Set em’ up, take em’ down. Did you ask yourself why Obama, Biden, Axelrod, and leftists of all stripes appeared to side with the pro-Ann Romney camp? Did it make you stop and think? Or did you buy into the distraction?
Crazy headlines like “Obama Throws Hilary Rosen Under the Bus” make you wonder why he would do that to someone who visited the White House 35 times since he became president. It’s because he isn’t really throwing her under the bus; he’s just saying he is.
Consider this excerpt from the poem “Child of Europe”:
Let your lie be even more logical than the truth itself
So the weary travelers may find repose in the lie.
After the Day of the Lie gather in select circles
Shaking with laughter when our real deeds are mentioned.
Behind the distractions, the Left, socialists, communists, Marxists whatever you want to call them have been “pushing centralization and collectivism” (see AT’s editor Thomas Lifson’s blog post) of the government right under our noses through lies and propaganda.
Republicans wonder why Obama’s buddies keep getting to set the narrative. The answer’s obvious — the Republicans keep taking the bait.
Throwing out chum to the chattering classes is right out of the Democrat consultant and Mao admirer Anita Dunn’s strategy to sidetrack us from the destructive transformative policies this administration has put in place.
Dunn’s name keeps popping up. She visits the White House regularly, and her PR firm SKDKnickerbocker was behind Sandra Fluke’s media firestorm; now we find Hilary Rosen works at SKDK.
Let’s recap the last three months just to get a handle on team Obama’s modus operandi.
In January Obama media reporter George Stephanopolous throws out a line about whether birth control should be covered in Obamacare at the Republican debate. Three weeks later what has all the conservatives in a tizzy? Sandra Fluke and her ridiculous call for free birth control and how she was wronged by a congressional committee who wouldn’t hear her case.
Non-stop media coverage ensued, but while everyone was looking at this nonsense, the administration continued to toil away 24/7 on creating and implementing socialist policies.
Next comes Trayvon Martin. His death came on February 26, but the chum throwers didn’t place it in the news cycle until March 19. More non-stop media coverage; more underground workers making the overthrow of capitalism a goal within their reach.
Now that Trayvon’s case has calmed down after the George Zimmerman arrest, enter stage right, Hilary Rosen, leftist media pundit. She makes an incendiary statement about Ann Romney “never working a day in her life,” and all hell breaks loose.
Not only are conservatives attempting to compare the illogic of this woman’s words with past remarks by feminists, but leftists are talking like they’re so above the vitriol Rosen spewed.
As a result of the Rosen affair, we’re all focused on antiquated mommy wars which were settled 50 years ago; nobody thinks stay at home moms don’t work. But that doesn’t matter. All that matters is conservatives just keep swallowing the Left’s brain candy.
And the driven-to-distraction narrative goes on…and on. We don’t have to jump every time Obama and his minions try to play us like fiddles.
The Hannitys, Becks and Limbaughs don’t need to comment. Instead they should highlight the egregious policies being practiced in the health care industry right now. They need to hammer away about the bad economy; Obama’s Achilles Heel. They need to instruct us on how centralization and collectivism happens on the street level.
They should point out how education reform is being spearheaded by Obama operatives (Anita Dunn pops up here as well; SKDK represents StudentsFirst and a mayoral candidate in NYC whom StudentsFirst is also backing) in conjunction with Republican sympathizers.
Wouldn’t it be cool if the next time the Left entices us with some manufactured crisis, we just ignore it and continue on with exposing what’s really going on?
In the unlikely event that any of the challenges to Barack Obama’s candidacy for a second term makes it all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court and succeeds, then what?
Before the case even got that far, would Judges and Justices appointed by Obama be eligible to hear and rule on the issue? Can you imagine Hannity or Limbaugh if they do rule? Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann (if he gets a job) if they don’t?
If Obama is ruled ineligible to serve as President of the United States, is he immediately removed from office? If so, who becomes President? If Obama’s 2008 election was invalid, it seems that Joe Biden’s election as Vice President would also be invalid. Next in line would be House Speaker John Boehner.
If John Boehner assumes the presidency, would the GOP nominate him as the 2012 candidate? Boehner isn’t ready to retire. Why would he want to give up the Speakership in order to be President for a few months. Would Boehner appoint Mitt Romney as Vice President? Would the Senate confirm Romney? Would Romney accept the job?
Would Boehner pardon Obama?
Who do the Democrats nominate for President? Biden? The party never warmed to him as a presidential candidate in his multiple tries. Hillary Clinton? John Kerry? Al Gore? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Keith Ellison (a real American Muslim)? Cory Booker? Dennis Kucinich?
What happens to all the laws, executive orders and appointments that Obama signed? Is ObamaCare the law? Are Sonya Sotomayor and Eleana Kagan Supreme Court Justices? Did Sandra Fluke really need all of that birth control?
Obama hasn’t signed a budget sinced he’s been President, but is the debt ceiling valid? Is all of that debt backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America?
Would Obama owe the U.S. Treasury his salary, rent on the White House? Would he have to reimburse the Treasury for his security and vacations? Does he has to reimburse all his donors from the 2008 and 2012 campaigns?
I can understand why Judges would look for procedural or jurisdictional grounds not to hear such a case.
What would be better for the country? To pursue the issues raised by the Objectors or look the other way?
Far be it from me to note the superficial and inconsequential, but when I see Fluke I think more “chaste librarian” than raging “slut.”
By Olivia Nuzzi
The Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh drama has succeeded in sparking a national debate about false equivalency in the media. Of course, things like sexism and misogyny exist on both the right and left. But on which side is it worse? And on which side – if any – is it fundamental?
In a piece posted here yesterday, Art Gallagher attacked “misogynists lefties” whom he admitted he had “never heard of” until The Daily Beast’s Kristen Powers brought them to his attention. Though, not knowing about these media figures didn’t stop Gallagher from blindly agreeing with Powers that they were “misogynists.”
I have a big problem with anyone making a diagnosis from a distance. Is Rush Limbaugh a misogynist? I suppose to figure that out you’d have to talk to his mother and four wives.
Does Rush Limbaugh say misogynistic things, and has he done so consistently throughout his career? From his claim that having “two or three abortions” is a part of a feminist “paying her dues” to his cracks about First Lady Michelle Obama’s figure, the evidence isn’t difficult to find.
However, none of that means that Limbaugh is without insight. And liberals who nod in agreement with the establishment left – conceding that he’s a mere useless blowhard – are not doing themselves any favors.
Limbaugh is right on occasion – there are indeed militant feminists, and what they espouse is arguably as harmful as Mel Gibson calling your daughter “sugar tits.” Admitting that doesn’t mean that I’m not a feminist, it means I’m not an ideological imbecile (though the readers on this website may disagree.)
The assertion that “lefties” are never reprimanded for their sexist or racist remarks may read as accurate if you live in a bubble. Evidently, Gallagher’s bubble hasn’t yet been punctured by reality on this topic.
Last May, MSNBC host and converted-liberal, Ed Schultz, was suspended by the network after calling Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut” on his radio program. I condemned that statement, as did every one from Alyssa Rosenberg from the left-wing Think Progress, to the Women’s Media Center’s President Julie Burton, to Keith Olbermann – that’d be one of those “misogynists lefties” Gallagher had “never heard of.”
In 2008, the National Organization for Women (NOW) circulated a petition, protesting MSNBC host Chris Matthews’ “record of ‘overt sexism when discussing women.'” They based this claim on research conducted by the known-liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America. The left-leaning NOW denounced Matthews for “sexist comments” made about Hillary Clinton, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the female correspondents who he worked with at MSNBC.
Also in 2008, MSNBC suspended Tucker Carlson’s guest-host David Shuster for suggesting that the Clinton campaign had “pimped out” Chelsea Clinton.
The late, great Christopher Hitchens was often the subject of liberal rage for his alleged sexism in the form of observations such as “Mrs. Clinton, looking like the dog being washed” and assessments of that same target as being “flagrant, hysterical, repetitive and pathological lying.” One of Hitchens’ later works, a Vanity Fair piece entitled “Why Women Aren’t Funny” saw him denounced as “sexist” by Mediaite’s Rachel Sklar and comedian Sarah Silverman.
In 2010, liberal hero Michael Moore, along with noted feminist author Naomi Wolfe, was the subject of a left-wing protest labeled “Moore and Me.” After making comments deemed “insensitive” regarding rape allegations against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and offering to post his $20,000 bail, Moore was declared a “rape apologist.” Also smeared with the label was Naomi Wolfe, who – along with Moore and a handful of others – refused to condemn and dismiss Assange by virtue of the unclear rape allegations made against him.
And should you be under the impression that those on the left are only castigated when they’re criticizing fellow liberals, you’re mistaken.
Keith Olbermann has come under fire numerous times from the liberal and feminist establishments for his bombastic remarks about conservative women. In 2009, Olbermann was called out by the left-wing Air America’s editor of news and politics, Megan Carpentier, for “belittling” Malkin’s voice with his impersonation of her. Carpentier went on to suggest that Olbermann’s attack relied on “silly stereotypes” and “imagery that brings to mind victims of domestic violence.”
This past November, Bill Maher – another one of those “misogynists lefties” Gallagher had “never heard of” – was scolded by feminists after he made a joke about the detention of CBS’s Lara Logan, wherein he suggested that America would be willing to send Elisabeth Hasselbeck to Egypt in exchange for the safe return of the foreign correspondent.
The Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh episode is a unique one, mainly because Sandra Fluke is not a public figure. Limbaugh did not simply take a one-shot at a commentator – he used his platform as the loudest voice in radio to verbally batter a civilian for days.
Far be it from me to note the superficial and inconsequential, but when I see Fluke I think more “chaste librarian” than raging “slut.” Not to mention, Fluke’s testimony itself had nothing to do with sex. Which leads me to believe that Limbaugh didn’t even bother to listen to her speak – and perhaps he didn’t even bother to look at her. Had he done so, he would’ve witnessed a civil woman discuss a friend who paid, out of pocket, for the birth control pills she was prescribed to treat a medical condition.
It’s true that both the liberal and conservative movements have leaders, followers and mouthpieces who often thoughtlessly employ incendiary rhetoric. But it’s also true that those with sharp tongues on both sides of the aisle face consequences.
Unfortunately for ideologues, more people are governed by their sense of Right and Wrong than Right and Left.
Olivia Nuzzi was briefly a MMM contributor until Dan Jacobson’s triCityNews lured her away with money and colorful language. We’re glad to have her back, even if only to set us straight.
In a column published yesterday on The Daily Beast, Kirsten Powers, who is also a FoxNews analyst, calls the leftist media on their hypocrisy over the Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke controversy.
Powers doesn’t want anyone to give Limbaugh a break over calling Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.” On the contrary, she says his apology is an inauthentic attempt to keep his advertisers from abandoning him. She’s probably right. Kirsten wants Rush to grovel more and to call Fluke on the phone, just President Obama did.
While I agree that Limbaugh’s comments were inappropriate and over the top, I predict that Fluke will parlay the resulting exposure into a lucrative media career. Watch out Rachel Madow and the lefties on The View — Sandra Fluke is your new competition. If living well is the best revenge, we’ll be seeing more of Fluke gloating than we’ll see or hear of Limbaugh groveling.
Powers has nothing to worry about. Fluke is no competition for Kirsten. Kirsten has integrity.
Which is why Powers calls out Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman and a couple of misogynists lefties I’ve never heard of (I’m sure they’ve never heard of me either), in graphic detail.
What if they said those horrible things about Jews or African-Americans, Powers asks rhetorically as if the answer was obvious.
The answer is obvious, but not the one Powers was implying. If Matthews or Olbermann said something racist about a Jew, nothing much would happen. If they said something racist about an African American, they would be boycotted and/or fired. Only Whoopie Goldberg, Jessie Jackson and rappers are allowed to make money using the N-word.
Bill Maher, the “grand pooh-bah of media mysogyny” is allowed to make money using the C-word. He can refer to conservative women like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum’s wife in sexist and sexual terms, make money and get a pass from Gloria Steinem.
Powers says that unless the left stream media starts holding their resident misogynists to account, “the fight against media misogyny will continue to be perceived as a proxy war for the Democratic Party, not a fight for fair treatment of women in the public square.”
What fight against media misogyny? Powers just laid it out perfectly in her piece. The left isn’t fighting against media misogyny. They are the media misogynists!
The right doesn’t have a media misogyny problem. Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Megyn Kelly, Sarah Palin and a great deal of the FoxNews talent, including Powers are not demeaned by male members of the media right or center right. When male members of the media right, like Bill O’Reilly for example, criticise Maddow, The View women or Nancy Pelosi, he never does it in a misogynist manner. I’m sure someone can come up with right wing media types on the fringe who are consistently misogynistic, but no one with the prominence of Maher, Matthews or Olbermann.
Limbaugh is not consistently misogynistic, like those lefties. I don’t know what is in Rush’s heart, but if he was consistently misognynistic his career would be over. And not because of the left wouldn’t tolerate it. Rush’s listeners would not tolerate such behavior.
Rush Limbaugh didn’t apologise because the the outcry from the leftist media and the Democrats. He lives for and cashes in over outcrys from the left. He apologised because of the outcry from Republicans and his right-wing advertisers.
We’ll know the left is fighting against media misogyny and that the Democratic Party truly stands for women’s rights when President Obama’s Super PAC returns the $1 million dollars that Bill Maher donated.
Powers is too smart to have the audacity to hope that happens. Otherwise she would have called for the President’s PAC to return the money. She left that task up to The Weekly Standard.
In the meantime, the “fight against media misogyny” is a “proxy war for the Democratic Party,” just like this whole fabricated contraception controversy is a proxy war for the Democratic Party.
“Contraception is working just fine. Leave it alone.” ~Mitt Romney answering George Stephanopoulos’s questions regarding States having the right to ban contraception during the New Hampshire GOP presidential debate
President Obama and his allies in the mainstream media completely fabricated the recent contraception controversy in order to distract America from its real problems which are likely to get worse between now and November 6.
Rather than talk about almost 25 million working age Americans without jobs, Obama wants America to be afraid that his Republican challenger would ban birth control if elected.
George Stephanopoulos of ABC News, formerly President Bill Clinton’s Communications Director, went to great lengths during the New Hampshire GOP presidential debate to get a sound bite of Mitt Romney saying that States have the right to ban birth control in early January.
In November of last year, Obama told then Archbishop, now Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, the leader of the Catholic Church in the United States, that he “get most of what he wanted” regarding contraception as the White House was hashing out the implentation of ObamaCare.
By early February, Obama changed his mind,betrayed Dolan and shifted the national debate away from the economy and on to issues that were “working just fine” — birth control and religious freedom — when he announced the ObamaCare regulations that requires all employers, including those affiliated with religious institutions, to provide health care that includes the cost of contraceptives.
Romney avoided the trap in January, but Rick Santorum jumped into it with both feet in February, as did Republicans in the House and Senate.
Rush Limbaugh did the congressional Republicans a favor by drawing attention to himself, and away from the Blunt Amendment which was never going to pass, with his crass remarks about Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown Law School student who is as much a part of this Obama change the subject gambit as Stephanopoulos is.
But Limbaugh did Obama a bigger favor. The President called Fluke yesterday to thank her for speaking out for women’s rights. Now he’s framing the contraception debate as a women’s right’s issue.
Fluke is not a 23 year old coed who can’t afford birth control as originally reported in the media. She’s a 30 year old women’s rights activist. It was no fluke that the Democrats wanted her to testify before congress. She’s likely to be the President’s 2012 Obama girl.