly Standard, neither elements of the failing lamestream media, both open fire on the arrogant and biased hacks that present themselves as 'fact-checkers'...

IBD starts with a very simple question, 'If media 'fact-checkers' are just impartial guardians of the truth, how come they got their own facts wrong about Paul Ryan's speech, and did so in a way that helped President Obama's re-election effort?'
Case in point was the rush of "fact check" stories claiming Ryan misled when he talked about a shuttered auto plant in his home state.

Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler posted a piece — "Ryan misleads on GM plant closing in hometown" — saying Ryan "appeared to suggest" that Obama was responsible for the closure of a GM plant in Janesville, Wis.

"That's not true," Kessler said. "The plant was closed in December 2008, before Obama was sworn in."

What's not true are Kessler's "facts." Ryan didn't suggest Obama was responsible for shuttering the plant. Instead, he correctly noted that Obama promised during the campaign that the troubled plant "will be here for another hundred years" if his policies were enacted.

Also, the plant didn't close in December 2008. It was still producing cars until April 2009.

An AP "fact check" also claimed that "the plant halted production in December 2008" even though the AP itself reported in April 2009 that the plant was only then "closing for good."

CNN's John King made the same claim about that plant closure. But when CNN looked more carefully at the evidence, it — to its credit — concluded that what Ryan said was "true."

Besides mangling the facts, so-called fact-checkers often are unable to fairly discern a difference between statements of opinion and claims of fact. And then there is the problem that the journalists producing the pieces are being drawn from the same ranks that have brought us the overwhelmingly liberally biased political news we as Americans are tuning out.
The Weekly Standard's piece, 'Lies, Damned Lies, and Fact-Checking' hammers this as just the liberal media's latest attempt to control the discourse in this country - to their, and the candidates they support, benefit...
But it seems the most outspoken fans of media fact-checking operations come from within the media themselves. “Has anyone else noticed that the Associated Press has been doing some strong fact-checking work lately, aggressively debunking all kinds of nonsense, in an authoritative way, without any of the usual he-said-she-said crap that often mars political reporting?” Washington Post blogger Greg Sargent wrote last year.

Sargent was conducting a fawning interview with the AP’s Washington bureau chief Ron Fournier about the outlet’s fact-checking operation. “The AP, for instance, definitively knocked down claims that [Supreme Court Justice] Elena Kagan is an ‘ivory tower peacenik,’ ” Sargent wrote.

Not surprisingly, Fournier agreed with Sargent. “What we tend to forget in journalism is that we got in the business to check facts,” Fournier says. “Not just to tell people what Obama said and what Gingrich said. It is groundless to say that Kagan is antimilitary. So why not call it groundless? This is badly needed when people are being flooded with information.”

Sargent and Fournier’s ouroboros of self-congratulation inadvertently revealed a problem: When it comes to fact checking, the media seem oblivious to the distinction between verifying facts and passing judgment on opinions they personally find disagreeable.

…Just remember: The fact checker is less often a referee than a fan with a rooting interest in the outcome.
From, here's a very interesting video with limited edits of Paul Ryan responding to NBC about the 'fact-checkers' who rushed to parse his speech...

Even more hilarious is NBC's Chuck Todd in his 'analysis' of Paul Ryan's speech determining that the speech was 'technically factual' but 'distorted the truth'...

In packaging Obama campaign talking points, however, Chuck Todd had to concede the accuracy of what Ryan asserted in his Wednesday night convention address, humorously leading Todd to conclude that “what he said many times was technically factual” but, “by what he left out,” he “actually distorted the actual truth.”
Here's Mitt Romney's acceptance speech - you watch and decide... offers us their picks for the 'Best and Worst of the RNC 2012'....

Compare their picks / pans with those offered by the liberal DC paper, The Hill....

They see the 'winners' as Paul Ryan, Ann Romney, Condoleezza Rice, and RNC Chair Reince Priebus.  Mitt Romney they rate as 'mixed' - saying Romney's good, but not great (in their opinion) speech losing stature because of Clint Eastwood's 'distraction'.

As losers, they cite three 'big' ones.  First, they termed Chris Christie a loser because he referred to himself (using 'I' or 'me') more than 40 times during his speech - which begs the question of where they are when the Narcissist in Chief does the same?  Second, they toss the Senate Republicans in the mix because the GOP was unable to get Todd Akin to drop out of the Missouri Senate race over his idiotic statement on abortion.  I think they're a little upset that Akin was a non-issue / non-entity at the convention - and that the GOP has a viable path to 51 seats in the Senate without Missouri,

Finally, we have one of the biggest things about the RNC that has so many of the left severely butthurt and cranky - Clint Eastwood.  'Bizarre', 'Rambling', 'Embarrassing' are just some of the adjectives being used to describe Eastwood's appearance.  Of all of the RNC speakers, Eastwood probably delivered the most 'red meat' to the viewers...referencing the Hollywood left as being 'Left of Lenin', and promoting such progressive heresy as saying 'We own this country', referencing the American people, and calling 'Clueless' Joe Biden 'the intellect of the Democrat Party'.

But what caused so many progressive heads to pop was Eastwood's use of an empty chair to denote the President - in a schtick that was well received by the audience that included having a conversation with the 'empty chair'.

We know this really hit home as the thin-skinned narcissist in chief's team, before midnight, had to respond by tweeting this picture -

- with the message 'This seat's taken...'

This wasn't the only 'outrage' directed towards Eastwood either.  MSNBC's Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz blasted Eastwood for 'belittling' and 'demeaning' Barack Obama....

Niall Stanage, one of the biggest Obama shills with The Hill, offered a political hack's commentary today in lieu of a factual news report - deciding that Eastwood's 'bizarre' performance took away from Romney's acceptance speech, and then spending the bulk of the piece creating a justification for his conclusion.  It's not journalism, but a fine job of DNC advocacy.

Speaking of DNC advocacy, the chair of the Democrat National Convention crashed the RNC, strolling up and down 'radio row' at the Tampa Bay Times Forum - promptly insisting that any conservative media be ushered away from her eminence.  When conservative radio media approached Debbie Wasserman-Schultz,  eager to ask the DNC chair a question or two, her handlers complained loudly to convention staff, questioning why DWS was in earshot of conservative media - at the Republican National Convention - on talk radio row?  So arrogant was DWS, her assistants reportedly required National Public Radio (hardly a conservative bastion) to give then a list of questions in advance so DWS could pick which ones would be permitted to be asked of her.

This is the same vapid ideologue who used her appearance at the RNC to hammer the Republicans for not scaling down the convention 'out of respect for Americans caught in the path of Hurricane Issac'...
“They could have taken things down a notch,” Wasserman Schultz said at a Democratic press conference rebutting the Republican convention. “I think it probably was an example of their continued focus on winning at all costs.”

While she said she agreed with the RNC’s decision to scrub the convention’s first day because of safety concerns, “parties and the special interest-funded bashes” still were held “in spite of the fact that our state was getting hit and Tampa was still in the path of the storm.”
What Debbie?  No comment about Obama spending the last three days on the campaign trail - a trail that hasn't included Louisiana or Mississippi, but was intended to limit the limelight being shown on the Republican convention?  How about Mitt Romney departing today for New Orleans - while Barack Obama campaigns in Texas - commemorating 'his' announcement ending US combat operations in Iraq?

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz visited the RNC with Sandra Fluke - the 30 something Georgetown Law student who wants everyone else to pay for her $9 per month birth control.  Fluke is apparently only willing to speak in controlled conditions - as she's chickening out on a debate with's Dana Loesch over women's issues...
“Is she afraid to be challenged on the ideas?” Loesch added. “That’s what it signals to me is that she’s unwilling to actually engage in a conversation with real conservative women. Is it because she’s afraid and doesn’t have the strength of her own conviction? That says to me quite a lot. I’m willing to put it on the line, why isn’t she?”

Loesch said she thinks Fluke is nothing more than a creation made by President Barack Obama as part of an effort to push liberal politics. “I don’t know of any other ‘private citizen’ who is represented by the Knickerbocker PR firm in Washington, D.C., which happens to be run by Anita Dunn, Barack Obama’s former communications director,” Loesch said. “I don’t know any private citizen who just happens to have that affiliation. This was an entirely fabricated narrative from the Democrats and they needed a face to put on it and so Sandra Fluke was the face that they put on it. I want to know if she’s woman enough to come talk to me.”
But the most reprehensible accusation made by the clueless DNC Chair has to be her calling the women who spoke at the Republican National Convention 'shiny packaging' to distract voters.

Reports are that the television ratings for the RNC are down, down significantly from the 2008 convention.  While there are those simple minded folks who try to use this to make the case that enthusiasm for the GOP is down considerably, the real meaning seems to be a continuation of middle America's dissatisfaction and lack of enthusiasm to view a biased and often deranged mainstream media.

Leading this has to be middle America's disgust towards the non-stop ranting and nonsensical raving over 'racism' at every turn as promoted by some of the biggest louts in media....

Was it racist for NBC to run commercials instead of the first three minutes of Marco Rubio's speech last night in their latest snub of a RNC minority speaker?

Even the U.S. State Department is seeing racism everywhere - now saying that if you go into a pub / bar and order a 'black and tan' - you're a racist...

...which brings us right back to the clueless nimrods who say, 'you oppose Barack Obama, you're a racist' or 'you're a Republican?  You're a racist'.

Michelle Malkin has a great take on this whole phony kerfuffle by the leftards in media in her column today, 'That's Racist - A Guide to What's Off Limits'.  Read it all as well as National Review editor Rich Lowry's editorial on 'The Race Canard'.

Unfortunately, these base and vile accusations will become all the more commonplace in the 67 days we have before the November election.  With the President in increasing trouble, the accusations of racism by simpletons will flood out as the defenders / supporters of the President seek to control and define the discourse.

How much trouble is the President in?

Barack Obama says, 'I didn't do a good enough job on selling America on the stimulus plan...'.  Mr. President, the issue isn't about selling the stimulus plan.  There was no interest to 'sell' the plan - it was rammed through the Democrat majority controlled Congress.  The problem with the stimulus was that it was an utter Keynesian failure.

The President, and his economic team, promised that the stimulus would generate a quick economic recovery.  We were promised an unemployment rate not to exceed 8% - and got 41 consecutive months of unemployment over 8%.  We were promised millions of jobs - and we have job creation that cannot keep pace with population growth.  We were promised economic growth, a GDP growth this summer of 4% to 4.5% - and in reality we are at 1.5% - 1.7%

Hot Air has a hard hitting piece on the jobs - looking back at the accusation made by John Kerry, who by the way apparently once served in Vietnam, who called the job creation during the Bush(43) first term (~5.6% unemployment, 300-500K jobs / month) the 'McJob Recovery' because the jobs being created were 'bad jobs' - and applying the same conditions to the Obama 'recovery'...
Today, the Obama administration keeps claiming to have added 4.3 million jobs by choosing to start from February 2010 rather than the start of the recovery in June 2009 or the passage of Barack Obama’s stimulus package in February 2009. The Obama recovery in full has only added less than 65,000 jobs per month, far below the level needed to keep up with population growth (125K-150K per month), and the civilian population participation rate has fallen to a 30-year low this spring. A new study now shows that even those jobs that have been added are the “McJobs” that Kerry inaccurately accused Bush’s recovery of generating:

First, the job market has not “turned around since then.” We’re not even keeping up with population growth in this recovery. The average jobs added per month since January has been 83,286 according to the BLS (Table A-1 seasonally adjusted), still a long way from keeping up with population growth. That’s not a recovery in jobs at all, which anyone looking at the participation rate (63.7%) would instantly recognize.

The data shows that even the paltry job creation of the Obama recovery has done little to advance the economy. Businesses won’t invest in job-creating activities that require more expensive labor until they can reliably calculate future costs, which in this regulatory and tax environment, they cannot do. That’s why companies are sitting on their capital, and why we won’t get anything but McJobs in significant numbers until those policies change. The only thing we can get with this job-creation environment is fries with our meal.
How much trouble is the President in?

The DeKalb County Democrat Party is giving away tickets to the President's acceptance speech in an Atlanta, GA bar, Manuel's Tavern.  Is this a sign of the enthusiasm towards the President?

How much trouble is the President in?

If you've lost Michael Moore....
In an appearance on The Huffington Post’s webcast on Thursday, filmmaker Michael Moore revealed that he is less-than optimistic about President Barack Obama’s chances against Mitt Romney.

Moore said the election’s going to come down to fundraising, and that Romney will have an edge over Obama.

“Mitt Romney is going to raise more money than Barack Obama,” Moore said. “That should guarantee his victory. I think people should start to practice the words ‘President Romney.’ To assume that the other side are just a bunch of ignoramuses who are supported by people who believe that Adam and Eve rode on dinosaurs 6,000 years ago is to completely misjudge the opposition.”
What if you've lost The Economist?

"One Question, Mr. President... just what would you do with another four years?"

Can Barack Obama cogently answer that question and get re-elected?  Perhaps we'll see next week at the Democrat National Convention in Charlotte, NC - but if that's the case, why hasn't that question been answered in the over year plus that the President has already been running for re-election?

Wrapping up - a few last videos....

First up, the latest from Bill Whittle in his 'Afterburner' series....

And an outstanding advertisement from American Crossroads that picks up on a meme from Paul Ryan's speech -

Today in History

1888 - Prostitute Mary Ann Nichols becomes the first victim of the London serial killer, 'Jack the Ripper'.

1916 - Harry Butters, the son of a prominent San Francisco industrialist, and an American serving in the British Army, is killed by a German shell during the Battle of the Somme, becoming one of the first Americans killed in World War I.

1939 - Nazi leader Adolf Hitler signs an order to attack Poland - German military forces move to the German-Polish frontier - some German troops staging an 'attack' on Germany while dressed in Polish uniforms.

1964 - California becomes the most populated state in the U.S.

1980 - Representatives of the communist government in Poland agree to the demands of the striking shipyard workers in Gdansk.  Lech Walesa led the striking workers, who went on to form Solidarity, the first independent labor union to develop in a Soviet bloc nation.  Solidarity grew to become a mass social movement to weaken the power and control of the communists over Poland and gain support from free nations, like the U.S., who under Ronald Reagan, imposed sanctions on Poland over that government's efforts to crack down on Solidarity.

1997 - Diana, Princess of Wales, is killed in a car crash in Paris.  Also killed were her driver, a bodyguard, and her companion Dodi Fayed.  The crash was determined to be caused by the grossly negligent driving of her driver, who also tested as being impaired by alcohol, and the pursuing paparzzi.

1998 - The DPRK (North Korea) fired a ballistic missile over Japan in a surprise missile test.  The fact that the missile's course took it directly over Japan escalated tensions throughout the region.

No comments:

Post a Comment