So, some extremist Florida pastor has now had his “15 minutes of fame“.  Pastor Terry Jones who had been planning to burn a “Koran on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks said [today] he would not go forward with the event, adding he would meet with the imam planning to build an Islamic center near ground zero.”

You know, I wonder if fringe figure had gone forward with his publicity stunt if it would have attracted more media than the miniscule membership of his congregation.

Would anyone even know who this guy was if, as Mike Thomas asks in the Orlando Sentinel, the “media had ignored” him?

James Taranto contends that the media helped make this crazy pastor’s stunt successful:

. . . a fringe Florida pastor’s announcement that he would observe 9/11 by burning the Islamic holy book was not, in itself, news. It was a mere publicity stunt–which the media, by treating it as news, made into a successful publicity stunt.

It is a publicity stunt that fits a pernicious media narrative, exemplified by a New York Times story we quoted yesterday titled “American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong,” which cited the Koran burning as evidence of widespread anti-Muslim bigotry.

Anti-Muslim bigotry is a problem, but it is only exacerbated by the media’s tendency to exaggerate and sensationalize it–and by the adversarial and snobbish attitude many journalists and some politicians have adopted toward the vast majority of Americans, who are not bigoted and who see the Ground Zero mosque as an affront.

While the media sensationalize this story, Sarah Palin takes notes of a story that media are ignoring “Book burning is bad. But the Muslim cleric who is running for parliament in Afghanistan is calling for the murder of American children in response to scorched Korans, which is worse. Where is the media’s focus?”   (more…)

John Cusack Calls for ‘Satanic Death’ of Fox News, GOP Leaders

*(about MSNBC, CNN & Democratic Leaders)

**& it would generate far more attention in the MSM.

‘CBS Evening News’ Ties All-Time Low

Well, I’ve been proven right.  Just shy of four years ago, I wrote:

I expect Ms. Couric to enjoy the same success with the CBS Evening News as Geena Davis [did] with Commander in Chief. All the hype about the show will give her great initial ratings which will gradually decline as the buzz wears off.

Couric’s “newscast” drew 1.62 million fewer viewers than did its counterpart on second-place ABC.  And over 2.5 million fewer than first-place NBC.

I guess making nice with Joe Biden just doesn’t help you earn the respect of the American people.

Speculating about the media’s (and Hollywood’s) double standard in responding to anti-Semitic tirades from Hollywood bigwigs, Jeff Jacoby concludes:

Gibson and Stone are both guilty of indulging in rank anti-Semitism (for which both promptly “apologized’’), but only Gibson was buried under a newsroom avalanche of outrage and disgust. What explains that glaring difference? Surely the media don’t think Jew-baiting is intolerable only when it comes from a right-wing Christian like Gibson. Surely they wouldn’t overlook Stone’s noxious rant just because he is a pluperfect left-wing activist.

(Via Instapundit.)  And as Glenn might say, read the whole thing.

Jacoby’s right, but there’s more to it than that Gibson represents a dying breed, the anti-Semitic “right-wing Christian,” Oliver Stone embodies a certain breed of self-styled intellectuals, always present, but now increasing in number, in our culture:  the left-winger who includes Jews in their list of people responsible for world problems.

There are, alas, all too many folks like Oliver Stone who see all the world’s problems as products of Western hegemony.   They cuddle up to tin pot tyrants, looking away from their failing economies and dismal human rights record and see only problems in the societies of which they themselves are products.

It’s almost as if they have so internalized our culture’s laudable tradition of self-criticism, that they believe only our culture merits criticism.

My SINCERE apologies for the delay in dancing on the grave Al Gore’s career this week.  Kaput.  Just like the climategate emails proved Global Warming was “fixed”…. this incident will purge Gore’s fradulent preaching for quite some time, if not forever.

PORTLAND, Ore. — The Portland Police Bureau has released an audio recording of the interview between a detective and the massage therapist who accused former Vice President Al Gore of groping her in 2006.

The woman spoke with Detective Molly Daul in January 2009 – two years after she canceled three appointments to meet with investigators.

During the interview, the massage therapist describes Gore as a “crazed sex poodle” as she details the moves he made during a late-night appointment at a downtown Portland hotel.

Police declined to file charges against Gore, saying there was insufficient evidence.

Now let’s be clear: no charges were filed.  Gore is legally innocent ’til proven guilty in this particular incident.  But where there’s smoke, there’s fire.  Why the sudden divorce from Tipper this month?  What about all of the rumors of Algore’s affair with TV producer Laurie David?  Why did the media ignore the accused sexual assault stories when accurately reported by the National Enquirer? (oh, off topic…)

So think about this:  Algore and John Edwards could have been our President & VP and both of their sex antics (and alleged criminal activities) would have made Bill Clinton look like an innocent puppy in comparison.

In the meantime, let me enter into evidence the following:  John McCain, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.  Quite a comparison with the sleazy Democrat standardbearers of late.

And no, it isn’t “all about sex”.  It is about telling the truth and being honest with your family first so you have the capacity to be a leader.  In advance of smart-ass Iraq/WMD comments:  ALL foreign intel officials believed Iraq had them in 2003, so it was a collosal intelligence community fail, not a deliberate lie from Bush or Cheney.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

It’s for the children regulation.

“Fisking” the warmist alarmist’s op-ed in the New York Times, blogress diva Ann Althouse figures out what Gore is all about:

He wants the policies that are sold under the name “global warming” whether the prediction of global warming is right or wrong.

Read the whole thing.  (H/t:  Instapundit.)

What is it with Howard Dean and “hate.”  When Republicans are in power, it’s right and good to hate them.  When Democrats are in power, the party that we were once supposed to hate becomes the party of hate.

He claims he was taken out of context when he said he hated Republicans and everything they stood for and called the partisan differences in America “a struggle between good and evil and we’re the good.” Only when he didn’t say jsut how his remarks had been taken out of context nor did he apologize.  He did say, “I don’t hate Republicans as individuals“, then added:

But I hate what the Republicans are doing to this country.  I really do.  I hate deficits, as you know.  When I was governor, I really was very tough on fiscal responsibility.  Deficits in the long run aren’t good for the country, and they do lower our standard of living.  Every American family knows that you have to pay your bills.  I hate the dishonesty, you know, the idea that you’d put a program through Congress without telling people what it costs, I think that’s wrong.  

Guess he must really hate this Administration, but then, he can’t because, well, he’s a Democrat and right now, only Republicans do the hating.  Yet, given what Howard Dean said back in ’05, you’d kind of understand it, you know by his standards, if Republicans did start pushing the hate button, I mean, with those big deficits we’re getting from team Obama.  

He is, however, not praising them when he alleges they have the same attitudes toward a spendthrift Administration that he once did:

He also said that the Republican Party holds “untenable positions based on emotion and anger,” and that the GOP won’t be effective until they “stop pushing the hate button.”

To show just how out of touch is this former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, he spouts some nonsense about the Tea Party’s views on social issues.  Guess he has a one-size-fits-all approach to conservatives.  If they oppose a Democratic Administration, then they must be like the imaginary conservative inside his head, harboring hateful views of homosexuals.

Hate to break it to you, Howard, but those Tea Party folks are pretty concerned about the things that got you hating the Republicans lo these five years ago.  Guess you just hate anyone who doesn’t have a (D) after his name and support your wayward left-wing ways.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.  This is the crusty old pot which once boasted about its thick coat of soot calling black the kettle just back on the stove after a long scrubbing with multiple Brillo Pads.

RING, RING.

ME: Hello?

INTRUDER BY PHONE: “Hi, first I want to thank you for your previous contributions to Senator John McCain and for being such a strong supporter.”

ME:  HAHAHAHA.  Um, what?  I am NOT a supporter.

IBP: Oh, I sense frustrations, may I ask why you…

ME: IMMIGRATION!  DUH!

IBP:  Well, you will be happy to know that Senator McCain is working to…

ME:  DON’T CALL ME AGAIN.

CLICK.

Well, that is, presuming this fundraiser takes place in the Golden State, but given Mrs. Boxer’s travel schedule, unless she’s hawking her book, she’s probably in Washington, D.C. a place she seems to prefer to the jurisdiction she ostensibly represents.  With Ma’am unable to muster more than 50% in the polls in a state where Obama topped 60%, she’s looking for some outside help:

To help with the warmth of money, Boxer will have Al Gore headline a fundraiser for her next weekend.

Clever use  of the word, “warmth,” Mr. Malcolm (who wrote the words above).  Seems that wherever global warmist Al Gore gives a speech, record cold weather comes with him.

Well, so now we know where he’s going to emerge from hibernation.  And while his pet cause is taking on water faster than the Titanic after hitting an iceberg, he probably still has some credibility among the global warming dead-enders in the Golden State.

Do wonder how environmental zealotry will help Mrs. Boxer outside the circles where she’ll do well no matter what.  But, beyond those deep blue enclaves in the Hollywood and Bay Areas, most people in this state are more concerned with other issues.

More on the polls mentioned in the article above anon.  Had seen the survey results earlier in the day, then Instapundit linked the article above and well that line quoted above inspired a post.

The immediate past Vice President of the United States has been very much in the news this weekend, supporting repeal of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, praising the President’s “decision to send more troops” to Afghanistan, tearing into his successor.  That good man has been keeping a high profile of late.  At the same time, the woman who followed him as his party’s choice for the second highest office in the land has also drawn much media attention.

So, once did Mr. Cheney’s predecessor, Al Gore.  That Democrat seemed eager to hog the limelight, offering apocalyptic warmings, er, warNings about the threat of global warming.  Now, he seems to have vanished.  Maybe he’s hibernating.  Must be that cold winter back east.

Wonder if his disappearance has anything to do with this headline: World may not be warming, say scientists.

In a sign that the Democrats’ strategy for 2010 is not gaining traction among the American people, the man on the moon in the media who best embodies their tack is tanking.  The Keith Olbermann show is sinking faster than the Titanic.  Guess Bush-hatred just doesn’t sell like it used to:

Remember Keith Olbermann?

He was the one-time must-see anti-Bush ranter who helped rescue MSNBC (yes, it’s still on at night) from even worse oblivion years ago.

Well, quietly last month while no one was looking, hardly anyone was watching Keith Olbermann anymore. . . .

In the most desirable TV demographic of 25-54, which Keith will soon outgrow himself, “Countdown” lost 44% of its audience from the beginning of President Obama‘s term until this year. It could have been worse — say, 45%.

Olbermann averaged 268,000 viewers last month in that sector. That’s just several thousand sets of those eyes more than Campbell Brown over on CNN. According to one count, Keith even finished in that time slot behind Nancy Grace. Nancy Grace!

Well, there is some good news.  More people watch his show than any other show in MSNBC’s prime-time line-up.

(H/t:  Instapundit)

One of the main reasons I find it difficult to embrace the gay marriage, er, marriage equality movement, is that its proponents seem more interested in the abstract notion of “equality” than in the real institution of marriage. Its advocates are less interested in promoting marriage than in winning, to borrow an expression from my friend Dale Carpenter, a “trophy in the cultural wars.”

We see this again this week when none of the national gay organizations took issue with those in the media who contend that gay people are incapable of meeting one of the primary obligations of matrimony:  monogamy.  Last Tuesday, January 26, on The View, Joy Behar said that gays, “don’t take monogamy and infidelity the same way that the straight community does.”  Two days later in the New York Times, Scott James reported approvingly on the number of gay couples trying “to rewrite the traditional rules of matrimony.”  Many are omitting monogamy:

New research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area.  The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

Now, I don’t know what percentage of those couples consider themselves married.  And to be sure, while it wouldn’t be my choice to be part of an open relationship, I do believe individuals should be free to design their relationships as they see fit.  Open relationships may well be fulfilling to the individuals involved, but they’re not marriages.

Given that marriage is based on sexual exclusivity, to call a nonmonogamous union “marriage” is indeed to subvert the meaning of the institution.

By refusing to criticize those who see gay people as incapable of monogamy, gay organizations lend credence to social conservative arguments that gay marriage advocates seek to subvert the institution they’re ostensibly trying to promote.  I could find nothing denouncing Ms. Behar on the web-sites of the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Center for Lesbian Rights or even Freedom (sic) to Marry.  Even my various google searches turned up no commentary from the head of these organizations taking Ms. Behar to task for her prejudice against gay people.  I could find none addressing the New York Times article.

As can be expected, it was only on blogs where gay people defended the ability of their fellows to meet the same conditions of marriage expected of our straight peers. The folks at Queerty responded that conversations about gay monogamy are best left in hands other than The View gals. Over at Good As You, Jeremy Hooper was astounded that Behar “could have such an uninformed opinion about gay relationships as a whole“: (more…)

In what may be the best bit of news for gay Americans since the Supreme Court handed down the Lawrence decision (though the Heller decision making it easier for us to defend ourselves against gay bashers was also pretty significant), John Fund (in today’s Political Diary) suggests that the unhappy Barney Frank may be facing electoral problems in Scott Brown’s Masachusetts.

Having called for the abolition of Fannie Mae and Fredddie Mac (Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) he has repeatedly defended in the past), that mean-spirited Democrat is

. . . suddenly sounding a lot more moderate, possibly because he may be the most vulnerable of the state’s incumbents.

Mr. Frank is the most powerful lawmaker in the Massachusetts House delegation given his chairmanship of the banking committee, but he also managed to win reelection by a smaller percentage than any of his Massachusetts colleagues in the blowout Democratic year of 2008. Yes, his 68% tally that year would still be the envy of most pols, but it was his worst showing since 1992. In many years, he ran unopposed, collecting virtually 100% of the vote. And because Mr. Frank’s decline began even before the recent rebellion over health-care reform and deficit spending, a good bet is that he’s been neglecting basic constituent services. Several potential GOP candidates already have expressed interest in the 4th District. Whoever the Republican is, Mr. Frank could be facing his toughest campaign since the early 1980s thanks to the anti-Washington tide.

Let’s certainly hope so. With his consistent refusal to admit his errors, the role he played in obstructing reforms of Fannie and Freddie , his conflict of interest in serving on the committee overseeing Fannie while his partner worked for the GSE, this most prominent gay lawmaker has long been an embarrassment to the gay community.

Should Barney remove himself from the public eye, it could only help improve the image of gay people in America.

Just wondering if any of Pat Robertson’s followers are asking how he knows the details of a pact made with the devil.  I mean, wouldn’t he need an inside source to get that information?  So, Pat, better lay off talking about this kind of deal, not just that it’s just bad form at a time like this, but, well, people might start wondering about your associations.

As, you may know, shortly after falling off his rocker*, the minister offered an explanation for the earthquake in Haiti:

Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. . . . They were under the heel of the French … and they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you’ll get us free from the French.’

Now, Pat wasn’t around two hundred years ago when the Haitians threw off French tyranny.  So, I don’t think the Haitians around back then would be able to inform him.  And when I studied Haitian history (for a paper on the Vodou mythology) and didn’t find any details of such a pact.   And, well, since it’s not in history books, the only way Pat could know is if . . .

———–

*Yeah, I know, it’s been happening a lot lately.  Someone needs get him that model with a seat belt.

If almost seems a certainty that if a public figure veers off into America-bashing conspiracy theories, he’s soon going to start apologizing for our enemies.  Usually, such apologetics focus on run-of-the-mill despots like Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, but occasionally spills over into full-blown defenses of Communism and even Islamofascism.

Rarely, however, have such self-haters shown sympathy for Adolf Hitler.

Until now.

According to a smart young writer, the ”man who immortalized Che Guevara is off to set the record straight and correct the right-wing’s misinformation campaign about Hitler“:

In a new documentary series titled “Secret History of America,” Stoned says, “I’ve been able to walk in Stalin’s shoes and Hitler’s shoes to understand their point of view. We’re going to educate our minds and liberalize them and broaden them.”

Most of us know the man my nephew called Stoned as filmmaker/conspiracy theorist Oliver Stone.  So, if we, as Stone claims, “can’t judge people as only ‘bad’ or ‘good,’” guess that lets W off the hook?

Right, so even as the Left accuses George W. Bush of killing one million Iraqis in his illegal war for oil, Bush has done nothing wrong. It’s all… America’s?… fault.

Surely, Stone’s next project will be to walk in Bush and Cheney’s shoes and understand their point of view.  So, if you do want to educate your own minds, take a gander at my nephew’s column, it’s well worth your time.

I have an exclusive story here folks!  My sources within the government have informed me that thanks to the intrepid hard work and intelligence gathered earlier this week in Costa Rica, a deadly and widespread terror sleeper cell has been disrupted.

It appears that a band of Joan Rivers impersonators had been deployed to conduct a campaign of terror by disrupting sleep patterns throughout the United States.  The Joan Rivers look-alikes talk with voices that interfere with the normal wavelengths of human perception.  The cackling and screeching being uttered across the nation would have resulted in mass insomnia from coast to coast.

Thank God our CIA, TSA and worldwide intelligence officials were on the look out for these dangerous suspects and picked up their leader before she had a chance to deploy this evil plot.  White House Spokesperson Robert Gibbs was quick to point out today that the Joan Rivers Sleeper Cell was a direct result of GITMO being used as a recruiting tool with drag queens.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Joy Behar called him one, so it must be so.

If he were such an icon, it would provide additional evidence of the politicization of gay culture, where a man is celebrated merely because he has spoken out against an approved villain of the gay establishment.  And the primary qualification for being such a villain is being a conservative politician with a popular following.

Ever since I reviewed the “news” segments where Katie Couric accorded different treatment to the Democratic and Republican nominees for Vice President last fall, I have been wondering if the reason the CBSNews anchor chose to include the clip of Joe Biden telling us how Franklin Roosevelt went on television right after the market crash (you know the one that, in combination with increased government intervention in the economy precipitated the Great Depression) was because, like the misinformed Democrat, she too was ignorant of American history.

If she had known that back in 1929, presidents didn’t go on television and that, well, FDR wasn’t then president (the market crashed more than three years before that Democrat’s election and longer still before his inauguration), she would have certainly asked a followup. (Okay, okay she may well have done that, but just edited it out–so we have another argument for her to release the raw footage of her interview.) 

Given that her segment was very favorable to the Delaware Democrat, it seems she wouldn’t have included the bit where Biden demonstrates his ignorance of American history.  So, maybe she too is ignorant of American history.  She didn’t know he got his facts wrong.

And if she did not that he was wrong—and didn’t press him on that, well, then we have another piece of evidence of her incredible bias.  Any good reporter would have asked a politician to follow up on such a strange statement.

That is, if she knew it to be strange.

When it comes to Adam Lambert, gay organizations should either ignore the guy or criticize him for helping foster the image that gay people are obsessed with sex and flaunting that in the public square.

While many gay and lesbian singers, actors and talk show hostesses live their lives openly, they leave the sexual aspect of their lives where it belongs: behind closed doors.  Now, after Lambert’s recent stunt at the American Music Awards, he has certainly extended his fifteen minutes, maybe to twenty, maybe to a full half hour, but he has done little to make himself anything more than a pop culture phenomenon.  He even made the list of Barbara Walters Most Fascinating People of 2009.  He certainly be on the 10 faded stars of 2010.

And he doesn’t do much to improve the image of gay people.  Neil Patrick Harris and Ellen De Generes he surely ain’t.

You’d think an organization “dedicated to promoting and ensuring fair, accurate and inclusive representation of people and events in the media as a means of eliminating homophobia and discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation,” would not want to encourage antics such as Lambert’s.  Well, despite that mission statement, GLAAD (the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) remains, in their words, “steadfast in our assertion that Adam Lambert is being subjected to a double standard by ABC as an openly gay performer. We do not support ABC cancelling Adam Lambert’s past and future performances.“  Guess that wanted to be inclusive of those who engage in such public stunts as his.

Um, fellas, it’s not because he’s an openly gay performer.  It’s because he behaved in a juvenile manner on a nationally televised awards show.

Do the folks at GLAAD feel they need to defend this guy just because he’s gay?  (more…)

Well, the thrill may no longer be running up Chris Matthews’ leg, but over at CNN, his less partisan counterpart, seems to have gotten whatever thrill the MSNBC host lost.  Just got back from doing cardio at the gym and was treated to three-quarters of an hour of breathless coverage of President Obama’s first state dinner honoring India’s Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh.

Sally Quinn, fresh from questioning Sarah Palin’s faith on the O’Reilly Factor and on her blog, was gushing over the First Lady’s dress.  Her eyes lit up and she became animated when Larry King gave her the chance to talk about Mrs. Obama’s wardrobe.   “This is high fashion!”  ”What a striking woman!”  ”Jackie O has met her match!”

Then, they brought on Neeam Khan, the man who designed the dress for this most divine woman.  ”Oh what a gift to humanity you are!” gushed Ms. Sally.  ”That you have it within you to clothes worthy of this striking woman!”  ”Clearly you must be the first man to design the peplos for the next Panathenaia!”

Wonder if Larry ever so convered a state dinner during the George W. Bush years and if ever brought on the designer of any of Laura’s dresses while having a Republican partisan coo over the excellence of that classy First Lady’s attire.