MSNBC

Media Guessing Game-Islamophobia Seems To Be Their First Guess

Published by Papa Giorgio

(Click to Watch MSNBC Interview)

NewsBusters will start out this little test of fact versus fiction. As all the facts reveal, Islamophobia seems to have NOTHING to do with this knifing.

CNN’s Deborah Feyerick joined the media guessing game as to the motivation behind the stabbing of Muslim taxicab driver in New York City, emphasizing the possibility it may have been “connected to this big Ground Zero controversy, where we’re hearing so much anti-Muslim sentiment.” Feyerick raised this hypothesis during reports on Thursday’s Rick’s List and The Situation Room.

The correspondent’s first report on the attack aired 12 minutes into the 4 pm Eastern hour of Rick’s List. Anchor Rick Sanchez played a clip from victim Ahmed Sharif’s press conference on Thursday before introducing Feyerick. She began by stating that when “Michael Enright, the suspect, was arrested, he had numerous journals and notebooks on him, all of them filled with writings, some of it completely illegible. That is now with authorities, all of that being vetted and looked through to see whether, in fact, there was anything indicating that he had undergone some sort of a mental or emotional change.”

Feyerick did mention that Enright “ironically…was a volunteer working for a non-profit organization that promotes peace,” but didn’t mentioned that the organization, Intersections International, actually supports the planned mosque near Ground Zero. She continued with the speculation over the possible motivation of the attack, including the “anti-Muslim” charge….

…(read more)…

The Wall Street Journal points out some media bias here:

…Then–in paragraphs 28 and 29–comes this:

Mr. Enright is also a volunteer with Intersections International, an initiative of the Collegiate Churches of New York that promotes justice and faith across religions and cultures. The organization, which covered part of Mr. Enright’s travel expenses to Afghanistan, has been a staunch supporter of the Islamic center near ground zero. Mr. Enright volunteered with the group’s veteran-civilian dialogue project.

Joseph Ward III, the director of communications for Intersections, said that if Mr. Enright had been involved in a hate crime, it ran “counter to everything Intersections stands for” and was shocking.

It’s shocking, all right. It’s also news! The Times hasn’t exactly buried the lead here: The attack is a significant story in itself, and it’s an entirely defensible editorial decision to begin by simply telling what (allegedly) happened.

But revealing the suspect’s association with the pro-mosque left so low in the story shows atrocious news judgment. Rehearsing the America-hates-Muslims narrative first strongly suggests that the Times’s reporting is driven more by an ideological agenda than by the facts of the case.

That ideological agenda is shared by Intersections International, as evidenced by the organization’s Aug. 2 statement supporting the Ground Zero mosque:

The controversy surrounding this project stems from the fact that the proposed building location lies in close proximity to the former World Trade Center, the site of the horrific terrorist attack in New York City on September 11, 2001. Intersections grieves along with those who suffered losses in that tragedy. Intersections acknowledges that any association between that event and this project is a fabrication. Further, Intersections applauds the work of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan, principals in The Cordoba House, for their long-term and steadfast commitment to interfaith relations. While acknowledging the real pain that 9/11 continues to evoke, Intersections deplores those who would use this project to promote fear and vitriol for personal gain or partisan politics….

…(read more)…

And the woman interviewed at the beginning will take us out. Above she is interviewed by Contessa Brewer. Below she is interviewed by Michael Medved:

Sophia Nelson Interviewed About Islamophobia from Papa Giorgio on Vimeo.

Rachel Madcow Caught Again

Published by Papa Giorgio

This catch over at NewsBusters made me laugh while wagging my head, as you will see, Rachel goes through her throes of body language while weaving a capitalist and xenophobic conspiracy of a great order. Except, her own guest makes a few statements both times he is on (the second interview begins around the 1:56 mark so you know) her show that complete;y dismantles her beliefs about this whole “sorted” topic.

Here’s NewsBusters end to their post on this:

But after Maddow introduced Loew, and Loew rehashed the details of his reporting on Senseman, Coughlin and CCA, Loew mentioned this awkward fact right at the end of his interview with Maddow…

LOEW: In addition, in Arizona we have a mindset among a couple of key legislators that privatizing the prison industry is a good thing. As you mentioned, they tried to privatize the entire system last year. The governor did veto that after the state corrections director sent her a letter saying, look, we can’t imagine having death row inmates in private prison systems and having death row inmates being taken care of by the lowest common bidder.

Excuse me, did you say “the governor” — by whom you mean Jan Brewer, correct? — vetoed the bill to privatize nearly all of Arizona’s state prisons? Shortly before she signed SB 1070, the law that would create vast penal colonies of suspected illegal immigrants? Apparently Brewer missed the memo on this fine-tuned, lucrative conspiracy.

Maddow’s flimsy premise having been demolished before her eyes — by a simpatico guest, no less — she invited Loew back the next night to harrumph about links between Republican state senator Russell Pearce, a major backer of SB 1070, and the private prison industry. (full segment from Maddow show linked here). Once again, Loew served up an inconvenient fact right at the end of his discussion with Maddow (third part of embedded video, starting at 2:28) —

MADDOW: Morgan, am I also right that in thinking that Russell Pearce was the man behind the effort last year to privatize all of Arizona’s state prisons?

LOEW: He was. He sponsored that legislation and we looked through his legislative record and it looks like as far back as 2003 he was pushing legislation that was calling for the privatization of state prison beds, I think 1,000 beds back in 2003, another 1,400 before that. But the biggest one is the bill that you just referred to, which would have handed over our entire prison system to the private prison industry. Now, that bill was vetoed but another bill passed that essentially did the same thing. Last year, our prison system would have, in a sense, most of it, would have been handed over to the private prison industry, but none of those companies would come forward to bid on them.

Once again, this fine-tuned, lucrative conspiracy — thwarted by the alleged conspirators.

Rachel Maddow Crazy Rants Refuted

Published by Papa Giorgio

This is a great story coming from Big Journolism, let me post a summation of it here:

Rachel Maddow does in her extremely lame attempt to prove that Fox News in general and Bill O’Reilly in particular are trying to make white people afraid of black people. She gives us the following examples:

  1. The Shirley Sherrod video
  2. ACORN sting videos
  3. Van Jones is a Marxist
  4. Eugene Robinson “traffics in racism”
  5. Black/White divide on limited government

Here is John Sexton’s response:

  1. On the Sherrod video, O’Reilly’s report didn’t appear until after she’d been fired at which point it quickly became national news. CNN also ran the clip twice the same night. Is Anderson Cooper trying to scare white people too?
  2. …Clark Hoyt, ombudsman at the New York Times, looked at all the evidence and concluded that the manufactured sideshow about what the pair wore did not change the fact that they had presented themselves as a pimp and prostitute, nor did it cause the entire sting to unravel…
  3. As for Van Jones, he is a self-identified Marxist and co-founder of the explicitly communist group STORM. You can read a pdf put out by the group itself here…
  4. Eugene Robinson writes frequently about racial topics, including this defense of Harry Reid’s statements about the “light-skinned” President. I don’t consider that piece racism, but Robinson definitely traffics in race. Maybe O’Reilly misspoke. Even if he didn’t, where exactly is the fear factor here…
  5. As for Maddow’s final clip, to which she devotes the most screen time, O’Reilly was discussing the findings of this Gallup survey. How can Maddow, minutes after blasting O’Reilly for his stance on the Sherrod video, then edit the clip of O’Reilly so dishonestly that viewers will have no idea of the proper context of his statements? That level of bullpucky should give Maddow whiplash, but apparently it doesn’t.

…(read more)…

Anderson Cooper Apologizes? Bravo! (Update: Chris Matthews vs Howard Dean)

Published by Papa Giorgio

 

Chris Matthews is right, by the way (is Hell frozen over??), Shirley’s whole story of redemption was included in the original video. (see my video posted July 19th – its Breitbart’s release).

 

 

Also note that FoxNews didn’t talk about this story until the White House had already moved on it, which Chris Matthews points out. Anderson Cooper admitting?  Bravo.

On Thursday’s Anderson Cooper 360, anchor Anderson Cooper faulted himself for not pressing Shirley Sherrod when she appeared on the show back on July 22 and claimed that conservative Andrew Breitbart was a “vicious” racist who “would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery.”

Cooper now says he should have challenged Sherrod to support such an inflammatory charge with facts: “I believe in admitting my mistakes….I didn’t challenge her that night and I should have.”

[….]

COOPER: I interviewed Shirley Sherrod last Thursday. And in the course of that interview, I failed to do something that I should have. I believe in admitting my mistakes. I looked at the interview again today, and Ms. Sherrod said during that interview that she thought Mr. Breitbart was a racist. She said, quote, “I think he would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery.” She went on to say she believed his opposition to President Obama was based on racism. Now, she, of course, is free to believe whatever she wants, but I didn’t challenge her that night and I should have.

I don’t want anyone on my show to get away with saying things which cannot be supported by facts. I should have challenged her on what facts she believes supports that accusation. That’s my job, and I didn’t do it very well in that interview, and I’m sorry about it. If I get a chance to talk to her again, I will.

…(read more)… Here is Dennis Prager on the issue:


Prager Discusses the Race Card and Howard Deans Use of It from Papa Giorgio on Vimeo.

Charlie Rangel Charged -&- Charlie Rangel Admits Left Leaning Media Bias (a twofer)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Most Ethical Congress Eva!

Charlie Rangel — if you listen to the end — admits that liberal media bias exists! He is surprised (as am I) that MSNBC would ask such a question. When Rangel asked where he was from, I bet he was thinking the reporter was from FoxNews, only they would ask such a question!

An AP story on MSNBC:

A House investigative committee on Thursday charged New York Rep. Charles Rangel with multiple ethics violations, a blow to the former Ways and Means chairman and an election-year headache for Democrats.

The committee did not immediately specify the charges against the Democrat, who has served in the House for some 40 years and is fourth in House seniority. The announcement by a four-member panel of the House ethics committee sends the case to a House trial, where a separate eight-member panel of Republicans and Democrats will decide whether the violations can be proved by clear and convincing evidence.

The timing of the announcement ensures that it will stretch into the fall campaign, and Republicans are certain to make it an issue as they try to capture majority control of the House. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had once promised to “drain the swamp” of ethical misdeeds by lawmakers in arguing that Democrats should be in charge.

Rangel led the tax-writing Ways and Means panel until he stepped aside last March after the ethics committee criticized him in a separate case — finding that he should have known corporate money was paying for his trips to two Caribbean conferences.

Chris Matthews Confirms Professor Obama Taught Saul Alinsky

Published by Papa Giorgio

The alternative title for this flashback upload was “Chris Matthews Out Socializes Bernie Sanders”. The original file is worth heading to as the comments are pretty funny/insightful.

In Chris Matthews special, The Rise of the Right, he shows a photo of Obama drawing on a chalk board while mentioning he was a Constitutional professor. Touting Marxist ideals like Chris Matthews does, is, what is at issue here. Here’s a picture of Barack Obama in Chicago teaching the principles of SAUL ALINSKY (GATEWAY PUNDIT).

  • The heading at the top reads “POWER ANALYSIS”. The sub-heading reads “RELATIONSHIPS BUILT ON SELF INTEREST”. The symbol on the arrow between “CORP” and “MAYOR” is the “$” sign.
  • The flow chart indicating the flow of money and power out of productive businesses (“CORP”) and into the political class (“MAYOR”)
  • Saul Alinsky came up with the idea of power analysis, which looks at relationships built on self-interest between corporations, banks and utilities. Barack Obama taught students in Chicago the Alinsky Principles.

Actually the photo used by MSNBC shows Obama teaching Alinsky principles not the US Constitution. PrestoPundit discussed this photo of Barack Obama in Chicago teaching the principles of Saul Alinsky back in February 2008. Notice the flow chart indicating the flow of money and power out of productive businesses (“CORP”) and into the political class (“MAYOR”)…

The heading at the top reads “POWER ANALYSIS”. The sub-heading reads “RELATIONSHIPS BUILD ON SELF INTEREST”. The symbol on the arrow between “CORP” and “MAYOR” is the “$” sign. Saul Alinsky came up with the idea of power analysis, which looks at relationships built on self-interest between corporations, banks and utilities. Barack Obama was teaching students in Chicago the Alinsky Principles.

  • Obama first learned Alinsky’s rules in the 1980s, when Alinskyite radicals with the Chicago-based Alinsky group Gamaliel Foundation recruited, hired, trained and paid him as a community organizer in South Side Chicago. (Gamaliel’s website expressly states it grew out of the Alinsky movement.)
  • In 1988, Obama even wrote a chapter for the book “After Alinsky: Community Organizing in Illinois,” in which he lamented organizers’ “lack of power” in implementing change.
  • Gamaliel board member John McKnight, a hard-core student of Alinsky, penned a letter for Obama to help him get into Harvard Law School.
  • Obama took a break from his Harvard studies to travel to Los Angeles for eight days of intense training at Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation, a station of the cross for acolytes.
  • In turn, he trained other community organizers in Alinsky agitation tactics.
  • Obama also taught Alinsky’s “Power Analysis” methods at the University of Chicago.
  • During the presidential campaign, Obama hired one of his Gamaliel mentors, Mike Kruglik, to train young campaign workers in Alinsky tactics at “Camp Obama,” a school set up at Obama headquarters in Chicago. The tactics helped Obama capture the youth vote like no other president before him.
  • Power would no longer be an issue, as Obama infiltrated the highest echelon of the political establishment — the White House — fulfilling Alinsky’s vision of a new “vanguard” of coat-and-tie radicals who “work inside the system” to change the system.
  • After the election, his other Gamaliel mentor, Jerry Kellman (who hired him and whose identity Obama disguised in his memoir), helped the Obama administration establish Organizing for America, which mobilizes young supporters to agitate for Obama’s legislative agenda using “Rules for Radicals.”
  • Obama’s favorite rule is No. 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.” You see that in his attacks on “fat cat bankers,” “greedy health insurers” and “millionaires and billionaires.” He also readily applies Alinsky’s fifth rule of “ridiculing” the opposition.

(IBD)

Mark Levin: Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals
Parts 1 n 2

Mark Levin compares and contrast the principle teachings of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and the Mantra and strategy of Obama’s campaign and LIFE!

Socialist Lawrence O’Donnell, Bringing “Balance” to MSNBC

Published by Papa Giorgio

NEWSBUSTERS lets us know who is filling in the 10pm spot over at MSNBC:

MSNBC contributor Lawrence O’Donnell will take over at the 10 pm slot, the cable network announced Tuesday. O’Donnell, who guest-hosted “Countdown” while Keith Olbermann was on leave, is a self-described socialist, and will fit in nicely with the rest of MSNBC’s prime-time lineup.

The 10 pm slot has up to this time been “Countdown” reruns, so MSNBC viewers will now be treated to a tad different far-left rant than Olbermann’s 8 pm far-left rant.

That said, O’Donnell’s segment will hardly be a breath of fresh air if his previous antics are any indication. He has a short, if colorful history of liberal outbursts. Let us review some of his greatest hits:

As mentioned above, O’Donnell made sure to correct Joe Scarborough on “Morning Joe,” telling him, “we’re socialists, not Marxists.“

O’Donnell then launched into a vicious tirade against author and former Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen that forced Scarborough to cut to commercial early. When the program returned, Scarborough carefully mediated the discussion.

The new MSNBC anchor has challenged the basic mental fortitude of Sarah Palin. Though that is hardly groundbreaking for a liberal, I suppose, O’Donnell even hosted a comedian to bizarrely mock Palin in drag.

O’Donnell retains the dubious honor of conducting “possibly the worst interview in history.” A member of Congress told him during an interview, “you’re illustrating why MSNBC’s viewership is in the tank.”

To his credit, O’Donnell was one of the few liberal media figures to accurately report that ObamaCare would mean a de facto tax increase–the largest one ever, by his account. But that didn’t stop him from offering his support.

O’Donnell has it wrong in this video, we know we will never be able to resend Social Security and Medicare… but we can offer more privatized versions of it.