The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for the ‘Journalism Is Dead’ Category

IUSB Vision proved correct once again – IAC: Previous IPCC Reports failed to meet basic academic standards; Participants “too political”

Posted by iusbvision on July 19, 2012

I have been waiting for this for a long time. When I was in college finishing my latest degree here at IUSB I was making many of these very same claims about global warming alarmist nonsense as the IAC report below. Leftist students and faculty pretty much told me that I was nuts, and I wasn’t a climate scientist so how would I know? Well it looks like I knew. It was easy. First of all it doesn’t take a genius to see when the scientific method is being ignored and second of all, what I am an expert on is politics and I know a political movement when I see one.

At the bottom of the article I posted a list of links that I wrote starting in 2007 saying many of the same things the IAC has pointed out below. I have reactivated IUSB Vision just for the purpose of posting this story. All of you PhD. laden academics who doubted me and called me all of those names behind my back should ask yourselves; why was a mere undergrad like me spot on and all of you who are supposed to be teachers wrong? And this isn’t this first time that happened is it? – Chuck Norton

President of the Heartland Institute Joseph L. Bast:

On June 27, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a statement saying it had “complete[d] the process of implementation of a set of recommendations issued in August 2010 by the Inter Academy Council (IAC), the group created by the world’s science academies to provide advice to international bodies.”

Hidden behind this seemingly routine update on bureaucratic processes is an astonishing and entirely unreported story. The IPCC is the world’s most prominent source of alarmist predictions and claims about man-made global warming. Its four reports (a fifth report is scheduled for release in various parts in 2013 and 2014) are cited by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the U.S. and by national academies of science around the world as “proof” that the global warming of the past five or so decades was both man-made and evidence of a mounting crisis.

If the IPCC’s reports were flawed, as a many global warming “skeptics” have long claimed, then the scientific footing of the man-made global warming movement — the environmental movement’s “mother of all environmental scares” — is undermined. The Obama administration’s war on coal may be unnecessary. Billions of dollars in subsidies to solar and wind may have been wasted. Trillions of dollars of personal income may have been squandered worldwide in campaigns to “fix” a problem that didn’t really exist.

The “recommendations” issued by the IAC were not minor adjustments to a fundamentally sound scientific procedure. Here are some of the findings of the IAC’s 2010 report.

Alternative views not considered, claims not properly peer reviewed

The IAC reported that IPCC lead authors fail to give “due consideration … to properly documented alternative views” (p. 20), fail to “provide detailed written responses to the most significant review issues identified by the Review Editors” (p. 21), and are not “consider[ing] review comments carefully and document[ing] their responses” (p. 22). In plain English: the IPCC reports are not peer-reviewed.

No formal criteria for selecting IPCC authors

The IAC found that “the IPCC has no formal process or criteria for selecting authors” and “the selection criteria seemed arbitrary to many respondents” (p. 18). Government officials appoint scientists from their countries and “do not always nominate the best scientists from among those who volunteer, either because they do not know who these scientists are or because political considerations are given more weight than scientific qualifications” (p. 18). In other words: authors are selected from a “club” of scientists and nonscientists who agree with the alarmist perspective favored by politicians.

Too political…

The rewriting of the Summary for Policy Makers by politicians and environmental activists — a problem called out by global warming realists for many years, but with little apparent notice by the media or policymakers — was plainly admitted, perhaps for the first time by an organization in the “mainstream” of alarmist climate change thinking. “[M]any were concerned that reinterpretations of the assessment’s findings, suggested in the final Plenary, might be politically motivated,” the IAC auditors wrote. The scientists they interviewed commonly found the Synthesis Report “too political” (p. 25).

Really? Too political? We were told by everyone — environmentalists, reporters, politicians, even celebrities — that the IPCC reports were science, not politics. Now we are told that even the scientists involved in writing the reports — remember, they are all true believers in man-made global warming themselves — felt the summaries were “too political.”

Here is how the IAC described how the IPCC arrives at the “consensus of scientists”:

Plenary sessions to approve a Summary for Policy Makers last for several days and commonly end with an all-night meeting. Thus, the individuals with the most endurance or the countries that have large delegations can end up having the most influence on the report (p. 25).

How can such a process possibly be said to capture or represent the “true consensus of scientists”?

Phony estimates of certainty

Another problem documented by the IAC is the use of phony “confidence intervals” and estimates of “certainty” in the Summary for Policy Makers (pp. 27-34). Those of us who study the IPCC reports knew this was make-believe when we first saw it in 2007. Work by J. Scott Armstrong on the science of forecasting makes it clear that scientists cannot simply gather around a table and vote on how confident they are about some prediction, and then affix a number to it such as “80% confident.” Yet that is how the IPCC proceeds.

The IAC authors say it is “not an appropriate way to characterize uncertainty” (p. 34), a huge understatement. Unfortunately, the IAC authors recommend an equally fraudulent substitute, called “level of understanding scale,” which is more mush-mouth for “consensus.”

The IAC authors warn, also on page 34, that “conclusions will likely be stated so vaguely as to make them impossible to refute, and therefore statements of ‘very high confidence’ will have little substantive value.” Yes, but that doesn’t keep the media and environmental activists from citing them over and over again as “proof” that global warming is man-made and a crisis…even if that’s not really what the reports’ authors are saying.

IPCC participants had conflicts of interest

Finally, the IAC noted, “the lack of a conflict of interest and disclosure policy for IPCC leaders and Lead Authors was a concern raised by a number of individuals who were interviewed by the Committee or provided written input” as well as “the practice of scientists responsible for writing IPCC assessments reviewing their own work. The Committee did not investigate the basis of these claims, which is beyond the mandate of this review” (p. 46).

Too bad, because these are both big issues in light of recent revelations that a majority of the authors and contributors to some chapters of the IPCC reports are environmental activists, not scientists at all. That’s a structural problem with the IPCC that could dwarf the big problems already reported.

IPCC critics vindicated

So on June 27, nearly two years after these bombshells fell (without so much as a raised eyebrow by the mainstream media in the U.S. — go ahead and try Googling it), the IPCC admits that it was all true and promises to do better for its next report. Nothing to see here…keep on moving.

Well I say, hold on, there! The news release means that the IAC report was right. That, in turn, means that the first four IPCC reports were, in fact, unreliable. Not just “possibly flawed” or “could have been improved,” but likely to be wrong and even fraudulent.

It means that all of the “endorsements” of the climate consensus made by the world’s national academies of science — which invariably refer to the reports of the IPCC as their scientific basis — were based on false or unreliable data and therefore should be disregarded or revised. It means that the EPA’s “endangerment finding” — its claim that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and threat to human health — was wrong and should be overturned.

And what of the next IPCC report, due out in 2013 and 2014? The near-final drafts of that report have been circulating for months already. They were written by scientists chosen by politicians rather than on the basis of merit; many of them were reviewing their own work and were free to ignore the questions and comments of people with whom they disagree. Instead of “confidence,” we will get “level of understanding scales” that are just as meaningless.

And on this basis we should transform the world’s economy to run on breezes and sunbeams?

In 2010, we learned that much of what we thought we knew about global warming was compromised and probably false. On June 27, the culprits confessed and promised to do better. But where do we go to get our money back?

Related from this old college blog:

Inconvenient Questions Global Warming Alarmists Don’t Want You to Ask – February 18, 2007 – LINK

Top Scientists Say: You Are Not the Cause of Global Warming – October 22, 2007 – LINK

Global Cooling Continues; Global Warming Alarmists Still Issuing Death Threats – December 28, 2008 – LINK

UK Telegraph: 2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved – December 28, 2008 – LINK

National Climatic Data Center: Cooling in Last 10 Years – January 10, 2009 – LINK

The Debate is Over. Global Warming Alarmism is About Achieving Central Control of the Economy and Now They Admit It Openly – March 27, 2009 – LINK

Al Gore: Climate change issue can lead to world government – July 11, 2009 – LINK

EPA Tried to Suppress Global Warming Report Admitting Skeptics Correct – October 23, 2009 – LINK

New AP Article on “Global Cooling Myth” Spins a Bad Study – UPDATED: Look where they put THIS ground station… – October 27, 2009 – LINK

Professors Paid to Plagiarize – UPDATE: Global warming scientists hacked emails show manipulation of data, hiding of other data and conspiring to attack/smear global warming skeptics! – November 19, 2009 – LINK

National Association of Scholars on the “ClimateGate” Scandal – November 28, 2009 – LINK

Examples of the “Climategate” Documents – UPDATE: BBC Had the emails and files for 6 weeks, sat on story. UPDATE II – They carried out their conspiracy threat; much of the raw data from CRU destroyed! – November 28, 2009 – LINK

Scientific American thinks you are stupid: The dissection of a blatant propaganda piece for global warming alarmism. – December 6, 2009 – LINK

The Roundup: IPCC Authors Now Admitting Fault – No Warming Since 1995 – Sea Levels Not Rising. Senator Inhofe: Possible criminal misuse of taxpayer research funds. – February 23, 2010 – LINK

OOPS AGAIN: IPCC scientists screeching about the cataclysmic effects of sea-level rises forgot to consider sedimentary deposits… – April 23, 2010 – LINK

UN IPCC Co-chair: climate policy is redistributing the world’s wealth – November 18, 2010 – LINK

More Hadley Center Global Warming Horror Claims Debunked by Real Science – December 6, 2010 – LINK

ClimateGate One Year Later. Elite Media Still Lying – December 6, 2010 – LINK

More ClimateGate One Year Later – December 7, 2010 – LINK

IPCC Lead Author Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT: Most global warming models are exaggerated, many scientists in it for the grant money or treat it like a religion – December 7, 2010 – LINK

How Global Warming Propaganda Works – December 8, 2010 – LINK

NASA’s global warming evidence page filled with lies, half truths and suspect data – December 10, 2010 – LINK

Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research: Halt economic growth, start government rationing. Global Warming Alarmists Party Fat in Cancun – December 21, 2010 – LINK

Global Warming Conference Delegates Sign Petitions to Ban Water and “Destabilize U.S. Economy” – February 15, 2011 – LINK

Global Warming Alarmist Quote of the Day – Former Canadian Environment Minister Christine Stewart: No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits…climate change provides the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.

AAUP Seeks to Limit Transparency Over Climate Science – September 19, 2011 – LINK

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Academic Misconduct, Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Culture War, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Regulatory Abuse, True Talking Points | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Selectively Edits Video To Make Perry Look Racist

Posted by iusbvision on August 16, 2011

Catch the video at the following link.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/16/msnbcs_ed_schultz_selectively_edits_video_to_make_perry_look_racist.html

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

MSNBC’s Chris Mathews is a Dirty Liar

Posted by iusbvision on August 11, 2011

This is how far the left has gone folks. Once again they have resorted to just making stuff up out of thin air. Mathews claimed on his show that Rush Limbaugh said that we should reverse the reintegration of the military that happened at the end of WWII. Mathews is lying in the worst form of smear. It is no different when MSNBC made up the false quotes about Limbaugh when he was trying to buy an NFL team.

Audio and transcripts of every Rush Limbaugh show are posted online every day.

Keep in mind it was Democrats led by Woodrow Wilson that re-segregated the military after Republicans had integrated it. The NAACP before it was hijacked by the neo-marxist left, was a solidly Republican organization that formed largely in response to Wilson who was also known as “the first progressive president”.

This is indicative of what we will see in the upcoming campaign.

Posted in 2012, 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Lies, Limbaugh, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

Collection of empirical studies on media bias concludes the obvious…

Posted by iusbvision on August 2, 2011

This professor used liberal sources and people to decide what the liberal bias was. So this was not conservatives deciding what was liberal bias and what was not. Several studies were used  and put together such as what facts were omitted, what euphemisms were used and what side did they favor, polls of the journalists themselves, prominence of ideologically charged stories etc.

One method used was to give half of a sample a free subscription to the Washington Post and the other half a subscription to the Washington Times determined by a coin flip. They went back to the families some months later and polled them on their political views to see how much they had shifted.

http://www.amazon.com/Left-Turn-Liberal-Distorts-American/dp/0312555938/

 

Dr. Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science and economics at UCLA, has spent years constructing precise, quantitative measures of the slant of media outlets. He does this by measuring the political content of news, as a way to measure the PQ, or “political quotient” of voters and politicians.

Among his conclusions are: all mainstream media outlets have a liberal bias; and while some supposedly conservative outlets—such the Washington Times or Fox News’ Special Report—do lean right, their conservative bias is less than the liberal bias of most mainstream outlets.

Groseclose contends that the general leftward bias of the media has shifted the PQ of the average American by about 20 points, on a scale of 100, the difference between the current political views of the average American, and the political views of the average resident of Orange County, California or Salt Lake County, Utah. With Left Turn readers can easily calculate their own PQ—to decide for themselves if the bias exists. This timely, much-needed study brings fact to this often overheated debate.

“I’m no conservative, but I loved Left Turn.  Tim Groseclose has written the best kind of book: one that is firmly anchored in rigorous academic research, but is still so much fun to read that it is hard to put down.  Liberals will not like the conclusions of this book, which in my opinion, is all the more reason why they should want to read it.”–Steven Levitt, Professor of Economics, University of Chicago, and co-author of Freakonomics.

“This book—an evolution from the pioneering article in the 2005 Quarterly Journal of Economics by Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo—uses a clever statistical technique to construct an objective measure of conservative or liberal bias in news coverage.  This method and those now adopted by other serious researchers show clearly that most U.S. news outlets lean left.  Most frighteningly, we learn that the media bias actually affects the ways that people think and vote.”–Robert Barro, Professor of Economics, Harvard University, and Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution.

 

Video of Dr. Groseclose on Lou Dobbs: http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1083158772001/do-all-mainstream-media-outlets-have-a-liberal-bias/

 

Washington Times:

The conclusions draw upon recent studies by some highly respected economists and political scientists. For instance, one study, conducted by Yale researchers Alan GerberDean Karlan and Daniel Bergan, is akin to a biology experiment. To one set of randomly selected voters in Northern Virginia, the researchers gave trial subscriptions to The Washington Post. To another set, they gave trial subscriptions to The Washington Times. After the subsequent election, the researchers polled their subjects and found that their Post-subscribing subjects voted for the Democrat at a 3.8 percentage higher rate than did the Times-subscribing subjects. That is, the more liberal newspaper truly seemed to cause people to vote more liberally.

After aggregating the results of this and similar studies, one finds an inescapable conclusion: Newspapers, television, radio and online media are extremely influential, especially over consumers’ political views.

For example, the results imply that if the “slant quotient” of the entire media moved 34 points leftward – approximately the difference between Fox News’ Special Report and The New York Times – then the “political quotient” of the average voter would move about 24 points leftward. The latter shift is approximately the difference between the average voter in Colorado or Iowa and the average voter in Rhode Island or Massachusetts.

If the analysis is right – that media bias really does change political views so significantly – then this no doubt has some important – and largely unrecognized – consequences.

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

More on that budget deal: “Moderates vs Conservatives”

Posted by iusbvision on August 2, 2011

Be sure to see our previous post HERE.

It is always painful when people who call themselves conservative buy into the elite media narrative, or want to place party leadership on a pedestal so bad that they make arguments that they would normally never make.

From today’s Drudge Report:

MSNBC Hosts Unanimously Predict Obama’s Re-Election…

Palin, Bachmann rip Biden for calling Tea Partiers ‘terrorists’…

REID: Rise of Tea Party ‘very, very disconcerting’…

Now watch as this Republican parrots some of this same spin.

 

My original comment:

What I find interesting is that any plan that would actually have a real chance of preserving our AAA credit rating was painted as extreme.

We should not let pundits move the Overton Window and decide what is extreme and what is not.

There will be many impacts to losing AAA, including the US Govt having to pay so much more interest on the debt every year that the savings from debt ceiling agreement (to only increase spending by $7.4 trillion over the next ten years instead of the base line $9.5 trillion) will be used up. Losing AAA will also cause more economic suffering for the average person.

Marco Rubio said that his line in the sand is to have a solution that actually fixes the problem. When preserving our AAA credit is considered “extreme” there is something very wrong with someone’s perceptions.

Person suckered in by the elite media spin responds to the above:

Economics trump any & all talking heads & forms my opinion on domestic fiscal policy, in my world. Anything more than 4% in cuts at a time most certainly would cause more recession, possibly depression. [Note: Notice that this is a classic far left Krugman/Keynes position and she doesn’t realize it.] The LiberTEArians want one extreme (too many cuts all at once) the Democrats want the polar opposite extreme (NO cuts, more taxes). That’s ‘extreme’ to Center Right America.

Reality:

When the government cut spending drastically under Calvin Coolidge/Warren Harding it helped us out of the depression of 1920. Also when the governmment cut spending by 50% in 1947 from 1945 levels the economy boomed.

Also conversely, look at the 80% increase in federal spending just since FY 2008 and look at the economic performance, and look at the economic performance under the New Deal which was a total fail as non farm unemployment never dropped below 20% during the New Deal.

Look at welfare reform and the reductions in spending growth that happened with the John Kasich budgets under Bill Clinton. The economy improved again as well.

Your premise, based on outdated neo-Keynsian theory, is falsified by history.

The reason why government increases in spending do not have the desired Keynesian effect, is the same reason that reductions in govt spending do not have the predicted Keynesian impact; and that is because govt does not spend money for the purpose of economic impact or to aid the market where it needs aid the most. Politicians spend money for the purpose of political impact.

This is why you see things in econ textbooks such as “Okun’s Leaky Bucket Theory” and why government spending tends to result in a very low velocity of money (supporting LINK).

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

Your pedantic tendencies are showing again… I am most certainly not a Keynesian ~ I’m with Paul Ryan & Charles Krauthammer. [NOTE: Paul Ryan & Charles Krauthammer never said that cutting spending would cause a depression; Paul Krugman says it every day.]

Reality:

That is great name calling, but that isn’t an argument. I also support Paul Ryan. For someone who claims not to be a Keynesian, you did a a great job of giving the typical Krugman/Keynes argument.

How many in 2010 got elected on taking the position that we should go back to 2008 spending levels? 2008 spending levels would still increase the yearly deficits by almost half a trillion a year – so that is not a “cut” nor is that even a spending freeze, it is just a reduction in the coming increases. So your entire notion that TEA party candidates or most new freshman argued for massive cuts is also just factually wrong.

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

The fact still remains that TEA’s expectations exceed their ability to make any large meaningful changes with only controlling The House. The Ryan Plan would never have passed in this climate. The Smart Thing to do is get the best deal, that could be passed in a Dem controlled Senate & a Dem controlled WH, live to fight another day, win BIG in 2012, then & only then, can the necessary stepos be taken. LiberTEA’s unrealistic demands & damn the torpedos bravado, are hindering that goal. We can argue about the best next steps forward in January ’13, IF IF IF the LiberTEArians don’t thwart that most important goal with their divisive bullheaded bravado.

Reality:

I think you misunderstand my position in part. Many do not think that we got the best deal. I say that because look at what happened in Minnesota recently with the government shutdown there. It was all doom and gloom, the media said that people blamed Republicans… until the governor caved and the GOP’s poll numbers went up.

I think we should have tried to get a little better of a deal for another reason, if the Dems went passed August 2, and America saw that we would not default and Social Security checks would indeed go out (as the govt brings in almost 200 billion a month on revenue) Obama would have had egg all over his face and his scare tactics would have blown up in his face.

I very much understand that we cannot run the govt from just the House, but we were timid and operating form a position of fear because of what happened in 1998.

I never said “all or nothing, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead”; I am just saying that we could have done better.

My problem is with those who are wiping their feet on this deal to make it look like that the deal is rockin’awesome and that those who wanted more are somehow extreme.

In fact that whole way of looking at it works against us in 2012. We should just admit the truth and say that this was not a very good deal. We should explain how the Democrats insited on 7.4 trillion in NEW spending or they would shut everything down, how they threatened default and social security when it was unnecessary, we should tell people how the Democrats INSISTED on a deal that would NOT preserve AAA – that is a key point. 

What we should not be doing is saying that those who supported a deal that had a chance of preserving AAA are extremists, as that undermines our position in 2012. Paul Krugman is already saying that losing AAA is just fine.

You are trashing people in the Republican base who wanted to save AAA as extreme (some TEA Party people and other conservatives), instead of trashing Democrats whgo deserve to get trashed, and that plays right into Obama’s hands in 2012.

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

At the MOST critical of times, TEA voted with Libertarians & the Democrats, voted AGAINST the GOP… Making them the RINOs they so clamorously hunt. That will not be forgotten by the electorate. This is a Center Right nation. I do not believe their constituents wanted them to risk turning the country against conservatives for advocating default by having completely unrealistic expectations in the political climate we currently find ourselves working within. Bulls in a China shop are never welcome, regardless of what side of the aisle they come from. But, I could be wrong, we’ll see what happens in their reelection bids, I suppose. [Note: How many important votes has the House voted on a bill or against a bill with the support of the entire party?]

Reality:

Hmm lets see Bachmann voted for the Patriot Act, Allen West just supported the budget deal. With that said, look at where that “TEA Party bullheadedness” has gotten us. Just a short time ago we were talking about Bailouts, stimulus, perhaps a stimulus II, massive multi-trillion dollar health care take overs, cap & trade, etc etc. Now the discussion is Balanced Budget Amendment, how much will be cut, entitlement reform and GOP stalwarts such as Haley Barbour are even talking about the ethanol scam and farm subsidy reform in IOWA of all places.

Stacy, the problem with what you are doing, besides that fact that it is helping Obama to get re-elected, is that you have got it in your brain somehow that most TEA Party folks are these Ron Paul loonies. While the Ron Paul loonies would like people to think that, it just isn’t the case, as the big polling outfits have polled them and done demograghics on them demonstrate this clearly.

Rasmussen:

48% Say Their Views Closer to Tea Party Than Congress

http://www.rasmussenreport​s.com/public_content/polit​ics/general_politics/april​_2011/48_say_their_views_c​loser_to_tea_party_than_co​ngress

In the ongoing budget-cutting debate in Washington, some congressional Democrats have accused their Republican opponents of being held captive by the Tea Party movement, but voters like the Tea Party more than Congress.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters say when it comes to the major issues facing the country, their views are closer to the average Tea Party member as opposed to the average member of Congress. Just 22% say their views are closest to those of the average congressman. Even more (30%) aren’t sure. (To see survey question wording, click here .)

This shows little change from a survey in late March of last year . Forty-nine percent (49%) of voters think the Tea Party movement is good for the country, consistent with findings since May 2010 . Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree and say the grassroots, small government movement is bad for America. Sixteen percent (16%) say neither.

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

That’s not to TEA’s credit. But, I find it fascinating that they are all about wanting to claim credit. As Reagan said, “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.” Unfortunately, LiberTEA’s all about themselves. 2010 was a national referendum against Failed Liberal Governance. I was happy to have TEA join us in making history, handing the Dems a shellacking, UNTIL they started acting like Libertarians, in deed (voting with them & the Democrats) & in tactics (their constant disparaging of the GOP, RINO Hunting, etc). The LiberTEArians went after both West & Bachmann for those stances, too, I might add… It’s their way or assault. No thank you. [Note: TEA Party groups are cellular in nature and not all of them agree on every issue as to be expected, yet this person takes an elite media report saying that a cell, somewhere is unhappy about a vote and all of the sudden in her mind it is all of them. The fact is that Bachmann and West enjoy broad support.

Rasmussen is laughable. [Note: Notice no supporting evidence.] It is NOT the GOP causing the damage & divide, it is TEA. How many times has the GOP reached out in the spirit of unity to TEA only to draw back a nub? Too many. Still today, credit is being thrown to TEA for helping turn the national debate, etc, yet they still are combative. Again, it is NOT the GOP causing the divide. It is the LiberTEArians, as is their MO, thus far.

Reality:

Than you oppose Charles Krauthammer – because what I just said about how the TEA Party changed the debate is near exact quote from him from two days ago. Feel free to look up the video. [Note: fooled person said earlier that she believed in Charles Krauthammer, but now that Krauthammer is used to debunk her claim that the TEA Partry people deserve credit for changing the debate, as an emotionally charged person would, I predicted that she would dismiss him and it did not take long to have my prediction come to reality.]

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

I repeat, “How many times has the GOP reached out in the spirit of unity to TEA only to draw back a nub? Too many. Still today, credit is being thrown to TEA for helping turn the national debate, etc, yet they still are combative.”

Reality:

Of course they are combative, that is how you change a debate. But hey, I am just sticking with Charles Krauthammer on this one. You really should watch him as he makes some great sense [Zing]. How dare those people who worked so hard to make 2010 happen actually stand up and fight for what they said they believe in such as balanced budgets and a change in the way Washington works. Why the nerve!

Person suckered in by the elite media spin:

I never miss him. And his throwing the LiberTEArian dog a bone was very nice of him. What did it get him? More LiberTEArian teenaged angst. [Note: So Krauthammer wasn’t serious he was just throwing them a bone. Mind reading must be her specialty.]

Reality:

How is the constant unsubstantiated name calling at a large portion of the base a plan for victory in 2012? It seems to me that some are TRYING to insult them and smear them to the point where they might consider voting for a third party.

Amazing isn’t it, the zeal to defend the attitude she got from the elite media. It goes to show just how effective elite media attitude change propaganda can be.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

George Soros funds 30 foundations on journalism to influence elite media

Posted by iusbvision on June 21, 2011

 

By Dan Gainor:

George Soros

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

This information is part of an upcoming report by the Media Research Centers Business & Media Institute which has been looking into George Soros and his influence on the media.

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press.

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Partyextreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features:

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Press Banned from Vice President Biden’s Fund Raiser Gala’s

Posted by iusbvision on June 15, 2011

OK on one hand I am totally in favor of this because I do not have to watch them.

On the other hand they are a violation of the Obama Administration’s repeated promises of openness and transparency.

Real Clear Politics:

A little more than a week ago, Vice President Joe Biden traveled to fundraisers in two battleground-state cities, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati.

Neither stop included the White House press corps; requests by local media to cover the events were denied by the vice president’s press office. The Democratic National Committee arranged the events for the Obama Victory Fund.

A number of seasoned political reporters and former White House press-office staffers consider that lack of coverage a dangerous precedent.

“It would behoove the Obama administration to keep its promise of transparency even with fundraisers,” agrees Jeff Brauer, a political history professor at Keystone College. “The United States is a democracy, after all.”

Having press coverage of fundraising events that feature the president or vice president matters for at least two reasons, Brauer explains.

“One, large amounts of taxpayer dollars are being used for personal security at such events. As with all tax dollars, they should be spent with accountability.

“Two, it is important for the public to know what the president and vice president are saying to donors. Is it the same message they are saying to the electorate at large?”

Such knowledge helps citizens judge officeholders’ authenticity and integrity.

More

Days before Biden was sworn in as vice president in 2009, he promised to be more open than his predecessor, Dick Cheney.

Yet his official schedule more often than not lists meetings as “closed press” or shows no public events at all.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Regulatory Abuse | Leave a Comment »

Palin Bashers in the GOP Should Think Twice

Posted by iusbvision on June 9, 2011

By IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton

There is nothing wrong with expressing concerns about a candidate. We should ask tough questions and expect good answers.

It does not take long to notice that those in the GOP who “Palin bash” go out of the way to avoid discussing her record. They have been caught up in the elite media narrative and have not done their homework. To be frank, Republicans should not be so foolish to Palin bash for the sake of bashing as it can have serious consequences.

The first problems is obvious. If Republicans buy into baseless and mindless elite media spin they might as well just ask NBC to pick the nominee for them.

Related to that problem is that the elite media went all out to try and destroy a GOP nominee. They took every allegation from her political opponents and reported them as if they were facts and in most cases would not offer retractions when such stories were proved wrong. They accused her of faking a pregnancy, accused her of being a book banner, accused her of trying to deny sexual assault victims rape kits, accused her of ravaging programs to help teen mothers, and even accused her of being an accomplice to the murderous shooting by Jarred Loughner and continued that narrative even after it came out that he was a dedicated Bush hater who had gone schizophrenic. The aforementioned is just a sampling of the lies the elite media has willingly propagated. The idea of Republicans standing by and doing nothing about this doesn’t sit well with me.

You can be sure if a shooting incident happens closer to election time, the commercials and “rhetoric” from the nominee will be blamed for it by the Democrats and their friends in the elite media.

You can also be sure, it will not matter who the GOP nominee is, be it if Mitt Romney or Michelle Bachmann, the elite media will accuse him/her of some kind of sexual misconduct. The New York Times baselessly accused Senator McCain of having an affair with a 40 year old lobbyist the day after he secured the primary.

Recently I had a conversation with some Palin bashers and in every case not a one of them was familiar with her actual governing record.

Palin Bashing Republican #1:

No, we don’t like her because she doesn’t have the leadership qualities to be president.

You might enjoy how I handled this “objection”:

I Agree, everything Sarah has touched has been a disaster. Here are some examples:

She cut the state budget by 9.8% while maintaining state services. Heck, name me one GOP governor who didn’t accomplish the same and cut the budget by at least 13%.

She cut the governors personal expenses by 80% over the previous Republican governor, who cares if she had three young kids to cart around.

She implemented a plan to begin weaning the state off federal “earmarks” and cut the number of earmark requests three years in a row. No one cares about that, after all earmarks are only less than 1% of the federal budget.

Cut Alaska’s Medicaid backlog by 83%. There are no long wait lists or backlogs in Massachusetts… oh wait…

Sarah was terrible for the Alaska GOP machine. When she rooted out the corruption of bought off Republicans in state government and sent many bad actors packing lots of party people were even fined. That is no way to lead a machine /nods.

She was able to pass sweeping ethics reforms and reform a state contract bidding process that was rigged and controlled by cronies? Doesn’t Sarah understand that when WE own the machine those are OUR cronies? Sheesh!

Sarah is SO behind the times. She had the NERVE to develop a competitive process to construct a gas pipeline [which languished for decades and is the largest state financed infrastructure project in US History]. Doesn’t she understand that “green jobs” are in?

And everyone knows that nothing got done when she:

Chaired the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Chaired the National Governor’s Association (NGA) Natural Resources Committee.
Chaired the Alaska Conservation Commission.
Presided over the Alaska Conference of Mayors.

Of course her record as mayor is equally pale.

According to Wasilla City documents that are posted on their web server. The propagandists who are obviously her cronies rigged the paperwork to indicate that Sarah oversaw the economic growth of Wasilla by a factor of four as a leader in city government from 1992 to 2003. They have the nerve to claim that while Wasilla’s population increased by 80%, city services were grown at a level to meet the challenge while property and business taxes rates were dropped. They even claimed Wasilla’s tax revenue still increased by nearly 250%. How laughable. Everyone knows that when you lower the tax rate you get less revenue….

Rigged paperwork, crony government, constant under performance. That’s Sarah Palin!

As you would expect, this completely shut the GOP Palin basher #1 down. She had no response.

GOP Palin Basher #2:

Chuck- I think if Sarah Palin had stayed on as governor instead of becoming more of a “celebrity” she would have retained the support of conservative women. This is where I think she went wrong. And I don’t think that women hate her because of her looks (jealousy), most conservative women I know believe in being/staying attractive. You are right , she has an excellent record- just wish she stayed on that path.

Again I went back to the facts:

[Editor’s Note – A legal loophole in Alaska Law allows anyone to file a lawsuit or phony “ethics complaint”, each requires an investigation and a ruling – the Governor must pay their own legal bills to fight them. Democrats filed dozens of these bogus lawsuits. Sarah easily won each of them, but it was eating up the Governor’s staff’s time and had put her into half a million dollars in personal debt.]

Palin Basher 2, if Sarah has stayed in office would have been endless bad press as the left continued to file one frivolous lawsuit after another against her using that legal loophole . I find it interesting that those who blast her for “quitting” never have anything to say about why she did it, or have anything bad to say about how sleazy the Democrats were in their behavior. Forgive me for being skeptical when people are far more willing and eager to blast our nominee than Democrats who behaved horribly.

Also, if Sarah had not taken on ObamaCare on her nation wide tour, not taken the slings and arrows for other conservatives, and not gone after Obama constantly to drive up his negatives, the 2009 and 2010 elections win margins would not have been what they were for us, so again if Sarah had taken any other course, Democrats would have been the ones who benefited. Who needs Democrats when “Republicans” are writing their spin and talking points for them?

Said Palin basher had no response. What is there to say? These facts are irrefutable and I am confident they felt embarrassed after being shut down with such authority.

Still, in the same conversation, entered a rather clueless Palin Basher #3:

And now we are rewriting history! Paul Revere warned the BRITISH that the British were comming! For me Intelligence is one of the must have traits to be President.

Palin Basher #3 did not bother to look up the record or the news all over the internet that Palin was correct in her account.

My Response:

NPR’s historian said that Palin was absolutely right about that. So did Prof William Jacobson at Cornell Law School who posted the quote from Paul Revere himself about it. Palin is a voracious reader of the Founders and if you watch her interviews she quotes them at length from memory from time to time. It is all over the net how the Palin bashers are easting crow on that one. So why are we bashing a nominee when we are not doing the homework and getting it wrong? If our “best” are going to believe the elite media narrative and not do any homework we might as well just ask NBC to pick our next nominee.

Another GOP’er claiming to be wise who has not done a lick of homework and had no response. Republicans are not supposed to behave that way and will pay a price as long as they do.

Words of Wisdom

Here is a 25 minute interview with Sarah where Chris Wallace throws every policy question in the book at her, and she answers each one with the proper detail – www.therightscoop.com/full-interview-sarah-palin-on-fox-news-sunday/  so to say that she is unintelligent is not only wrong, but foolish for Republicans in the long run. On at least 70% of the issues all of the potential candidates agree so if Sarah is an idiot and our nominee agree on most issues, what does that say about our nominee? Do you think the left will not take advantage of that? Sarah may decide to run for Senate, what then? Make no mistake, since Sarah Palin is a GOP VP Nominee, smearing her is smearing the Republican Brand.

The simple truth is that Sarah Palin has posted detailed policy positions on almost very issue imaginable. Most of the others do not.

This early in the primary season, it is wide open. ANYTHING could happen and the political landscape can change radically in a single day. Never forget that.

Early in the primary season for Reagan he was in double digit negatives as well. We need to support all of our potential candidates. I will be supporting all of them (except Ron Paul as he goes places I simply cannot follow). Early in his campaign season Ross Perot had double digit positives.

Now is NOT the time to be violating the 11th Commandment. We should express concerns about our candidates, ask tough questions and expect good answers from all of them, but we should not trash them. Anyone who says that X can win and Y cant at this stage in the game is just off their rocker. At this stage before the last election people were like “What is an Obama?” or “Someone with a last name like Obama (Usama) could never get elected”. Well here we are.

Lastly, Sarah Palin keeps score and is very good at political payback as Mitt Romney, Ed Rollins, Chris Christie, and a pile of now former political players in Alaska have found out the hard way. As the Alaska Daily News points out, “The landscape is littered with the bodies of those who crossed Sarah”.

If Sarah Palin becomes our nominee she will control the RNC and perhaps the White House. All of those who smeared her will be on the outs for a long time.

So why has IUSB Vision always been so invested in Sarah Palin?

The simple truth is that we aren’t. The number one goal of this publication and blog, be it under Editor Chamberlain, Brigham, or Norton, has been to introduce people to points of view they will not commonly see on a college campus or in the elite media/Democrat media complex. We believe that the elite media is beyond incompetent and is in fact corrupt.

There is no better or more numerous example of this truth than the elite media coverage of Sarah Palin, which is more wrong than it is right, and in which journalistic ethics is completely abandoned more often. We take interest in correcting the record of the elite media, it is just that in the case of Sarah Palin, more correction is needed.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Craig Chamberlin, Jarrod Brigham, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Republican Brand, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »

The Washington Post and New York Times ask for volunteers to go through Sarah Palin’s emails.

Posted by iusbvision on June 9, 2011

The Washington Post and the NYT are asking for 100 volunteers to go through Palin’s emails. Funny, I don’t recall them asking for help to read the 2000+ page ObamaCare bill. If they had perhaps they may have found the three multi-billion dollars slush funds that were hidden in it.

When CBS refused to release the video of Obama calling certain federal workers “scrubs” where was the NYT and WashPo to protest?

Our friend Nick Anderson says, “Maybe they should be reading Cong. Weiner’s email. I bet they would find more crimes in there.”

Related:

Republicans Find Multi-Billion Dollar Slush Funds Hidden in ObamaCare Bill – UPDATE: PolitiFact, FactCheck, WashPo Fact Checker, Heritage say Bachmann is Right

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »

Palin bashers on “Paul Revere” eat crow. Paul Revere’s own words verify Palin correct.

Posted by iusbvision on June 8, 2011

Sarah is clearly exhausted in this video. She is on a tour talking to people non stop day after day and living on a bus with never enough sleep and reporters dogging her every move. If I follow you around 24/7 on such a tour and tape everything how many moments of non perfect articulation am I likely to get on tape? Even so, Sarah gets this piece of history correct.

Prof. William A. Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell gets the truth from Paul Revere’s own words.

Letter from Paul Revere to Jeremy Belknap, circa 1798:

I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back, and ordered me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the affirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and added, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He immediately rode towards those who stopped us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then ordered me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms.

Says Prof. Jacobson:

“Palin’s short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming — that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting — appears to be true.”

 

UPDATE:

[Editor’s Note – I listened to a clip from NPR. The NPR reporter was all geared up to have their official goto historian on to blast Governor Palin. You could hear the excitement in the reporter’s voice, it was unmistakable. It was also unmistakable how deflated said NPR reporter became when their history professor said that Sarah’s remarks were correct. I must confess to taking a certain pleasure at said reporter’s expense.

I found the clip – http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011636/how-accurate-were-palins-comments-on-paul-revere ]

There were actually signal shots involved in his exploits. See “Paul Revere’s Ride” by David Hackett Fischer. Hint: There were multiple rides. As far as sounding the bell, she obviously means “alarm bells” as a figure of speech. ]

This film recreation of Paul Revere’s Ride also had his run in, and warning to the British.

The Ride – Paul Revere short educational film piece

Patterico has a list of most of the leftist bloggers and elite “media reporters” who just could not bring themselves to do a few minutes worth of homework.

ABC News is at it again. They post no retraction or any mention of the historians who said that Sarah was correct. I noticed that several of the comments of people who tried correcting ABC were vanishing. So I posted a comment telling them about the letter mentioned above and asked them for a correction. Soon after my comment was deleted.

The hit piece from ABC was written by Sheila Marikar and when one examines her twitter page it seems obvious that she views the Governor with a degree of contempt. So naturally ABC made her their official Palin correspondent for the 2012 election http://abcn.ws/mrWLIa .

This is no different than Sarah Palin’s “Party like it’s 1773” comment. The elite media and the leftist bloggers went nuts calling her names “Doesn’t she know that the Boston Tea Party was in 1776” … oh really… Boston Tea Party.

[Editor’s Note – So lets take a walk through ABC’s Hit Piece Memory Lane. 

ABC News has had the most unethical Sarah Palin coverage I have seen. 

In the infamous interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson, ABC cut out many of the substantive parts of her answers to foreign policy questions. Gibson misquoted Palin when he scolded her for saying that Iraq was a “mission from God”. Palin never said it in that context as the full quote was selectively edited. Palin’s answer about the “Bush Doctrine” was also correct; as there are six “Bush Doctrines” with Sarah naming one and Gibson naming one.

When ABC’s Barbara Walters asked Sarah Palin the infamous question again “what do you read” they edited out the books she mentioned about law, philosophy and history such as Liberty & Tyranny by famed attorney and legal scholar Mark Levin.

ABC Calling Sarah Palin “Barbie” – LINK

ABC saying that “Limbaugh has a history of making racially offensive comments” – but offered no proof  – LINK

ABC  – If you oppose Obama on policy, your racist – LINK

ABC does an infomercial for ObamaCare yet refuses health care ads from Republicans – LINK (2)

ABC questions asked to Republicans vs Democrats – LINK and I could go ON and ON.

Related:

See “Attitude Change Propaganda” at Work Courtesy ABC News. UPDATED!

ABC News Managing Editor: I didnt even know about the ACORN story.

In The Tank: NBC & ABC Refuse Health Law Ads from Conservative Groups. – UPDATE: ABC Medical Correspondent is Obama $$$ Donor!

VP Biden’s daughter on film with cocaine. ABC, CBS, and NBC offer no coverage. When “Biden” and “Cocaine” are searched on the NBC site it gives you a picture of Bristol Palin….

ABC’s Jake Tapper Not Giving the Full Story on Alaska Earmarks

Newsbusters Slams ABC and Gibson for Editing Out Key Portions of Palin’s Statements (that made her look good).

Hey Gibson! About that Bush Doctrine: There are SIX of them. Palin was right again.

ABC News Get’s It Wrong In Palin Interview

More Media B.S. – ABC News Broadcasts Bogus Palin Hit Piece Before McCain Speech

]

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | Leave a Comment »

Do Not Make This Mistake Journalism Students: Washington Post Columnist Insults Intelligence of Readers

Posted by iusbvision on June 7, 2011

Different newspapers can get away with different things depending on where they are and who their audience is.

When you are in Washington D.C. some of the smartest people in the world are going to read your column. It is important to not say things that are so flamboyantly incorrect that many thousands of readers will wince.  It is no different when I was a radio host on AM 1580. I know that Notre Dame Law School is right here. Some of the finest law professors in the world, such as Charlie Rice, are likely in my audience. So I had to be sure that when I spoke on the law that I had it as correct as possible. Here in South Bend there is likely someone in the audience who is a better expert on any given subject than the host, but in Washington D.C. if you try to pull one over on the audience in the fields of basic political history or basic communications strategy the result is ridicule and laughter by a great many.

I know it seems like we have been picking on The Washington Post lately, but only because they have made themselves an easy target.

The Washington Post Columnist Richard Cohen engages in spin for the president. In Washington almost everyone spins some and that is to be expected. The trick is to not get laughed at when you go too far.

Quote:

The insane policy would be to ignore the signal lesson of the Great Depression — when Franklin Roosevelt, listening to the John Boehners of his day, cut spending to reduce the deficit. The Depression deepened.

Amazing, this is exactly the opposite of historical reality. Cohen apparently never heard of the “New Deal” where government spending went off the charts. Government spending, over regulation, and redistribution don’t work well and even FDR’s own Treasury Secretary finally said so. Non farm unemployment never dropped below 20% during the “New Deal”. The United States did not enjoy full employment in a non-war economy until 1947 when government spending dropped by two third’s.

Henry Morganthau, Roosevelt’s Treasury Secretary from 1934-1945 , wrote in a letter to Congressional Democrats  May 1939:

“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … And an enormous debt to boot!”*

* Burton Folsom, Jr., New Deal or Raw Deal? (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008), p. 2.

Quote:

As with the business community, Obama’s assurances to the pro-Israel community mean little. His precise words are discounted. As with the business community, rumor or anecdote trumps pronouncements …

Ah yes, the old “precise words” defense. This is the oldest political trick in the book. Always include a word or a phrase that acts as an escape hatch so that, if needed, said politician can flip to the other side of the political issue in case backtracking becomes a political necessity. [Editor’s Note: always look for the escape hatch phrase in any political speech]

In the case of Obama’s controversial recent Israeli policy speech the escape hatch phrase was “1967 borders with mutually agreed swaps”. That sounds so good doesn’t it? Tell me, how can Israel give up any land West of the large valley between Israel and Jordan, or the Golan Heights etc ? [Note: If you are not aware of the details of the critical geography mentioned see the video HERE]  To do so would leave Israel with borders that are structurally indefensible. It has only been by the bravery of the Israeli people and the overwhelming technical superiority of American military hardware that has prevented a second holocaust.

With the escape hatch phrase Obama can say “I wanted borders based on the 1967 lines” which had resulted in an invasion, while at the same time saying “I said that we cannot just go back to the 1967 borders”. There are few politicians who speak that do not include these escape hatch phrases.

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu made use of Obama’s escape hatch phrase and wiped his feet on it saying “President Obama says that we cannot go back to the 1967 borders”. Of course the Prime Minister knows full well this was not Obama’s intent, but graciously gave him an out.

Gov. Christie of New Jersey does not use escape hatch language and even made a speech against the use of it:

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Journalism Is Dead, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Gerald Celente: American Journalism is a Disgrace

Posted by iusbvision on May 27, 2011

Now before you watch this video there are a few caveats.

Gerald Celente is a smart guy and he leads the Trends Research Institute. They look at history and at patters and extrapolate predictions based on trends and their track record has been pretty decent. They are not the end all be all but they are far from stupid.

The network he is on is RT – AKA Russia Today. Russia Today does some pretty good journalism compared to the American Elite Media (which isn’t saying much). RT’s agenda is to make America look bad in front of a Russian and international audience so they often bring on people who have some kind of critique. Anyone who goes on that network needs to keep this in mind. RT is not huge in the states but it is very big around the world and on the internet.

I am presenting this video because Celente makes some good points; especially about why the American Elite Media has not covered the details of what is in the Wiki-leaks memo’s worth a darn.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

The Atlantic Monthly: On Second Thought, Sarah Palin was a Great Governor

Posted by iusbvision on May 11, 2011

Every once in a while, the elite media (Democrat Media Complex) remembers that they are journalists and when they think they can get away with it they tell the truth or at least get much closer to it. Of course they had to destroy Sarah Palin first with all of their lies, editing chop jobs and other malfeasance, but at least now they can say “hey we reported what a good job she did”.

[Editor’s Note – Here is something else you might not know. In the infamous interview Palin had with Katie Couric over those couple of days, Katie would ask Sarah the same questions over and over again. This frustrated Palin and some of her answers became flippant as she was just getting sick of Couric’s badgering. The flippant answers are what NBC put on TV. 

This is while Steve Schmidt, (who was hostile to Palin from the beginning because he despises religious conservatives and made that clear in his own writings)  who ran the incompetent McCain communications machine, kept her off talk radio where she had a lot of experience, and wanted Sarah to behave in a way Schmidt wanted, Sarah just could not be herself.

In the infamous interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson, ABC cut out many of the substantive parts of her answers to foreign policy questions. Gibson misquoted Palin when he scolded her for saying that Iraq was a “mission from God”. Palin never said it in that context as the full quote was selectively edited. Palin’s answer about the “Bush Doctrine” was also correct; as there are six “Bush Doctrines” with Sarah naming one and Gibson naming one.

When ABC’s Barbara Walters asked Sarah Palin the infamous question again “what do you read” they edited out the books she mentioned about law, philosophy and history such as Liberty & Tyranny by famed attorney and legal scholar Mark Levin.]

This Atlantic  article isn’t perfect, but from a leftist outfit that often just publishes smears and hate that can be debunked in mere moments, it is quite good where it is just explaining the facts and not editorializing for the left.

Sarah Palin did not just “raise taxes” as MSNBC tried to spin this piece, Sarah Palin pushed through an entirely new royalty structure for the oil companies buying oil from the people of Alaska. The old royalty system was not just a good deal for the oil companies, it resulted in a royalty so low that the people of Alaska were being ripped off (details HERE). The Murkowski machine was corrupt and on the take, they were also corrupt in the contract bidding process which Palin also fixed.

As far as I know, this is the first elite media publication to tell the truth that Dick Morris told us way back in mid 2008 (and what we have told you in dozens of articles ever since):

So why do so many of the American people not know this Sarah Palin? Why did the elite media, who knew all of this, not bother to tell you?

Atlantic:

As governor, Palin demonstrated many of the qualities we expect in our best leaders. She set aside private concerns for the greater good, forgoing a focus on social issues to confront the great problem plaguing Alaska, its corrupt oil-and-gas politics. She did this in a way that seems wildly out of character today—by cooperating with Democrats and moderate Republicans to raise taxes on Big Business. And she succeeded to a remarkable extent in settling, at least for a time, what had seemed insoluble problems, in the process putting Alaska on a trajectory to financial well-being. Since 2008, Sarah Palin has influenced her party, and the tenor of its politics, perhaps more than any other Republican, but in a way that is almost the antithesis of what she did in Alaska. Had she stayed true to her record, she might have pointed her party in a very different direction.

Inside the Alaska capitol hangs a framed copy of the front page of the Anchorage Daily News for September 11, 1969, its headline—“Alaska’s Richest Day: $900 Million!”—stretching above a picture of purposeful-looking men in suits carrying large briefcases and about to duck into a car. The briefcases contain a fortune that is being rushed to the airport and on to a bank in San Francisco, so Alaskans will not forgo a single day’s interest. This is the proceeds of the state’s first oil-lease auction since the discovery, a year earlier, of the massive oil deposit at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope, to this day the largest in North America. The headline captures the euphoria over the massive payout by the world’s leading oil companies—a windfall that transformed the state’s politics, economy, and self-image almost overnight.

Throughout most of its history as a territory and, after 1959, as a state, Alaska was a tenuous proposition, a barren outpost rich in resources yet congenitally poor because the outside interests that extracted them didn’t leave much behind. The main obstacle to statehood was convincing Congress that Alaska wouldn’t immediately go bust. It still relies heavily on aid from Washington, and that, combined with the federal government’s holding title to 60 percent of its land base (the state itself holds 28 percent more), generates a robust resentment of federal power. The colonial mind-set is reinforced by the intensity of the state’s politics, a common attribute of remote settlements like Alaska, as the historian Ken Coates has noted—think Lord of the Flies.

To suddenly strike it rich opens up all sorts of possibilities, but there can be problems too. The legislature exhausted its fortune without meeting Alaskans’ outsize expectations. And although oil brought jobs and revenue, it also ensured that a state long accustomed to economic subservience would be beholden to a powerful new interest. Oil is more important to Alaska than the movie business is to Los Angeles or the auto industry is to Michigan. Stephen Haycox, a professor at the University of Alaska at Anchorage, writes in Frigid Embrace, his history of the state’s political economy, “The oil industry is, for all practical purposes, Alaska’s only private economy.”

This binds the state’s fortunes not just to the price of oil but also to the fate of the three giants that dominate Alaska: BP, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips. Oil taxes supply almost 90 percent of the general revenue, so oil is the central arena of state politics. The industry is forever trying to coax lower taxes, lighter regulation, and greater public investment by promising jobs and riches—or, on occasion, threatening to withdraw them.

In 1978, the Democratic legislature tried to secure the state’s share of oil profits by establishing a corporate income tax over the bitter opposition of the oil companies, which sued to overturn it. They lost in every venue, including, finally, the U.S. Supreme Court. But the real battle was fought in the statehouse.

The oil industry contributed mainly to Republicans through the 1960s and ’70s, but came to realize that it needed broader alliances, and in the late ’70s began courting Democrats too. The strategy paid off. In 1981, the oil companies, through their allies in the legislature, launched a coup, ousting the speaker of the house and key committee chairmen. Then they revoked the corporate income tax. For the next 25 years, oil interests ruled the state almost uninterruptedly.

Palin’s rise began in 2002, when, term-limited as mayor of Wasilla, she ran for lieutenant governor. Little known and heavily outspent, she beat expectations, losing only narrowly and showing an exceptional ability to win fervent support. Afterward, she campaigned for Frank Murkowski, the four-term Alaska senator come home to run for governor. Palin traveled the state speaking about Murkowski, and making herself better known. When he won, she was short-listed to serve the remainder of his Senate term, and even interviewed for the job. But it went to his daughter Lisa instead. (Palin acidly recounts the patronizing interview with the new governor in her memoir, Going Rogue.) Palin got the low-profile chairmanship of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, a regulatory body charged with ensuring that these resources are developed in the public interest.

By the time she arrived, the notion that Alaska’s oil-and-gas policy operated in the public interest was getting hard to maintain. The industry controlled the state, and especially the Republican Party. Other than a modest adjustment to oil taxes that squeezed through in 1989 after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the hammerlock held. Alaskans were coming to regard this situation with suspicion and anxiety. The problem wasn’t just that the state was starved of revenue from its most valuable resource. It was also the failure to develop another resource to which the oil companies held title: Alaska’s bountiful supply of natural gas. It’s always been understood that North Slope oil would one day run dry. Someday, perhaps as soon as 2019, there won’t be enough oil left to push through the trans-Alaska pipeline—a catastrophe, unless the state somehow replaces the revenue. For this reason, building a gas pipeline has long been a political priority, and one the oil companies have balked at.

From her spot on the oil-and-gas commission, Palin touched off a storm over these anxieties. One glaring example of the unhealthy commingling of oil interests and Republican politics was her fellow commissioner and Murkowski appointee, Randy Ruedrich, who was also chairman of the state Republican Party. Less than a year into the job, Ruedrich got crosswise with Palin for conducting party business from his office (and, it was later revealed, giving information to a company that the commission oversaw). When he ignored her admonitions to stop, she complained to Murkowski’s staff, but still nothing happened. So Palin laid out her concerns in a letter to the governor and the story leaked to the media. In the ensuing uproar, Palin became a hero and Murkowski was left no choice but to fire Ruedrich from the commission.

Palin got strong support from an unlikely quarter: Democrats. “She had the appearance of someone who was willing to go in a different direction,” Hollis French, a Democratic state senator, told me. “We subsequently learned that she’ll throw anyone under a bus, but that wasn’t apparent at the time. It looked like real moral courage.”

Even so, Palin’s actions were presumed to have ruined her prospects. Murkowski and Ruedrich still ran the party. Breaking with them made her no longer viable as an ordinary Republican or a recipient of oil-company largesse. To continue her rise, she needed to find another path. Palin alone imagined that she could. In this and other ways, she displayed all the traits that would become famous: the intense personalization of politics, the hyper-aggressive score-settling—and the dramatic public gesture, which came next.

Palin was clearly the victor (Ruedrich paid the largest civil fine in state history), but she quit the commission anyway. In Going Rogue, she says only that as a commissioner, she was subject to a gag order that Murkowski refused to lift. But quitting didn’t void the gag order. What it did was thrust her back into the spotlight and reinforce her public image. It also gave her a rationale to challenge Murkowski.

All of this turned out to be shrewd politics, because Murkowski’s governorship proceeded to fall apart, thanks to his brazen sense of entitlement. After failing to persuade the Homeland Security Department to buy him a personal jet (to help “defend, deter or defeat opposition forces”), he ignored the legislature’s objections and bought one with state funds. But it was his handling of matters vital to the state’s future that finally threw open the door for Palin.

Murkowski made up his mind to strike a deal with the major oil producers to finally build a gas pipeline from the North Slope. He cut out the legislature and insisted on negotiating through his own team of experts, out of public sight. This rankled all sorts of people because, beyond his arrogance, Murkowski had distinct views about oil and gas that many others didn’t share.

Alaska’s parties align differently from parties elsewhere—they’re further to the right and principally concerned with resource extraction. The major philosophical divide, especially on oil and gas, is between those who view the state as beholden to the oil companies for its livelihood, and will grant them almost anything to ensure that livelihood, and those who view its position as being like the owner of a public corporation for whom the oil companies’ interests are separate from and subordinate to those of its citizen-shareholders. “Oil and gas cuts a swath right through ordinary partisan politics,” Patrick Galvin, Palin’s revenue commissioner, told me.

Murkowski’s willingness to cater to the oil producers, and his secrecy, caused tensions in his administration that burst into view when he announced his deal, in October 2005. It was a breathtaking giveaway that ceded control of the pipeline to the oil companies and retained only a small stake for Alaskans; established a 30-year regime of low taxes impossible to revoke; indemnified companies against any damages from accidents; and exempted everything from open-records laws. In exchange, the state got an increase in the oil-production tax. (Palin later released a private memo in which Murkowski’s top economic adviser complains that he has “gone completely overboard” and is treating “Alaska as a banana republic in order to secure the gas line.”) The deal conceded so much that Murkowski’s natural-resources commissioner, Tom Irwin, publicly questioned its legality—and was summarily fired. Six of Irwin’s aides quit in protest, and the “Magnificent Seven” became a cause célèbre. In the end, the legislature rejected the gas-line deal. But, in a twist, it agreed to the oil tax—which had been intended as an inducement to pass the rest of the package.

Palin came out hard on the other side of the philosophical divide from Murkowski—and made it personal. She announced she would challenge him for governor. She assailed the “secret gas line deal” and the “multinational oil companies that make mind-boggling profits off resources owned by all Alaskans.” She put an “all-Alaska” pipeline at the center of her campaign. And she declared her intention to hire Tom Irwin to negotiate the deal. “She’s what I call ‘alley-cat smart,’” Tony Knowles, the former Democratic governor, told me. “It’s not about ideology. She knows how to pick her way down the political route that she feels will be the most beneficial to what she wants to do.”

Murkowski’s tax was discredited almost immediately. Just after he signed the new Petroleum Profits Tax, the FBI raided the offices of six legislators, in what became the biggest corruption scandal in state history. During the legislative session, the FBI had hidden a video camera at the Baranof Hotel, in Juneau, in a suite that belonged to Bill Allen, a major power broker and the chief executive of Veco Corporation, an oil-services firm. The tapes showed him discussing bribes with important politicians, and revealed the existence of a group of Republican legislators who called themselves the “Corrupt Bastards Club” and took bribes from Allen and others. (Several were later sent to prison.)

In the Republican primary, Palin crushed Murkowski, delivering one of the worst defeats ever suffered by an incumbent governor anywhere. She went on to have little trouble dispatching Knowles, an oil-friendly Democrat. “A lot of people on the East Coast, when they think of Sarah Palin now,” Cliff Groh, a former state tax lobbyist, told me, “some five-letter words come to mind: Scary. Crazy. Angry. Maybe some others. But the five-letter word that people in Alaska associated with her name was clean.”

You betcha.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad | 2 Comments »

Meet the Favorite Candidate of that “Racist” TEA Party

Posted by iusbvision on May 11, 2011

Herman Cain

At the beginning of the first GOP Presidential Primary Debate only one person in the Frank Luntz focus group knew who this man was, by the end he had won the debate handily.

Herman Cain has been TEA Party favorite since 2009 and this author has followed his career since 1994. Cain has been speaking a TEA Party and GOP events for a long time and this debate was his national television debut. Cain is also a former Indiana resident.

www.hermancain.com

  • A native and current resident of Atlanta, Georgia. Married for over 40 years with two adult children and three grandchildren
  • Author of four books, Leadership Is Common Sense (1997), Speak As A Leader (1999), CEO of SELF (October, 2001), and They Think You’re Stupid (May, 2005)
  • Graduated from Morehouse College with a B.S. in Mathematics in 1967. Earned his Master’s Degree in Computer Science from Purdue University in 1971
  • Recipient of eight Honorary Doctorate Degrees from Morehouse College, New York City Technical College; Suffolk University, Johnson & Wales University, Creighton University, Purdue University, Tougaloo College and the University of Nebraska
  • Serves on the Boards of Directors of AGCO, Inc., Georgia Chamber of Commerce, Hallmark Cards Inc., Whirlpool, Inc., and Morehouse College, Atlanta, Georgia
  • Member of The National Commission on Economic Growth and Tax Reform (1995), chaired by former Republican Vice-presidential candidate, Jack Kemp
  • Former Chairman and President of the Tax Leadership Council, the public educational component of Americans for Fair Taxation
  • Former Chairman of Godfather’s Pizza, Inc. after serving as CEO and President for ten years, 1986 – 1996. In 1988 he bought the company from The Pillsbury Company
  • Past Chairman of the Board of the National Restaurant Association (1994-1995), and former full time CEO and President of the Association (1996-1999)
  • Recipient of a 1996 Horatio Alger Award and the 1991 International Foodservice Manufacturers Association’s Operator of the Year/Gold Plate Award
  • Chief Executive Officer and President of THE New Voice, Inc., a business consulting company, and Head Coach of HITM
  • Past Chairman and Member of the Board of Directors for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City
  • At a nationally televised Presidential Town Hall Meeting on Health Care Reform (1994), challenged President Bill Clinton’s health care proposal when he said, “Mr. President, with all due respect, your calculations are incorrect…”
  • Radio Talk Show Host, “The Herman Cain Show”, News Talk 750 WSB – Atlanta, Monday – Friday, 7pm-10pm EST

Herman Cain is incredible in a debate. The Democrats (and their media complex) already know that they do not want to have Obama on the same stage with this man. They will try to ignore him, but when they can ignore him no longer they will attack and smear him. Expect it.

Herman Cain: Stay Informed, Stay Involved, Stay Inspired

Sen. Rick Santorum also gave a very impressive showing at the debate. Here is an interview with Judge Napolitano:

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Hollywood Screenwriter Andrew Klavan Blasts NPR for Vile Propaganda and Antisemitism

Posted by iusbvision on March 24, 2011

NPR was caught on tape willing to help launder $5 million in illegal money from the Muslim Brotherhood in a sting.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Israel, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Elite Media and Democrats Using Japan Crisis and Lies to Advocate More Deficit Spending

Posted by iusbvision on March 22, 2011

The Media Research Center exposes the lies.

 

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Lies | Leave a Comment »

MSNBC A Welcome Relief from Reality

Posted by iusbvision on March 19, 2011

Bob Schneider served on Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council. He is a recognized expert on Middle-Eastern policy and a respected consultant on international business, foreign affairs and politics. Schneider is also a humorist whose writings are popular among the politically savvy.

By Bob Schneider

Tired of watching all the bad news on TV these days?  Millions are turning to MSNBC in what psychologists call “a harbor away from reality”.

Fred Stimple, from Old Forge, NY, a school teacher reported he was really getting depressed with all the bad news about the economy, wars, unrest in the world, but found a safe haven at MSNBC.  “I was sitting there in front of the TV, sort of like a zombie, channel surfing when all of a sudden I hit MSNBC.  There was a sorta manly looking woman, Rachel something…like ‘Mad Cow’ or a name similiar, with all this brainless made up stuff she was babbling.  I just sat there transfixed, thinking about how funny it was she thought anyone would take her seriously.  It was a nice break, sort of like a lobotomy.”

Stimple has become a regular, and says he appreciates MSNBC running the show many times a night, so he can catch up on absolutely nothing that’s going on in the world.  “I even found a major new comedian, someone named Barney Frank, on MSNBC.  He’s hilarious!”

The phenomena seems to be spreading, and not just to MSNBC; CNN is also benefiting offering absolutly nothing in the way of information.   Tracy Adams, a pole dancer from Houston Texas tunes in CNN often.  “I was trying to find something on cable that wasn’t news, and I found this programs with a guy named Wolf Blitzer, who’s obviously ADD.  Since I’m also studying psychology during the day, it’s thoughtful of CNN to help me with my homework by putting a textbook case of ADD, and who knows what other abnormal behaviors, right on cable TV for me, daily.  I like it when he gets himself all worked up, then they have a break, and he’s all calm again.  I wonder if on the break he twists up a big fat doobie?”

Mr Stimple says he has to be circumspect when watching MSNBC: “I do have kids around the house, and you wouldn’t want someone under the age of 12 watching MSNBC, due to possible impairment of their mental development.  But for an adult with a firm grasp on reality, while less intellectually stimulating than the Cartoon Network, at least it is in color, unlike old Three Stooges episodes.”

More as this develops.

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Chuck DeVore advises Israel on how to use social media to fight the Hamas propaganda offensive.

Posted by iusbvision on March 19, 2011

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Israel, Journalism Is Dead, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Huffington Post Blasts Elite Media: Ignoring Death Threats to Wisconsin Politicians Is Media Bias

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2011

Well I never thought I would see the day.

Of course most of the nutty commenters are siding with the people making the death threats and condemning the author for just telling the truth, that conservative bloggers got the story right. There have been dozens of death threats in recent weeks, and violence (LINK1, LINK2) and the elite media ignores it all. Of course Fox is the only one with the guts to report it.

Wisconsin Democrat Gordon Hintz to Female Republican Michelle Litjens After Budget Vote: “You Are F*cking Dead!

HuffPo:

Three questions for you.

  1. Do you think of Republicans and the Tea Party as dangerous, violent extremists?
  2. Do you think the Wisconsin protests over GOP Governor Scott Walker’s move to strip public sector employees of collective bargaining were peaceful?
  3. Do you scoff at the right wing notion that mainstream media like the New York Times, the TV networks and NPR have a liberal media bias against the conservatives?

If you answered ‘yes’ to all three of those questions, then let me ask you one more…

Why isn’t the mainstream media talking about the death threats against Republican politicians in Wisconsin?

Try to set aside whatever biases or preconceptions you might have for a moment and ask yourself why death threats against politicians aren’t considered national news, especially in the wake of the all too fresh shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and other bystanders. And there hasn’t just been one death threat, but a number of them.

Here’s an example and it’s real…..

 

So of course the post went viral. I have been watching it on and off for hours the moderates came in and cleaned up the comments … LOL

 

Jim Treacher asks: What’s with all the death threats libs?

Somebody just sent James O’Keefe this lovely message on Twitter. [WARNING: Rude, moronic, violent language]

I’m going to assume this guy’s name is Mike Clark, and his Twitter bio says he’s in Memphis, TN. Sending somebody a death threat is dumb to begin with, but doing so via a Twitter account with your name and location on it? That takes a special brand of stupid.

Ann Althouse just received a direct threat to her person as well. Like O’Keefe, Althouse has raised the ire of the left by videotaping them in action. Tell the truth and they call it lies. Make your point nonviolently and they threaten you. It’s like clockwork.

And it doesn’t stop there. John Nolte at Big Government has put together a compilation of the last three weeks of left-wing threats and bullying in Wisconsin. It’s getting so bad that honest liberals (no, it’s not an oxymoron) like Lee Stranahan are fed up with the media ignoring these threats. “Don’t retreat, reload” is considered violent rhetoric if a conservative says it, but “I’m going to kill you” isn’t considered violent rhetoric if a liberal says it. I keep trying not to attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence, but are all these big-brained reporters really that inept?

By the way, if you want to bug me about this supposed “debunking” of O’Keefe’s video that I’m supposed to care about, read thisthisthis, and this. And then, if you still want to whine about how a “discredited” guy like James O’Keefe keeps making fools of you, go bug NPR. If you can convince them it’s all just a lie, maybe those poor NPR execs will get their jobs back.

Good luck.

P.S. And this.

P.P.S. James Taranto: ‘Civility’ Was Always Dead.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Violence | Leave a Comment »

More Attitude Change Propaganda from the NYT Against Palin

Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2011

NYT:

Palin’s Successors (Republicans Too) Seek to Dismantle Her Energy Legacy

JUNEAU, Alaska — While every online swipe from former Gov. Sarah Palin still draws national attention and stirs fresh speculation about her political ambitions, back home she is no longer quite so imposing.

Even as she casts herself as an energy expert and is quick to attack the Obama administration on oil and gas issues, the two most prominent energy policies she put in place as governor of Alaska face new challenges less than two years after she left office.

Gov. Sean Parnell, Ms. Palin’s fellow Republican and former lieutenant, has announced that it is his top priority to undo parts of major oil tax increases that Ms. Palin made law. He argues that high state taxes, not just federal regulations, are preventing oil companies from exploring new drilling in Alaska and therefore jeopardizing future state revenues.

“Lower taxes means more competitive,” Mr. Parnell said last week. “It means more jobs.”

Sounds pretty bad doesn’t it? It is intended to. As the article goes on it does not indicate just what Changes Gov Parnell wishes to make. So how do you really know her “legacy” is at stake? The narrative that the NYT wishes you to believe is that even the Republicans thought she was misguided and had no idea what she was doing.

Are you ready for the truth? This is wht the NYT decided you didn’t need to know.

Before Gov. Palin blew the whistle about the bribes to keep the Alaska Oil Royalties down Alaska had nearly the lowest oil royalties in the world. You can examine a chart at the following link – http://www.iraqdividend.com/World_Oil_Tax_Policies.pdf

When she ran for Governor Mrs. Palin promised to make the royalties competitive so that the Alaska citizens were not getting ripped off. In fact, Governor Palin sent much of that money to Alaska residents in the form of checks directly to citizens. On top of that Alaska now has a $12 billion rainy day fund (that Democrats are itching to blow).

So what was Governor Palin’s plan? Here are some highlights of bill:

1 – 20% production tax credits for oil and gas investment in Alaska

2 – 22.5% tax rate on “net” positive cash flow or “Production Tax Value”

3 – Progressivity: A higher tax rate (.25) kicks in when oil sells for more than $55 per barrel.

4 – Requires a report in 2011 about how well all the incentive provisions are working to enhance exploration, development and production in the state.

The taxes the oil companies had to pay on the value of the oil increased by 22% which still puts Alaska at a below average tax rate for oil drilling. This is still a good deal for oil companies, but not one that leaves Alaskan’s short changed.

So what is the problem? As the Alaska Daily News reports, the progressive increases in the tax rate per barrel of oil get pretty high when you see oil going to $120 or $130 mark. ADN points out that most legislators did not foresee such prices as being likely. When the price of a barrel of oil gets rather extreme as it is today that tax goes up too high thus making it more profitable to pull oil resources out of Alaska and place them elsewhere.

Here is an even bigger rub, Governor Palin’s bill accounted for this and as you can see section 4 above demands a report in 2011 to see how the bill’s rates and incentives are working to prevent decreases in oil production and potential job loss. Thanks to OPEC and Obama’s illegal off shore drilling ban this is exactly what we are facing. This mandated report, as well as others, show that production and investment in Alaska has fallen since the 2009 oil price spike and is now getting worse.

As a result Gov. Parnell wishes to adjust the progressive part of the oil tax downward to attract more production and job expansion. Governor Palin would have done exactly what Governor Parnell is doing now. Parnell is not reversing Palin’s legacy, he is reaffirming it.

Posted in 2012 Primary, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Journalism Is Dead, Palin Truth Squad, True Talking Points | 2 Comments »

Robert Spencer takes down an elite media journalist who is “playing the game”

Posted by iusbvision on March 17, 2011

If you are an elite media journalist, this is what will happen to you if you pull the David Gregory style of bogus accusations in the form of a question trick.

Robert Spencer is a remarkably clear thinking man. I have met Mr. Spencer and chatted with him for about five minutes at CPAC. He could not have been more gracious and kind. Do not confuse his willingness to stake out where he stands with boldness as being unkind or nasty.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Israel, Journalism Is Dead, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Fear the Media Meltdown, Not the Nuclear One. How a Nuclear Reactor Works, Why This is No Chernobyl, Elite Media Using Nutty “No Nukes” Activists as “Experts” Without Disclosure, Activist Obama NRC Head Making Reckless Comments – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2011

UPDATE March 31 – It appears that the earthquake, which was one of the strongest in recorded in history, did place a small  crack the containment bottle in one of the reactors which has resulted in water leaking from it. A cement pump is being moved on the site to bury that reactor. If  the containment bottle leaks water and they cannot perfectly contain the water leaking out I am unaware of another choice.

Remember that in general journalists are not very well-educated. What they say about things like science, economics or other complicated issues is usually suspect at best. They also like to hype and create a stir for ratings. The truth is often tertiary if considered at all. Many of the “experts” they are putting on the air are nutty “no-nukes” activists. Do an internet search on every talking head you see.

I was ready to come home and write something similar to the article linked below and I have had to explain to about a dozen friends today why this is no Chernobyl and how most of the radioactive exposure has been so small that it is not near enough to get you sick. There was one burst of radiation for a few moments in one place near the reactor that was almost enough to get you sick with some prolonged exposure to that spot, but when the detectors discovered it the people were evacuated.

Our nuclear reactors, along with the Japanese reactors are a completely superior design in every way compared to Chernobyl. In fact if the troubled Japanese reactors had back up coolant generators/batteries on high ground so the tsunami couldn’t get to it there would have never even been a hitch with the exception of some sea water contamination of the coolant which is minor.

Go to the following link right HERE and get educated.

Why take my word for anything? I graduated at the top of my class at the Advanced Airborne Armament Systems School in the Air Force and that includes training in nuclear weapons and protocols. I am quite familiar with first, third and 4th generation (PBR) reactors through self study.

UPDATE I – I am watching the big networks and the NYT’s coverage and it is just irresponsible.

This story from the NYT –

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16contain.html?_r=2

Tells how plant designers had safety concerns since 1972 that could result in disaster, then they tell you all of the horrible things that can happen. Oh so scary… Then many paragraphs down at the bottom they tell you that all of these plants were retrofitted with new devices to address those concerns years ago.  ABC has an online article that pulled the same stunt and they did a video piece that left the retrofitting information out.

The elite media knows that most people rarely read beyond the fifth or sixth paragraph.

UPDATE II – Fox News gets the story right – LINK and watch the video.

The “explosions” were merely hydrogen getting released and/or the steam pressure being released. That explosion blew off the outer building over the three stage containment vassal. Looks bad on TV, but predictable under the circumstances. I would be quite surprised if the reactor melted through the first stage of the containment bottle and will eat my hat if it got passed the second, which is incredibly unlikely. There is still a third stage as explained in the article that will keep the worst of it bottled up quite well.

UPDATE III – ABC News and much of the other elite media are being completely irresponsible as of Wednesday. They are getting the numbers all wrong and ABC News has updates with radically different numbers.

For Example one ABC News report said that workers at the plant were exposed to .10 millisieverts which is about 1 CT scan per hour. This number is likely correct and/or close to it. It is not a level of radiation you want to stand in for a month, but is not particularly dangerous. If managed properly and certain steps are taken such as rotating people in for shifts to reduce exposure.

Then shortly after on the ABC News web site they said that radiation can get you sick and start to become deadly at 1000 millisieverts. [This is true. At 1 sievert (1000 millisieverts) if untreated there will be a 15% mortality rate. At 4.5 sieverts (4500 millisieverts) there is a 50% mortality rate within 30 days.] Then ABC said that workers are being exposed to as much as 8 times that much which is fantastically preposterous. That much radiation would be 100% lethal in a short amount of time.  If radiation were passed half that the military would be pouring sandbags mixed with cement and boric acid to bury them and lower the radiation risk.

Some of these elite media reporters are paid big money and cannot seem to take the time to do a half hour of research online. Of course they have no incentive to report responsibly anyways.

UPDATE IVThe American NRC goes off the deep end…

Gregory B. Jaczko is the head of the NRC. He used to work for Senator Harry Reid, went to the University of Wisconsin at Madison and is a long time critic of nuclear energy.

Remember what I said about eco-activists? Well Jaczo is running around telling people that there is no water cooling the rods (false as reported by people on the ground) and that people there are exposed to nuclear radiation at deadly levels and  that people should get 80 KM away because May, IF , Could, and people on the ground are like, umm no the reality is X Y and Z.

USA – Get 80 KM away – LINK

People on scene: Passed 20 KM no possible health risk as it stands now – LINK

Has there been any word that even the first layer of the containment bottle has been breached yet? No. As long as nothing gets passed stage two of the containment bottle the radiation risks are low. The biggest risks are the waste storage rods that were housed near by and the steam coming out of the plant. Water does not hold nuclear radiation but the minerals and other containments in the water can carry it. Since sea water had to be used the radiation from the steam is higher, but still not enough to get one sick unless one stayed in the brunt of it for an extended period of time.

Here is Jaczo in the NYT:

Wednesday night, Mr. Jaczko reiterated his earlier statement and added that commission representatives in Tokyo have confirmed that the pool is empty. He said Tokyo Electric and other officials in Japan have confirmed that, and also stressed that high radiation fields are going to make it very difficult to continue having people work at the plant…

While radiation levels at the plant have varied tremendously, Mr. Jaczko said that the peak levels reported there “would be lethal within a fairly short period of time.” He added that another spent fuel pool, at Reactor No. 3, may also be losing water and could soon be in the same condition. Japanese efforts to pour in water by dumping it from helicopters were suspended, for fear that the helicopter crews would receive too large a dose of radiation.

This is pure nonsense folks, lies are another word for it. Now the facts from the TOKYO office of Reuters:

Wed Mar 16, 6:37 pm ET

TOKYO (Reuters) – The level of radiation detected at the Tokyo Electric Power Co Fukushima plant has fallen steadily over the past 12 hours, an official at Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said on Thursday.

A level of 752 microsieverts per hour was recorded at the plant’s main gate at 5 p.m. (0800 GMT) on Wednesday, said the official, Tetsuo Ohmura. The monitoring point was then changed to the plant’s west gate and readings were taken every 30 minutes, he said. At 5 a.m. the reading was 338 microsieverts per hour.

That level was still much higher then it should be, but was not dangerous, and that by comparison absorption of a level of 400 was normal from being outside over the course of a year, Ohmura said.

(Reporting by Terril Jones)

Notice that is MICROsieverts not millisieverts. So the radiation right there is less than 1 millisievert. A Cat Scan exposes you to 5-15 millisieverts. Jaczo needs to resign.

Jaczo is whipping up the press and the government with his comments. Is he just a pinhead activist who cannot help himself? Or is the govt deliberately whipping this up as a bigger crisis than it is with these reckless statements? We all know what this administration likes to do in a crisis.

UPDATE V – Of course conspiracy wacko Alex Jones is getting in on the stupidity and mindless fear mongering….. http://www.infowars.com/fukushima-nuclear-power-plant-in-japan-a-dirty-bomb-waiting-to-go-off/

UPDATE VI – Dr. Jay Lehr, of the Heartland Institute, vs. Dr. Arjun Makhijani, of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research

The Heartland Institute is a think tank that focus’ on issues on the Midwest. The political arm of the think tank is traditional free market in philosophy, although they do have a science wing and an agricultural wing.

The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research is a radical environmental pressure group.

Right on their web site, “Where science and democracy come together”. Funny, when I took science they didn’t tell me it has a political ideology. Democracy sounds so nice doesn’t it? When radicals talk about “democracy” they literally mean the rule of man (them) over the rule of law. IEER pushes the radical environmental agenda from no nukes to the “sustainable development” movement which according to its founder Maurice Strong, seeks to deindustrialize the free world. Their newsletter is called “Science for Democratic Action”.

A quick look at their donor list says it all which includes: Colombe Foundation, Livingry Foundation, New-Land Foundation, Stewart R. Mott Charitable Trust, and the Town Creek Foundation. This is a who’s who of the radical left advocating planned societies, global redistribution of wealth, radical environmentalism, no-nukes, unilateral disarmament (the USA and Israel disarms – bad guys don’t) and so forth. Of course some of these organizations are connected with the Tides Foundation, George Soros and the usual suspects. Click the links to see the data.

UPDATE VII – Radiation at 3.3 millisieverts at plant as of the morning of the 18th. This is a little higher than two days ago but still far from dangerous – LINK. New power lines are being ran to the cooling pumps and they are expected to be operational by Saturday (UPDATE – lines are now connected and expect final repairs to reactivate the pumps on Sunday).

UPDATE VIII – More irresponsible reporting and it is linked on Drudge.

UK Daily MailThe moment nuclear plant chief  WEPT as Japanese finally admit that radiation leak is serious enough to kill people

Officials admit they may have to bury reactors under concrete – as happened at Chernobyl [They would have said that from day one, if they cannot save the plant this is always an option…]

Japanese upgrade accident from level four to five – the same as Three Mile Island [No one died at 3 Mile Island, in fact no one even got sick form the radiation…]

Particles spewed from wrecked Fukushima power station arrive in California [At almost a billion times less than a level that can hurt anyone…]

Military trucks tackle reactors with tons of water for second day [If they are still at the plant spraying that means the high level of radiation is right above the containment bottle and to quote my teenage daughter, “No duh” if the radiation was that high anywhere else they would already be burying it…]

It sounds ominous doesn’t it? They even said that inside the plant radiation levels hit 4,000 millisieverts which is enough to kill. But……

This piece in the Daily Mail is a completely irresponsible. They have firefighters outside the plant spraying water again. If the radiation was at 4000 anywhere but just over the containment bottle they would already be using aircraft to bury it. The fact that they are not burying it now means that they are still trying to save the plant. A partial meltdown means that the situation it is in the same technical level as 3 Mile Island with the exception that it is not bad enough to abandon hope of saving the plant yet. No one died at 3 Mile Island and no one died as a result of the radiation that was leaked. NHK has a measurement at the plants front gate every day and this morning it was at 3.3 millisieverts which is half that of a CT scan.

By the way, the Japanese only expect the partial meltdown to be 3% of the core, which is not nearly as bad as 3 Mile Island, but any melting at all puts it in the same technical category.

Fox News just interviewed a man who worked at a nuclear plant for 30 years. Notice what he says at the end.

Note – There are lots of these guys around, yet only Fox News can seem to find one …

UPDATE IX – Radiation levels still falling – LINK. Heat at two reactors below the boiling point – LINK. Power about to be restored to coolant systems – LINK.

UPDATE X – Water has begun to leak at reactor three at Fukishima. Since they are using sea water some of the water leaking out of the containment bottle is pretty radioactive. 10,000 times more radioactive than the coolant water is normally. It sounds bad and the elite media once again is hyping the situation for ratings.

But here is the rub and what the press isn’t telling you. Highly filtered water is what is normally used for coolant in a plant of this type. Why? Because it is almost impossible to make water radioactive, but that is not so for mineral and chemical contaminants in the water. Since they have been using dirty sea water the steam and water leaking from a crack in the containment bottle due to the quake would be more radioactive, but even 10,000 times more radioactive than the filtered water would not be particularly dangerous as long as the exposure was limited. The real challenge will be to make sure that said water is contained and does not leak out and cause problems.

Fortunately the restoration of the filtered water cooling is well underway. The coolant system is already functioning at one reactor and it is expected to have them working at all of them by Sunday. If the contaminated sea water has been contained it can be filtered and the contaminated waste properly disposed.

If there is a tiny crack in the containment bottle in reactor three that is a problem, but not an insurmountable one by any means. They will have to keep cooling it with the clean water till such a time where the fuel can be removed and the containment bottle replaced, or perhaps that reactor can just be replaced with a third generation design.

Perhaps in the spirit of good will the Japanese Government can assist TEMPCO to replace all of the reactors with 4th generation PBR reactors which cannot overheat or meltdown. They also do not require water, have passive safety systems that are almost perfectly effective, do not require electricity to be made safe in the event of a catastrophe. They also generate more power.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Congressman King vs Wash Post’s Eugene Washington on Islamic Radicalization Hearings. King Wins.

Posted by iusbvision on March 12, 2011

I am not going to hold back here. Eugene Robinson is the quintessential example of what is wrong with journalism today. His arguments amount to emotionalism, fear mongering and demagoguery, which he uses to try to hide that fact that he rarely does his homework.

We have talked about the way the far left argues. The first argument is S.I.N. and the last argument is an attempt to paint you as a monster to shut you up. This is all that is in the far left play-book. You can see that Cong. King pummels Robinson with fact after fact while Robinson just sits there and shakes his head. The far left typically ignored most facts that threaten their narrative. You will see this pattern perfectly in this video.

When Joe Lieberman and Snow had similar hearings some years ago why did the left not call Lieberman a McCarthy or a bigot? This is all politics folks and Eugene Robinson once again shows himself to be a naked partisan hit man.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Click & Learn, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) Sued for Sexual Harassment: “Unwelcome Sexual Advances” and “Unwelcome Touching” – Elite Media Mum

Posted by iusbvision on March 10, 2011

Judicial Watch:

Hastings Allegedly Retaliated Against Victim for Complaining About Conduct

Alcee Hastings

Washington, DC — March 7, 2011Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it filed a lawsuit on March 7, 2011, against Florida Democrat Congressman Alcee Hastings on behalf of a female employee who was repeatedly subjected to “unwelcome sexual advances,” “unwelcome touching” and retaliation. The alleged harassment and retaliation began in 2008, when Hastings was Chairman of the United States Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Commission is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Also named is the Commission’s former staff director, Fred Turner. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit on behalf of Commission employee Winsome Packer (Packer v. US Comm. On Security & Cooperation in Europe, and Hastings and Turner (CV No. 11-00485 D.D.C.))

According to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, filed on Monday March 7th with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia:

For over two years, from January 2008 through February 19, 2010, Ms. Packer was forced to endure unwelcome sexual advances, crude sexual comments, and unwelcome touching by Mr. Hastings while serving as the Representative of the Commission to the United States Mission to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Although Ms. Packer repeatedly rejected Mr. Hastings’ sexual attention and repeatedly complained about the harassment to the Commission Staff Director, Fred Turner, Mr. Hastings refused to stop sexually harassing her. Rather, Mr. Hastings and Mr. Turner began to retaliate against Ms. Packer—including making threats of termination—because she continued to object to Mr. Hastings’ conduct.

Ms. Packer was particularly vulnerable to such threats because she was a Republican working for the Democratically-controlled Commission, a point that both Mr. Hastings and Mr. Turner used to threaten and intimidate her. Eventually, the emotional distress, anxiety, and humiliation caused by the sexual harassment and retaliation caused Ms. Packer to suffer severe health problems and forced her to leave her prestigious position.

 

According to Judicial Watch’s complaint, “Mr. Hastings’ intention was crystal clear: he was sexually attracted to Ms. Packer, wanted a sexual relationship with her, and would help progress her career if she acquiesced to his sexual advances.” These advances included: Making multiple demands that Ms. Packer allow Rep. Hastings to stay in her apartment while she served as the Commission’s lead staff representative overseas; subjecting Ms. Packer to unwanted physical contact, including hugging her with both arms while pressing his body against her body and his face against her face; inviting her on multiple occasions to accompany him alone to his hotel room; making sexual comments and references to Ms. Packer, and asking Ms. Packer humiliating and inappropriate questions in public, such as “What kind of underwear are you wearing?”

After Ms. Packer repeatedly rebuffed these advances and reported them to her superior, Mr. Turner, and other officials (including Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD)), Hastings allegedly scolded her for not being a “sport” and for rejecting him after he had “come to [her] as a man does a woman.” He said he was very upset she had reported his behavior to Mr. Turner: “How dare you complain about me! You had better forget about being Republican.” Moreover, Hastings and Turner then allegedly took retaliatory actions against Ms. Packer by repeatedly threatening her job at the Commission, by refusing to allow her to return from overseas to her position as Policy Advisor in Washington, D.C., and by intentionally marginalizing her from her colleagues. Hastings also pressured Ms. Packer to buy him personal gifts and make a campaign contribution to him.

As a direct result of Mr. Hastings’ sexual harassment, Ms. Packer experienced insomnia, anxiety, depression, high-blood pressure, and developed symptoms of coronary artery disease. At one point, these symptoms were so severe Ms. Packer collapsed and was rushed to the emergency room. Ms. Packer has been prescribed medication and is under the care of a physician because of the severity of her heart problems.

“The allegations against Alcee Hastings as detailed in this complaint are outrageous. Is Congress so far gone that its members think they can get away with the most base sexual harassment of staff! For two years Hastings subjected Ms. Packer to a never-ending barrage of unwanted sexual advances. And when Ms. Packer tried, time and again, to put a stop to it, he resorted to threats and intimidation to force her compliance. Even after Hastings’ behavior caused Ms. Packer’s physical collapse, he would not relent. We look forward to holding Alcee Hastings and the other defendants accountable for their unlawful behavior in court,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Hastings, a former federal judge, was impeached by the House and, after a trial, removed by the U.S. Senate from the bench in 1989 for bribery and perjury.

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead | Leave a Comment »

Columbia Journalism Review is a Smear Outfit. MSNBC Lefty Talker Admits Hiring Actors as Callers.

Posted by iusbvision on March 9, 2011

Too many journalists like to smear, too may far left activists like to smear, too may far left academics like to smear. Put it all together and you get Columbia Journalism Review (CJR).

An example is this story that came out accusing Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck of secretly hiring actors to call in.

FM “Morning Zoo” shows often use a service to have an actor call in with a crazy story everyone can laugh at. Anyone who has worked in radio knows this. FM “zoo” shows have to because those people who they call up for those great laughs have to be actors due to FCC rules. You see it is illegal to put someone on the air unless you can be reasonably sure they know who they are talking to.

So a CJR “reporter” decided to take such a known service and accuse them of calling political news/talk shows with no evidence whatsoever. Said reporter never even called the company who has the service for comment, nor did the reporter call Limbaugh or Hannity to even ask the question. Instead the reporter just made the allegation.

The story gets worse, the story is from Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), allegedly from the finest teaching journalism professors in the country. Journalism teachers who cannot follow the basic ethics rules found in any j-school textbook. CJR is partially funded by George Soros.

UPDATE – MSNBC lefty talker Ed Schultz admits he used hired actors coached by Congressional Democrats as callers. (H/T The Blaze)

His excuse is lame. When my radio show started we had nothing and I built it up with hard work and talent to beat the competition. I never used staged ringers as callers. A good host should be ready to go an entire show filled with great content and never have to take a call. The most obvious reason why is that at times technical difficulties will prevent you form taking calls. People do not listen to a show to hear callers so quite frankly callers are not that important. That is why I never took very many calls on my show.

What will CJR have to say now?

I will have much more on CJR in my upcoming book.

Posted in Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

AOL News Op-Ed: Elite Media Whitewashing Wisconsin’s Protests

Posted by iusbvision on March 9, 2011

AOL News:

For the past two weeks, the news media have been swarming over Madison, Wis., covering every detail of the public-sector union protests against Gov. Scott Walker’s proposed budget cuts, as well as other similar protests around the country.

If you’ve followed the mainstream press, you’ve seen lots of civil protests, lots of interviews with reasonable teachers, pictures of signs about the need for quality education.

But have they been giving viewers and readers the whole story? Not quite.

Here’s a sampling of what you likely missed:

Uncivil language

  • During the protests, there have been signs comparing Gov. Walker to Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mubarak, even Satan. Some signs featured Walker’s face in crosshairs with the words “Don’t Retreat, Reload: Repeal Walker.” Another held a sign saying “Political Death to Tyrants.”Click here to see a gallery of signs(caution, several signs contain adult language).
  • On Feb. 22 in Boston, Rep. Michael Capuano, D-Mass., fired up a union crowd in front of the statehouse: “I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an e-mail to get you going. Every once [in] a while you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.”
  • In Rhode Island, a union supporter called a cameraman a derogatory term for a homosexual and threatened to have anal sex with him.
  • In Ohio, a union activist called tea party members “corporate butt-lickers” and Nazis.

Violence

  • Tabitha Hale of FreedomWorks was filming a union protest outside their offices in the nation’s capital Feb. 23 and was shoved to the ground by a middle-aged male activist wearing a T-shirt of the Communications Workers of America.
  • Fox News correspondent Mike Tobin said he was hit by pro-union protesters in Wisconsin amidst cries of “Fox News lies” from the crowd, which also tried to block the cameraman’s view of Tobin.

Not one of those outrages was apparently worthy of much in the way of news coverage.

For example, a Media Research Center study of 53 Wisconsin stories on ABC, CBS and NBC found that only eight stories visually featured signs comparing Gov. Walker to Hitler, or Mussolini, or Stalin, or Mubarak, or Satan. More incredibly, not a single network anchor or reporter addressed whether that kind of signage was civil or appropriate. And only Fox covered Capuano’s “get a little bloody” remark.

Now, compare this to how tea party protests have been covered, and you can see a glaring double standard at work.

These same media outlets spent two years obsessing over every over-the-top tea party sign and mere accusation of uncivil behavior.

Do you remember the claims that tea party activists intentionally spit on Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (a charge he backed away from) and that tea partyers yelled the N-word at black congressmen (which no one could produce on video)? The mere accusation, the mere suggestion was enough for blanket network coverage.

Do you recall the endless parade of anti-tea-party stories after the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others in Tucson? All of them uniformly denounced Sarah Palin as if she encouraged the shooting. Palin put crosshairs on a congressional district, on the Internet. The Wisconsin protesters put Walker’s head in the crosshairs on posters. But Palin was the evil one, and the Wisconsin protesters got a free pass: No one denounced them.

Well, one uncivil action did break through the media blackout — when blogger Ian Murphy of the “Buffalo Beast” made a crank call to Gov. Walker pretending to be billionaire conservative philanthropist David Koch. But he was celebrated by the press.

On “The Early Show,” CBS reporter Dean Reynolds talked about how gullible the governor was. NBC News correspondent Michael Isikoff asserted that Murphy proved the union conspiracy theorists were right. CNN named Murphy “The Most Intriguing Person of the Day.”

None of these networks, it’s worth pointing out, mentioned that Murphy’s article on this prank call was titled “Koch Whore,” or that he’d in the past written such things as “If Rove is Bush’s brain, may the 43rd president be lobotomized before we string him up.”

Why would they, since that apparently wouldn’t fit the media’s preferred narrative that the pro-union protesters are, unlike tea partyers, champions of civility?

L. Brent Bozell III is president of the Media Research Center.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Lies, True Talking Points, Unions, Violence | Leave a Comment »

Christian convert from Ohio faces honor killing from father

Posted by iusbvision on February 27, 2011

Islamic Sharia Law mandates that anyone who leaves Islam must be killed.

Rifqa Bary was raised in a devout Muslim home in Columbus, Ohio but at age 13, she attended a Korean Methodist church at the invitation of a classmate.  As a result, she had a significant conversion experience and secretly committed herself to the Christian faith.  Eventually her faith was discovered on Facebook by leaders of the Noor Mosque in Columbus where her parents attended.  In the summer of 2009, she fled her home in Columbus for Orlando after her parents threatened her life for not renouncing Christianity.  After a number of court battles in both Orlando and Ohio, Rifqa was declared a dependent of the state of Ohio and then a permanent US Legal Resident before she turned 18 on August 10, 2010.  The legal case made international headlines and brought the rarely discussed  practice of Muslim honor killings (or apostate killings) to the public eye.

Now the Islamic groups have filed a series of frivolous lawsuits in Ohio and Florida against her attorney to try and bankrupt him. Please donate HERE.

Notice that only one network seriously followed this story.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead | 1 Comment »

Lara Logan – Where are the “Elite Media” and the “Feminists” now?

Posted by iusbvision on February 27, 2011

If Lara Logan had been merely touched at a Tea Party event the Elite Media would STILL be talking about it. But apparently the Elite Media & the feminist groups hate Western Civilization so much that they are willing to gloss over the mass sexual assault of Logan all because the left and the Islamists both have a common ideological foe – Western Civilization.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Kathleen Parker ousted from CNN for the same reason she was hired.

Posted by iusbvision on February 27, 2011

 

I was tossing and turning in my mind if I should write this article or not. It is the same old story with so called “conservatives” who have little intellectual substance who, in an act of desperation for attention, start attacking conservatives of substance with with name calling or unsupported accusations to get “instant stardom” by the leftist elite media; just ask Davids Brooks and Frum who now only have traction within New York City. Ask John McCain who used to say that the elite media was his constituency till he ran against The One. The day after McCain won the primary, the love affair was cut off, the elite media turned on him in unison, the NYT falsely accused him of having an affair and for the first time refused to publish his letters to the paper.

As a former radio talk show host myself if I switched sides and attacked there is little doubt that I would get offers from leftist media and or newspapers to work. It is a story that has happened a dozen times. What a conservative says is not “newsworthy” to the elite media until said conservative attacks a Republican candidate with something “saucy”.

The elite media makes its news decisions based of leftist dogma. Conservatives know that and when they want to cash in they know what to do to get attention. However that success is very limited and such so called “conservatives” cannot draw in a wider audience because they lose credibility with conservatives, traditionalists and independents.  I did not watch the show more than a few times because it was boring and neither of the people on had much substance in their views. Besides who wants to watch a “crossfire”  like show with a liberal Republican sellout and a leftist politician who likes prostitutes? There just isn’t enough substantive conflict to make the show interesting.

Imagine if you will, “CROSSFIRE” with David Frum & Joe Lieberman. They would agree 70% of the time and it would be a snoozer. But at least Joe is an honest man who I can respect.

With that said there is NO chemistry between these two. Let us say the obvious. Parker finds Spitzer revolting because he is. He is dismissive of her and talks over her in a way that is misogynistic and she is trying too hard to be liked by CNN’s small audience.  This does not make for good TV.

I am way behind in my writing anyway so I was going to just blow this off, but then John Ziegler wrote the article I would have written, but included a dimension to it that only he could deliver.

John Ziegler:

But the primary reason why the program couldn’t work is also the very reason Parker got the gig in the first place [Emphasis ours  – IUSB Vision Editor]. She was clearly hired because she was perceived as a “conservative” who was willing to vigorously attack Palin, while not holding any particularly strong conservative opinions which might offend the largely liberal CNN audience. It is hardly a secret that the best (and perhaps only) way for an unknown or career-challenged conservative to achieve mainstream media acceptance is to be a sellout to their supposed cause (just ask Arianna HuffingtonPeggy NoonanDavid BrooksDavid FrumMichael Smerconish, or Joe Scarborough, to name only a few).

Criticizing Palin (along with endorsing Obama) has quickly become the most reliable path to instant notoriety/credibility for ambitious “conservatives,” and Parker became the poster child for this phenomenon. When I went on CNN during my film’s first release, I was actually asked to respond to a Parker quote about Palin. This was especially absurd because Parker had no special knowledge of Palin and was virtually unknown before she “led” Palin’s “assassination.” Had Parker praised Palin, CNN would never have found the quote remotely newsworthy.

However, there is apparently a downside side to getting a show this way. Much like a guy who spends all his cash to get the girl and has nothing left to keep her, Parker had no capital with which to make the show a ratings success. Conservatives, most of whom don’t trust CNN to begin with, had no reason to tune in, and she was such a soft and colorless “conservative” that she didn’t even make for a fun punching bag for the liberal audience, or her overrated co-host (based on my experience Spitzer is actually quite dumb). The sad reality of cable news television today is that you must be polarizing to “succeed.” Moderation or wimpiness simply won’t work, especially when such a temperament is clearly contrived, and not backed up with any real talent.

With no spark, no friction, no talent, and no audience base, Parker brought nothing to the table, and the show was clearly doomed. In the end, she got the fate that she clearly deserved, only probably better.

There is also an interesting secondary element to Parker’s demise which might make media pundits a little more hesitant to attack Sarah Palin. Since the 2008 election, many of her biggest media critics have found themselves out of a job. Keith Olbermann, Rick Sanchez, David Shuster, Alan Colmes, Campbell Brown, John Roberts, Larry King, Harry Smith and Parker are all prominently mentioned in my documentary and all of them have been let go from TV jobs since Obama got elected.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad, Republican Brand | Leave a Comment »

Andrew Klavan: Stop Right Wing Hate!

Posted by iusbvision on February 25, 2011

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Pinhead Academic: Ban ROTC from Campus

Posted by iusbvision on February 18, 2011

Normally I do not like name-calling or mocking someone unless one has tried to use substance and genuine argument first. There are some cases where what is spoken by some far left academics is so painfully dumb and foolish in the worst extreme, that it does not merit serious refutation (although we are going to give you some). This is such a case.

Parents and student’s need to know that pin-heads like this guy are praised on campus. They are given access to your kids without any attempt to balance the conversation in almost all cases.

Allow me to introduce you to Colman McCarthy. The Washington Post describes him thusly:

Colman McCarthy, a former Post columnist, directs the Center for Teaching Peace in Washington and teaches courses on nonviolence at four area universities and two high schools.

Frightening.

Here is a sample of McCarthy’s work:

I sat down with Theodore Hesburgh, the priest who had retired two years earlier after serving 35 years as the university’s president. Graciously, he invited me to lunch at the campus inn. During our discussion, he took modest pride at having raised more than a billion dollars for Notre Dame, and expressed similar feelings about the university’s ROTC program. More than 700 student-cadets were in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Few universities, public or private, had a larger percentage of students in uniform then. The school could have been renamed Fort Hesburgh.

When I suggested that Notre Dame’s hosting of ROTC was a large negative among the school’s many positives, Hesburgh disagreed. Notre Dame was a model of patriotism, he said, by training future officers who were churchgoers, who had taken courses in ethics, and who loved God and country. Notre Dame’s ROTC program was a way to “Christianize the military,” he stated firmly.

I asked if he actually believed there could be a Christian method of slaughtering people in combat, or a Christian way of firebombing cities, or a way to kill civilians in the name of Jesus. Did he think that if enough Notre Dame graduates became soldiers that the military would eventually embrace Christ’s teaching of loving one’s enemies?

It gets worse, he proceeds to tell how soldiers are dumb and academically sub-standard. Of course this has been proved incorrect as the military on average has higher  education than the public at large.

Colman McCarthy obviously knows little about Christianity as well. There is such a thing as a just war doctrine. It is a neighborly thing to rescue people from a brutal dictator and if he had read his prophecy he would know that Jesus is returning with a sword and its no more Mr. Nice Savior:

“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it.” (Matthew 10:34-39 NASB)

And

American King James Version
Then said he to them, But now, he that has a purse, let him take it, and likewise his money: and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Jesus does not advocate violence, but recognizes that at times it is necessary. Jesus said that if you live by the sword you die by the sword, but also said that it is better to be naked than unarmed, defenseless. Clearly Jesus is making the just use of violence clear, self-defense, just war, bearing arms as a deterrent are justified. Brutality makes right is not.

In case you are not convinced, Jonah Goldberg and master historian Dr. Victor Davis Hanson provide the scholarly take-down.

Posted in Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »

White House: Stimulus Goals Have Been Met …

Posted by iusbvision on February 17, 2011

Denial?

Watch the video at Real Clear Politics. – LINK.

Is there any regard for reality in D.C. ?

Posted in 2012, China, Journalism Is Dead, Lies | Leave a Comment »

MSNBC host labels Congressman a “Tax Criminal” for sleeping in his office…

Posted by iusbvision on February 17, 2011

See the video HERE.

 

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action | 1 Comment »

Sarah Palin & The Leftist Psyche

Posted by iusbvision on February 8, 2011

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Protesters with Former Obama Advisor Van Jones: “String Up Clarence Thomas” – “Revolution Now Like in Egypt”

Posted by iusbvision on February 4, 2011

The elite media likes to tell you that the Tea Party are hateful racists, in spite of the fact that there is no good evidence to demonstrate that. However getting people to say these types of things at almost any left of center protest is easy (especially on most any college campus where there are plenty of unhinged Marxist professors and indoctrinated students in one place). I have seen it first hand as a former counter protester myself. What are the odds of seeing this on NBC News?

This group is called “Common Cause” and do I really have to state the obvious?… Yes they get money from George Soros.

Thanks to Andrew Brietbart for the footage.

The Kicker:

Common Cause is a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1970 by John Gardner as a vehicle for citizens to make their voices heard in the political process and to hold their elected leaders accountable to the public interest.
The IRS considers them a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity because they are “non-partisan” (non partisan my ear…), so yes indeed being tax exempt means that YOU help subsidize them.

//

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Violence | Leave a Comment »