Iraq War Coverage Declines as Conditions Improve Part 2
Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell
This is the second story that I have found this month that writes about the fact that the Iraq war is not being covered in the news now that the situation is improving. You can read my first post on this subject here. The reason that I feel the need to write about this is that I feel that it vindicates one of my positions on the media.
The media wants either Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton to be the next president. The media wanted the Republicans to lose control of the house and senate in 2006, and they got their wish. The media, and the Democrats, were able to use the Iraq war for the benefit of the Democrats when the war wasn’t going well. It was all we heard about on the news. But then a funny thing happened on the way to the presidential election. The situation began to improve as the surge took hold. As the situation improved, the media slowly but surely stopped covering the war because the war was no longer useful in their goal of getting Democrats elected. In fact, the war became harmful to their ultimate goal.
Lets take a look at some of the numbers.
Statistics clearly illustrate the diminished attention. For the first 10 weeks of the year, the war accounted for 3 percent of television, newspaper and Internet stories in the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s survey of news coverage. During the same period in 2007, Iraq filled 23 percent of the news hole.
The difference is even more stark on cable news networks: 24 percent of the time spent on Iraq last year, just 1 percent this year.
The article goes onto say that it could be possible that the fatigue factor has set in and that is why coverage is down, yet the article then goes on to pinpoint the precise time that the coverage began to dwindle.
It’s possible to pinpoint the exact week that the switch turned off. The war averaged 30 minutes per week of coverage last year on the three network evening newscasts up until Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the U.S. forces, testified in September about the surge’s progress, according to news consultant Andrew Tyndall. In the last 15 weeks of the year, the broadcasts collectively spent four minutes per week on the war.
What? The surge is a success? America is winning? Okay, move along people, there is nothing to see here. That is the attitude the media has adopted once things began to improve for America, and decline for the Democrats who need America to lose in Iraq.
When I find stories of American successes in Iraq I write about them, I feel that the word must get out there. The mainstream media won’t write about it, so I do. Lately because of this I have been accused of glorifying war, and been reprimanded by commenters of how nothing good can come from war. I am not trying to glorify war, and yes, good can come out of war. I am simply trying to write about the successes that America has accomplished in the war, I am writing about how we have turned a corner in the war. I wish we never had to go to war, but that is an unachievable goal. As far as nothing good ever coming from war, I think Jewish people would disagree with that notion when talking about WWII, as would black people when talking about the civil war.
There have now been studies done that show a clear connection between the improving situation in Iraq and the declining media coverage and I find this unacceptable. When it favored the Democrats to have the war in the news every day, it was. Now that it does not, it isn’t. It seems pretty clear cut to me. There is an old saying, you have to take the bad with the good. Well, the media doesn’t subscribe to the opposite, you have to take the good with the bad.
The media doesn’t take the good with the bad, they just pretend that they don’t see it. They are doing a disservice to the men and women who wear the uniform. They are doing a disservice to the men and women who volunteer to fight and die to maintain our way of life. It’s a shame.
Iran is Teaching Children the Virtues of Jihad
This is an article that I have been meaning to write about for a week but it slipped to the back burner with all of the Barack Obama news concerning his racist “reverend.” But now is the time to write about this subject. The subject at hand is the fact that Iranian schools, and presumably other Middle Eastern schools in my opinion, are teaching their children the virtues on Jihad.
When third grade school children in Iran turn to page 113 of their textbook “Let’s Read,” they find a passage that says, “At that time, the Israeli officer pounded (three-year-old) Muhammad’s head with the rifle’s stock and his warm blood sprinkled upon his (six-year-old brother) Khaled’s hands.”
In another third-grade text, “Gifts of Heavan,” an illustration of a monster wearing the Star of David is seen going through a tidy Muslim town leaving garbage everywhere.
That is the kind of hatred that is being taught to THIRD GRADERS in Iran. As bad as that seems, as bad as the hatred that is being taught to little children seems, it just gradually grows more and more hateful as the children grow older.
The seventh grade text “Islamic Culture and Religious Instruction,” which refers to the West and Israel as the “Arrogant Ones,” tells students that war is unavoidable and victory is guaranteed “in order to continue with all our power our revolution against the Arrogant Ones and the oppressors.”
An eighth grade text says the “army of Islam would make the Arrogant Ones fall in holy Jihad and heavy attack.”
And then these children get to high school.
On page 20 of the high school textbook “Humanities,” the United States is described as an “imperialist country” that “does not refrain from massacring people, from burying alive soldiers of the opposite side and from using mass-destruction weapons. It makes use of atomic bombs. … It creates the greatest dictatorships and the violent and torturous security-oriented regimes, and defends them.”
This is what is being taught to Middle Eastern children.This is not being taught to them for any other reason than the fact that Jihadists believe that the Koran compels them to spread Islam across the globe. Jihadists also believe it is perfectly acceptable to spread the word of Muhammad through violence and they are teaching their children this violence on a daily basis.
This is what we are at war with, it is more than just a struggle between good and bad, right and wrong, and America vs Iraq. We are at war with an ideology that believes it is their God given right to either convert or kill infidels. We are the infidels. That is what they are teaching their children, indoctrinating their children into this hatred from the time they are born. Their children know nothing other that what they are taught, and they are being taught to hate us.
This will not go away after the election when George Bush is gone from power. This is not a problem based on our foreign policy, it is a problem based on ideology. Ideology that will not go away just because George Bush is no longer the president.
Let’s just hope the next president has the balls (sorry Hillary) to look Jihadists in the eye and continue the fight for the American way.
Supreme Court to Hear Gun Control Case This Week
This week offers the first real test of what I believe will be President Bush’s most important legacy. Long after President Bush has left office, and long after the Iraq war, his lasting impression will be that of his supreme court nominations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito.
This week the supreme court will hear it’s first case on the second amendment in many years. The supreme court is going to hear the case about whether Washington D.C.’s handgun ban violates the second amendment.
But this case is even more important than just whether D.C. residents can carry handguns. This is the first case that the supreme court will hear in many years where there is no precedent set to draw upon. This case, according to this Washington Post article, will actually delve into whether the second amendment applies to individuals or just state militias.
“This may be one of the only cases in our lifetime when the Supreme Court is going to be interpreting the meaning of an important provision of the Constitution unencumbered by precedent,” said Randy E. Barnett, a constitutional scholar at the Georgetown University Law Center. “And that’s why there’s so much discussion on the original meaning of the Second Amendment.”
The outcome could roil the 2008 political campaigns, send a national message about what kinds of gun control are constitutional and finally settle the question of whether the 27-word amendment, with its odd structure and antiquated punctuation, provides an individual right to gun ownership or simply pertains to militia service.
“The case has been structured so that they have to confront the threshold question,” said Robert A. Levy, the wealthy libertarian lawyer from Family Lawyers Brisbane who has spent five years and his own money to bring District of Columbia v. Heller to the Supreme Court. “I think they have to come to grips with that.”
This case looks to have wide ranging implications and it is the first real test in my opinion of the reformed supreme court under President Bush. I have been of the belief, and I have written about it, that President Bush’s lasting, and very under-rated, legacy would be the two men that he was able to get appointed to the supreme court. This is their first test. lets hope they pass.
Barack Obama’s Racist “Reverend” Resigns From Campaign
Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s racist “reverend” has left the Obama campaign. Jeremiah Wright was part of Obama’s African American Religious Leadership Committee. (His spiritual advisory committee.)
Jeremiah Wright preaches to his congregation hatred and bigotry towards whites, his sermons are divisive and offensive. This man is the man that Barack Obama called his spiritual leader and good friend. Obama says he is the only candidate that can bring America back together and heal our souls, yet this is who he looks to for guidance?
Here is part of Obama’s statement after the good “reverend” left the Obama campaign.
“What I hope is [that] what the American people will trust is what I believe,” he said, that “my values, my ideas, what I’ve spoke about in terms of bringing the country together will override a guilt by association.”
It should tell you something when Obama uses the term “guilt by association” when talking about the man whom Obama seeks direction from. Obama touts his judgement leading up to the Iraq war to claim that he would never have invaded in the first place. What kind of judgement does it show the American people when Obama is influenced for twenty years by this bigoted “reverend?”
Barack Obama has run on bringing the country together, uniting us, and healing us. Yet Obama’s minister preaches the opposite. Barack Obama is not fit to be president, this just reaffirms it. Obama’s spiritual leader and good friend is nothing but a race baiting bigot, and Obama looks to this man for guidance.
How can Obama unite the country when his guidance councilor is so adept at dividing America?
Congress Passes New Budget, Hold Onto Your Wallets
It is a phrase that conservatives say over and over again. It is always true, and it will always be true. The phrase is said so often that it probably loses it’s luster. Last week it was proven true once again. What phrase am I referring to? This one:
(Insert Democrat name here) is a tax and spend liberal.
Last week the Democrats passed a new $300 billion dollar budget increase over the next five years. How are they going to pay for this? I don’t even have to answer that question, we all know the answer. By raising taxes, naturally. It won’t just be by repealing Bush’s tax cuts though, as Democrats have promised. It won’t just be by raising taxes on the rich, not unless we redefine the term “rich.”
From the Washington Post:
“(Barack) Obama and (Hillary) Clinton both promise to reverse Bush’s tax cuts for wealthier taxpayers, but the Democratic budget they’ll be voting for would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more,”
Congratulations are in order for all working Americans out there, YOU ARE RICH. Way to go, I bet you didn’t even know how rich you were until now. Truth be told, everyone knows that Democrats consider people who have a job and work for a living “rich.” Everyone knows that Democrats always take money from the workers to give it to people who aren’t working to support themselves. If you didn’t realize that before now, maybe this will help you realize what the Democrats stand for.
We are in a time where the “experts” say we may be headed for a recession, and Democrats tell us that the middle class is struggling just to get by. So what is their solution to this problem? To take more of our money away. About $2000 a year away to be exact. That sounds like a sound economic policy, doesn’t it?
As bad as this sounds it will get much worse. After November, it will get much worse. Just wait until we get “free” health-care. You will be amazed at how much “free” can cost.
The term “tax and spend” has never rung so true, it is such a sweet sound to the Democrat’s ears.
Wake Up America Endorses Hillary Clinton, Can it be True?
I have been enjoying the downfall of the Clinton campaign. It has been so delightful to watch the Clinton’s go down in flames. While enjoying the downfall of Hillary, it comes at a price. I have written many times that I thought Barack Obama would be a worse choice for president than even Hillary. He is much farther to the left than even she is. But I still couldn’t help myself, I thought it would be great to see Hillary fall in the primaries and then the Clinton’s would be gone forever. I thought we could deal with Obama after that first goal was accomplished, but then along came John McCain and now there is no conservative candidate to vote for. This throws my whole plan into disarray.
Yes, even though I knew that Obama was worse than Clinton, I still routed for Democrats to vote for him. Until now. After seeing who Obama has invested his faith in, his trust in, his friendship in, the “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright, who is nothing but a racist pig, and anti-American scumbag, I can no longer route for Obama to beat Hillary in the primary. This “reverend” has made it impossible for me to hope (the audacity of hope) for an Obama victory over Clinton.
Nothing pisses me off more than people who owe everything that they have to this great nation, but still just piss on the back of America. Michelle Obama is just such a person. She claims to just now be proud of her country now that her husband has a chance to be president. She has claimed that America is a mean nation. Yet, she went to Harvard above others who had better grades and more credentials. Why? Because she was black and received special treatment because of it. Yet she believes the hate that Jeremiah Wright spews from his vile mouth.
Barack Obama stopped wearing a flag pin after September 11th, why? Could it be because his spiritual advisor, and good friend, Jeremiah Wright says that America deserved September 11th? I think that that is possible.
Do we want a couple who shows such disdain for the country that provided them with everything that they have to be in the white house? I think not. Because of Jeremiah Wright I am throwing my support behind Hillary Clinton in the Democrat primaries. Hillary Clinton may be a communist, but at least she is no Barack Obama.
Barack Obama, while as a state senator, refused to classify BORN, living, breathing babies, whose hearts were beating that accidentally survived a murder attempt an abortion as being alive. Instead these living babies were left on the operating table to die alone and uncared for, to be thrown in the trash. There is nothing more vile than refusing to protect those who can not protect themselves. You can read about that here.
An Obama campaign staffer was forced to resign for calling Hillary a monster, well Obama is the true monster.
Democrat voters I urge you to vote for Hillary Clinton.
You go girl!
The heat is being turned up on Al Gore by global warming skeptics. (The irony of that statement makes me smile). More and more people seem to be questioning Al Gore and the bullshit that he has been spewing across the world in the name of climate change. Yesterday I wrote this post about a conservative group that is now running television ads that point out Al Gore’s energy use and global warming hypocrisy. Today you can read here about how the founder of the Weather Channel thinking that Al Gore should actually be sued for fraud because of his propaganda.
“Is he committing financial fraud? That is the question,” Coleman said.
“Since we can’t get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue,” Coleman said. “I’m confident that the advocates of ‘no significant effect from carbon dioxide’ would win the case.”
That is all we global warming skeptics want from the alarmists, a debate. However Al Gore says the debate is over and the science is settled. I have never even heard a debate. Al Gore, who last time I checked was a politician and not a scientist, has shoved this shit down our throat and told us we must eat it. People are beginning to get fed up with elitist, alarmist politicians telling us how to live our lives for the good of the planet while they live a totally “environmentally insensitive” lifestyle. Al Gore is making financial gains off of this hoax and because of that he has a vested interest in fucking us over on environmental issues at every turn. And he is doing just that.
But the tide is turning. People are beginning to wake up and question Saint Al. And it is about time. The time is growing short to stop this scam from being perpetrated on the American people. It is being taught in school as fact, and our children are being indoctrinated into this thought process of taxation for better environment. We are the last generation that has been taught to think for ourselves and we need to continue to ensure that our children think for themselves or we will lose all that America stands for. Not just on the environment, but also on the way our government is supposed to work.
“As you look at the atmosphere over the last 25 years, there’s been perhaps a degree of warming, perhaps probably a whole lot less than that, and the last year has been so cold that that’s been erased,” he said.
“I think if we continue the cooling trend a couple of more years, the general public will at last begin to realize that they’ve been scammed on this global-warming thing.”
I hope he is right, but the public in general just follows along with the latest trend of the day. The latest trend is being environmentally friendly. Don’t get me wrong, I am not against protecting the environment. But when taken to the level that Al Gore has taken it, without settled scientific fact, I have a problem. When a person is not allowed to build a house because it might harm a frog or a bug that is indigenous to the area ( it has happened) I have a major problem. And when I am told that man is destroying the planet and the only way to solve the problem is to take more of my money, well you can just go to hell. Now that would be hot.
Perhaps John Coleman is right. Perhaps litigation is the only way to go. Al Gore continues to duck debating the issue, maybe if he had to testify under oath we could get to the truth. I am up for whatever it take to show that this man is full of shit.
Barack Obama’s Racist “Reverend”
Barack Obama attended the Trinity United Church of Christ for twenty years. The reverend of that church, who until he recently retired, was Jeremiah Wright. Barack Obama has called “Reverend” Wright his spiritual leader. Obama was also married by the great “reverend.”
This is what the so-called reverend said about Hillary Clinton during a sermon:
“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said. “Hillary would never know that.
“Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”
“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty”
Now that is full of the love of God, isn’t it? If you think that is much adu about nothing, just watch the video below. Update: the original video I posted was removed by youtube, I have replaced it with the following video.
The “reverend” is dividing America between whites and blacks. He calls America the U.S. of KKKA. He says instead of singing “God Bless America” we should sing Goddamn America. This gives us a little more perspective on why Michelle Obama said that for the first time in her adult life she is proud of her country. This is the man that married Michelle and Barack, if she has been listening to his bullshit all these years it is no wonder that she isn’t proud of the country that put her through college. She probably has the same disdain for the country that the “reverend” has.
The “reverend” then goes on to basically say that America brought on the terror attacks of 9/11. Back in October I posted about how Barack Obama took of his lapel flag pin after September 11th, on February 13th, I posted about one of Obama’s campaign headquarters displaying the communist flag. In this post I also included a video where Obama refuses to put his hand over his heart, and looking disinterested and bored, during the playing of the national anthem. These posts were met with mixed reactions. But many people thought neither issue a big deal.
I now ask all of you who thought it wasn’t a big deal for Obama to remove the flag pin from his lapel after 9/11 if you still think it isn’t a big deal. Now that you now Obama’s spiritual leader thinks we deserved 9/11, do you think that maybe Obama believes we deserved it also? Could that be why he removed the pin? Could that be why he doesn’t place his hand over his heart during the national anthem?
Can we really have a couple like this in the white house? A first lady that appears to loathe the country, and a president who quite possible believes we deserved to be attacked?
Geraldine Ferraro Resigns, But Why?
I have not weighed in as of yet, nor did I intend to, on Geraldine Ferraro’s supposed racist comments, but this is just too juicy to pass up any longer. This is what the former vice presidential candidate had to say:
“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”
This was naturally perceived by the politically correct left, and by opportunistic people on the right, to be racially motivated. After all, she made almost these same exact comments about Jesse Jackson many years earlier. She has a history here.
Has anybody stopped to ask the question “could this be true?” Let’s be honest here, Barack Obama has no qualifications to be president, so why is he so popular? He became a United States senator just three years ago, and halfway through his term he has abandoned his duties to the senate to run for a job he is clearly not ready for. Yet he continues to build momentum. Why? It can’t be his record, he has none. He abstained, or voted present to all of the controversial bills that he faced so that he would not be on record.
Obama is an empty suit with no plan, just rhetoric. He says nothing, but he says it well. So there must be something that he has in his favor. Could it possibly be that if he was just another white man running for president he would already have pulled out of the race? I find this extremely plausible. Surely Dodd, Biden, Edwards, and Kucinich were far more qualified than he, yet they are long gone. Why?
So why then must a person resign for saying something that they believe to be true? That is where I wanted to focus this post. Why should a person have to resign for saying anything? Do we not have the right to free speech? We used to, but the Democrats have pushed this whole political correctness bullshit down our throats for about twenty years now. Somehow over the course of the last twenty years we have become a society that allows free speech, but only as long as it doesn’t offend anybody. How free is that for free speech? It doesn’t seem so free to me.
Political correctness was designed by liberals to limit free speech to speech that is non offensive, but who is to decide what is offensive? By limiting what someone can say by limiting all offensive speech, we create this supposed Utopian country where speech is controlled under the guise of political correctness. The problems we are no longer allowed to talk about have not been solved, they are just hidden because we can’t talk about them.
Republicans have long been stereotyped as being bigoted and sexist, now one of the left’s own is falling prey to the political correctness mindthink of the left, and it is not going over well. How can this happen to the party that supposedly cares so much about political correctness?
The left has sensitised Americans to the point that nobody knows what is acceptable anymore. The Clinton campaign is trying desperately to attack Obama, yet they are scared to death that they will be branded as racists for attacking him. Liberals are falling into the politically correct trap that they themselves have been setting for all of these years.
Liberals never dreamed that political correctness would come back to haunt them, after all they are the ones who promise black voters that they will take care of them. They promise minorities the world and deliver nothing. Yet minorities keep voting for Democrats, and Democrats keep failing them. But they keep promising them they will take care of them. Democrats love minorities, that is a fact, however they like their minorities poor and dependent on government for survival. Just search the liberal blogs about Condi Rice and you will see some of the most despicable comments about this successful black woman that you can imagine. Barack Obama is a minority, but he is a successful minority, he threatens them because he does not need them.
This is why they are having so many problems with Obama. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has done it’s best to keep reminding voters that Obama is black.
Democrats are attacking each other over this. Keith Oberman said that Hillary was acting like Barack was the Democrat and she was the Republican because her campaign is now percieved as racist. How ignorant, and stereotypical is that comment? And how downright insulting is that type of comment to conservatives? That is what conservatives have been dealing with all these years.
They are falling into their own trap. For so long Republicans have had to apologise for benign statements that have been made, now Democrats are beginning to understand also how much of a restriction on free speech they have made.
Was what Ferraro said racist? Was a simple question worth her resignation? Was it the truth? All of these are viable questions, but nobody dares to ask them. Why? Because political correctness denies us the right to ask such questions.
Is this right? Not in my opinion, but as they say, what comes around goes around. And it has finally come around, it is too fun to watch.
Ferraro is a victim of the political correct mindset that she and other liberals have fostered over the years.
By the way, if Hillary wasn’t a woman, would she still be in the race?
New Television Ad Targets Al Gore’s Global Warming Hypocrisy
It seems as though Al Gore’s contrived, made-for-profit environmental crisis may be losing some steam. At least I hope so. A new national ad campaign is targeting Al Gore’s hypocrisy when it comes to saving the planet. Usually this type of ad campaign is relegated to people running for office. But in this case, Al Gore and his stupid ecochondriac environmental policies are so dangerous to average Americans, because of the money it will cost them, that advertising is now being run to try to save us from economy stalling tax policies hidden as environmental carbon offsets that Al Gore would have us pay.
Much like Eliot Spitzer, Al Gore doesn’t hold himself to the same standards he holds others to.
The advertisement begins with the sound of a chain being pulled and video of a light bulb coming on. “Here’s the electricity we use at home,” a male narrator says.
The bulb then goes dark as four rows of five bulbs come on behind it. “Al Gore uses 20 times as much,” the narrator continues,
Pictures of the former vice president with celebrities who are also global warming activists – such as actor Leonardo DiCaprio and comedian Larry David with his wife, Laurie, who produced Gore’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth” – then fill the screen.
“Mr. Gore’s friends use lots of energy, too, but Al Gore wants to cut our energy use, putting our jobs and our future in jeopardy,” the male voice states. “Mr. Gore’s future, on the other hand, couldn’t be brighter.
“We depend on reliable, affordable energy for our food, our transportation, our homes,” the narrator continues. “It’s the best protection we have against the hazards of life, and it’s even more important to people elsewhere who are struggling to survive, to break out of the prison of poverty.
“For them, affordable energy is something to hope for and something to celebrate,” he says as a video shows the people in Pignon, Haiti, cheering the arrival of that town’s first streetlight in February 2005.
“But what will happen to that hope if we restrict energy use?” the narrator asks.
“Some people may have a bright future,” he continues, as an image of Gore in a tuxedo fills the screen. “But don’t kid yourself – without affordable energy, hundreds of millions of people won’t have any future at all,” the narrator concludes as the original light bulb re-appears and then goes dark.
Al Gore is making millions off of this global warming scam and it is great to see a conservative group going after him. He must stop this see-through rhetoric, and let us everyday working class Americans live our lives instead of telling us how to live our lives while he leads a totally different lifestyle.
“Here you’ve got one of the wealthiest, most well-connected and powerful personalities around, and he literally cannot go by a single minute of the day without relying on the exact sort of energy that he wants everyone else to cut down on,” Kazman said.
“The question is: If he can’t do it, is it something we really want for humanity?” Kazman asked.
The answer to that question is simple, it doesn’t matter what he can or can’t do, he knows what is best for us so we must live the way he tells us to. Just don’t expect him to do the same. Just because it is best for us, doesn’t mean it is best for him.
Read more here.
