Archive for October 21st, 2009

Krauthammer Rips ‘Repulsive Audacity’ of White House for Fox News Attacks

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

As I’ve said before, the White House attack on Fox News should be very worrisome. Right now it’s Fox News, but what will happen to the next new outlet that becomes critical of Obama?

By now, the cat is out of the bag – President Barack Obama and his administration are no fans of the Fox News Channel and have been all too eager to wear that sentiment as a badge of honor.

However, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer identified the vigor with which the Obama administration has attacked Fox. He explained on Fox News Oct. 20 broadcast of “Special Report with Bret Baier” it’s different than just fighting back, but an effort to destroy the cable news channel.

“Look, it’s one thing for the government, the administration to attack opponents, institutions, media,” Krauthammer said. “It is another to go out to try and delegitimize them and destroy them.”

But as Krauthammer explained, the White House attacks could have more far-reaching repercussions than just promoting an agenda the Obama administration wants in place. According to Krauthammer, it has the potential to scare advertisers from Fox News and any media outlet that could follow up on a story broadcast on the channel.

“I thought it was sort of repulsive audacity on the part of the administration to go out and to declare Fox is not a real news organization, particularly when there might be big companies out there who might think twice about having an ad on Fox or other news media who might think twice about following a Fox story because it might incur the displeasure of the administration,” Krauthammer continued.

And Krauthammer said there were also similarities to how the White House is attacking the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He explained efforts by administration officials to go to the boardrooms of major corporations and influence their participation in the chamber is similar to politics associated with Chicago.

“Similarly, to go after the Chamber of Commerce – you can argue against it, defend yourself on the arguments – but to try to induce defections as a way to destroy it is a new level,” he said. “It’s Chicago-level politics.”

Original Link.

‘Now We Realize What IDF Had to Counter’

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

“I’m not sure if the Israeli standpoint is that much different than the Canadian standpoint, having had the experience in Afghanistan,” said Canadian Armed Forces Chief of the Defense Staff, General Walter J. Natynczyk, in a Tuesday interview to the IDF journal Bamahane.

The general’s three-day visit to Israel – his first official tour here since he began his tenure as head of Canada’s military in 2008 – concluded on Tuesday.

Natynczyk was commenting on the Goldstone report, which sharply criticized IDF tactics employed during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza last winter, saying he wished to read the report in order to understand whether the document took into account the complexities of the reality in which Israel had operated and the methods used by the enemy it was battling.

“I’ve got to look through the whole report and read it through myself. But I fully understand how when someone is attacked from houses, family houses, and so on, that there is a responsibility to protect oneself and protect civilians,” Natynczyk said. “I have just had a great education in terms of where weapons were fired from and so on. I want to look at the report in terms of how does it describe it… My impression of the Gaza Strip up to now has been through media reports. Now I got to actually see the size, the space, the context… It just puts into perspective many of the reports and also the operations that were conducted before.”

Original Link.

Democrats Lock Republicans Out of Committee Room

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

Here is another example of Democrats and their typical low handed partisan tactics.

Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to keep them from meeting when Democrats aren’t present.

Towns’ action came after repeated public ridicule from the leading Republican on the committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), over Towns’s failure to launch an investigation into Countrywide Mortgage’s reported sweetheart deals to VIPs.

For months Towns has refused Republican requests to subpoena records in the case. Last Thursday Committee Republicans, led by Issa, were poised to force an open vote on the subpoenas at a Committee mark-up meeting. The mark-up was abruptly canceled. Only Republicans showed up while Democrats chairs remained empty.

Republicans charged that Towns canceled the meeting to avoid the subpoena vote. Democrats first claimed the mark-up was canceled due to a conflict with the Financial Services Committee. Later they said it was abandoned after a disagreement among Democratic members on whether to subpoena records on the mortgage industry’s political contributions to Republicans.

A GOP committee staffer captured video of Democrats leaving their separate meeting in private chambers after the mark-up was supposed to have begun. He spliced the video to other footage of the Democrats’ empty chairs at the hearing room, set it to the tune of “Hit the Road, Jack” and posted it on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s minority webpage, where it remained as of press time.

Towns’s staffers told Republicans they were not happy about the presence of the video camera in the hearing room when they were not present. Issa’s spokesman said the Democrats readily acknowledged to Republicans that they changed the locks in retaliation to the videotape of the Democrats’ absence from the business meeting even though committee rules allow meetings to be taped.

“It’s not surprising that they would choose to retaliate given the embarrassment we caused by catching them in a lie on tape,” said Issa spokesman Kurt Bardella. “If only they
would use their creative energy to do some actual oversight rather than resorting to immature tactics, but I guess we’re getting some insight into what lengths they’ll go to avoid addressing the Countrywide VIP issue.”

Towns’s office said in a statement the locks were changed on Republicans “because they don’t know how to behave.” As for the video the GOP made, Towns’s office pointed out: “The minority is using taxpayer dollars to make these campaign style videos.”

Bardella replied: “It’s also those same taxpayer dollars that paid for them to sit in a room while they came up with an excuse to cancel the mark-up — what exactly do they do all day?”

Original Link.

“Denounce, Demonize, Marginalize, Neutralize” by Jack Kinsella of Omega Letter

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

“The chief function of propaganda is to convince the masses, whose slowness of understanding needs to be given time so they may absorb information; and only constant repetition will finally succeed in imprinting an idea on their mind.” “Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf (1925)

Hitler came to power in 1933 on a plurality vote of 43.9% which gave the Nazis the majority of seats in the German Parliament. Through the use of various contrived crises, Hitler managed to consolidate his power by seizing control of the German mainstream media.

All means of communication were monopolized by the government. The media and movies had to show pictures glorifying the Nazi movement and its illustrious leader. The Ministry of Propaganda, Josef Goebbels, had two main tasks.

* First, to censor anything that might be viewed as harmful to the Nazi Party or its agenda and eliminate the visible opposition.
* Secondly, to ensure that the Party’s agenda was presented in the most seductive and attractive way possible.

But before he could eliminate the opposition, he had to first get the man on the street on his side. Those who held the ‘right’ views were rewarded with status and inculcated with a sense of privilege.

Anyone who disagreed with the Reich was demonized as a liar, an agent of the Jews, or a tool of the special interests. Goon squads would show up at opposition rallies and provoke confrontations while the media portrayed the rallies and their participants as “angry mobs.”

The Nazis also used the public school system to indoctrinate the next generation of Nazis. Parents who tried to teach their own values were denounced by their children. Politi cally incorrect views were criminalized. Opposing viewpoints were heavily censored.

To ensure that everybody thought in the correct manner, Goebbels set up the Reich Chamber of Commerce in 1933. This organization dealt with literature, art, music, radio, film, newspapers e tc. To produce anything that was in these groups, you had to be a member of the Reich Chamber.

The Nazi Party decided if you had the right credentials to be a member. Any person who was not credentialed was not allowed to have any work published or performed.

The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was simple: to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information. Punishments ranged from banning of presentation and publishing of works at first; then later, deportation, imprisonment and even execution.

Eliminating the opposition always followed the same formula; denounce, demonize, marginalize, and neutralize. Sort of along the lines of the way the Obama administration does it, but not quite as subtle.

A study by the Pew Research Center showed that 40 percent of Fox News stories on Obama in the last six weeks of last year’s presidential campaign were negative. Similarly, 40 percent of Fox News’ stories on Obama’s Republican opponent, Senator John McCain, were negative.

On CNN, by contrast, there was a 22-point disparity in the percentage of negative stories on Obama (39 percent) and McCain (61 percent). The disparity was even greater at MSNBC, according to Pew, where just 14 percent of Obama stories were negative, compared to a whopping 73 percent of McCain stories—a spread of 59 points.

Because the Obama adminisration is a political entity made up of hundreds of individuals and not just Barack Obama himself, one must assume that there is some kind of political strategy behind the administration’s declaration of war against Fox News.

It has to be more than pettiness. Even among Democrats. One pretty much has to assume that not all of them are clinically deranged. And they can’t all be that stupid. Fox News reaches more Americans on any given day that all the rest of the networks combined.

And if there is one thing that the administration’s very public declaration of war means is that Fox’s ratings will only go up in direct proportion to the level of public conflict.

The White House has very publicly assigned Anita Dunn to fact-check Fox News’ Glenn Beck. Beck responded (brilliantly, I thought) by installing a hotline on his set and giving Hill the phone number.

Robert Gibbs mentions Fox News at almost every opportunity; the president himself has publicly identified Fox News as his principle antagonist. A few weeks ago, Obama conducted what they called a ‘Sunday blitz’ appearing on all major network news programs except Fox.

The administration has declared Fox News off-limits to all its senior members — again, very publicly — as a form of ‘punishment’ for what the administration is now calling ‘outright lies and distortions’ but without offering to either provide examples or correct the allegedly distorted record.

It is hard to imagine that the administration really believes that it can ‘break’ Fox News and convince it to parrot the party line the way that CNN and the major networks do in exchange for access.

And by attacking Fox, it has to know that it is alienating itself further from Fox’s core audience. The very audience the administration needs to persuade. What’s up with that?

Denounce, demonize, marginalize, neutralize. By pushing the message that Fox News is just a propaganda arm of the Republican Party and keeping the fight in the public arena, it reinforces the message that Fox News is unreliable.

That the mountains of evidence being heaped up by Glenn Beck, for example, are all Republican lies. By repeatedly denouncing them as liars and demonizing them as Republican shills, they hope to marginalize Fox in the eyes of all but the most devoted viewers, thereby neutralizing the threat posed to the administration’s agenda.

When a government denounces an opposing point of view as being “against the state” and then actively discriminates against that point of view, that’s called ‘censorship’. The Obama administration has unleashed the full force of the federal government against the Fox News Channel.

TIME Magazine is anything but conservative-friendly. But even they couldn’t help but wonder what Obama is hoping to gain.

It may be that, by seeking out a controversy that will get a lot of press (the media loves a “fight” with antagonists, which is why it’s important to call out Fox by name), the Administration wants to plant a seed in assigning editors’ and producers’ minds, to make them more likely to look at these stories with suspicion or think twice about giving them credence simply because they’re on an endless loop on Fox.

TIME even noted the stories Fox reported that nobody else would report.

The Administration, openly and not so openly, has been annoyed with the mainstream press (I know, I know, but I have to call it something) for picking up stories driven by Fox News, its hosts and various conservative media outlets— the townhall protests, the ACORN-pimp videos, the schoolteachers-are-brainwashing-kids-with-Obama-songs videos or what have you.

What I found most astonishing is the matter-of-fact way that the mainstream media is dealing with it. “Sure, the administration is trying to censor Fox News” . . . “Sure, the rest of the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama” . . . .

Is it just me or is anybody else shaking their heads at the cheerful admission that the mainstream media actively suppresses news that doesn’t favor the administration unless they are forced to in order to compete with Fox?

I used to think, “it can’t happen here.” It’s already happened. Even as I was watching it all unfold, right before my eyes.

And I still can’t quite believe it.

Original Link.
Also see “Will The World Recognize The Antichrist?”.

“What Happened to Global Warming?” by Todd Strandberg

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

For the past couple decades, there has been a growing bandwagon of people who have been telling us that the earth is on track to suffer catastrophic warming from man-generated greenhouse gases. I have been told that drastic action is needed to save ourselves from catastrophe.

Until the latter part of 2007, we had seen some rather surprising signs of global warming. Here are a few examples:

* The years 2005 and 2006 were said to be the warmest on record.
* We had several years of severe tropical storms all around the globe.
* Australia had experienced its worst drought on record.
* Glaciers and polar ice caps were showing signs of rapid meltdown.
* January 2007 was the warmest year in Netherlands since temperatures were first measured in 1706.

The whole idea of global warming does make sense. If you add billions of tons of a known greenhouse gas like C02 into the atmosphere, we should expect an increase in the global temperature. Since the dawn of the industrial age, CO2 levels have more than doubled.

Earth has a very complex weather system, so it’s not always clear what impact any type of change will have on the planet. Just as all signs pointed to an apocalyptic future, the threat took a dramatic reversal. The year 2007 started with record warmth, but it ended with record cold. The pattern of low mercury readings continued in 2008.

The year 2009 has been very much on the cool side. The Great Lakes area had one of its coolest summers on record. This past week has seen a long list of record low temps in North America and in Europe. I moved down here to Arkansas hoping to escape Nebraska’s chilly fall temps only to find an endless pattern of cold, rainy days.

Another blow to the climate-change agenda has been the revelation that much of the evidence of a warming climate has been the result of biased reporting. We’ve all been told the polar ice caps are rapidly melting away. The fact is that there is no change in sea ice.

“Thanks to a rapid rebound in recent months, global sea ice levels now equal those seen 29 years ago, when the year 1979 also drew to a close. Ice levels had been tracking lower throughout much of 2008, but rapidly recovered in the last quarter. In fact, the rate of increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards” (Daily Tech, 1/1/09).

Rather than question the validity of these most dire forecasts, the press continues to spew out left-wing propaganda. Just this last week, most news outlets ran an article about how the ice caps will be completely gone in 20 to 30 years. The report was from Pen Hadow, an environmentalist whose claim to fame is walking to the north and south pole. He admits his expeditions have added little to the field of science. Nonetheless, Hadow’s prediction was treated as gospel by the media.

Global warming is supposed to increase the severity and frequency of tropical storms. But hurricane and typhoon activity is at a record low. The Weather Channel is very slanted in its coverage of weather events. Despite its forecast of super-hurricanes fed by warmer waters, the Atlantic maps remain mockingly quite.

The most ridiculous part of the global warming debate is the ideas being proposed by activists like Al Gore. He would have us save the earth with trivial solutions like building more wind mills and taxing people’s carbon emissions. Of course, at the same time, he ignores the fact that several countries are rapidly becoming major producers of greenhouse gasses. China alone opens two power plants each month.

The whole goal of the environmental movement is to bring America under the umbrella of a global nanny organization. California is an early sign of this grab for power. State legislators in the Golden State want to end the use of incandescent bulbs by 2012. They just banned the sale of TVs that use a certain amount of electricity.

The Bible says that someday the world will come under the leadership of one man. The threat of terrorism, economic chaos, and global warming are the three leading reasons cited for why we need to cede our sovereignty to global governance. The way the world is changing right now, it might only take a heat wave in 2010 to push us over the edge.

***[RAPTURE READY CHANGE OF ADDRESS]***

Rapture Ready has had a post office address change. The new address for all postal mail is now:

Rapture Ready
P.O. Box 969
Benton, AR 72018

— Todd

Original Link.