“…I’m a woman of wealth and taste…”
Hillary, you don’t need to reintroduce yourself. The problem isn’t that we don’t know who you are. The problem is that we do know who you are, and entirely too well…
“…I’m a woman of wealth and taste…”
Hillary, you don’t need to reintroduce yourself. The problem isn’t that we don’t know who you are. The problem is that we do know who you are, and entirely too well…
Our free, independent press does what our free, independent always seems to do: take marching orders from the Democratic Party:
Thanks to some fabulous work by American Commitment’s Phil Kerpen digging through on Tuesday e-mails from Clinton State Department staffer Philippe Reines, he found that suspended CNN global affairs correspondent Elise Labott had communicated with Reines on multiple occasions to the point of taking marching orders over what she tweeted.
Amidst the e-mails obtained by Gawker (which included Politico’s Mike Allen promising soft pieces on Chelsea Clinton), Kerpen unearthed a series of instances where Labott (in words of Kerpen) “tweet[ed] on request” for the Clinton camp, ranging from so-called acts of transparency in her State Department to when exactly Clinton would depart her post in 2013.
This will no doubt be a great shock to anyone who didn’t already consider CNN an extension of the Democratic Party…
Last week, the New York Times seemed as determined to keep Ted Cruz’s new book A Time For Truth off their bestseller list as the BBC was to keep the Sex Pistol’s “God Save the Queen” out of the #1 spot on the singles chart during the Queen’s Silver Jubilee.
They claimed Cruz’s book was only eligible for the list due to “bulk sales.” There was just one tiny little problem with that theory: It wasn’t true.
“HarperCollins Publishers has investigated the sales pattern for Ted Cruz’s book A Time For Truth and has found no evidence of bulk orders or sales through any retailer or organization,” the publisher said in a statement [last] Friday.”
Also this:
“The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Chicago Tribune, Publisher’s Weekly, and Barnes & Noble all included A Time For Truth on their bestseller lists, with most placing it at #4 for nonfiction.”
Not only was Cruz in the right, he stood to benefit just by picking the fight. “For a conservative presidential candidate, the New York Times—an emblem of liberal elitism, right up there alongside arugula, the Toyota Prius and San Francisco—is a perfect foil.” (Also: “As it happens, A Time For Truth is a good read—especially by the dismal standards of the genre.”)
Yesterday, Ted Cruz was able to declare victory: “Five days after accusing The New York Times of bias, secrecy and foul play, Ted Cruz is finally getting what he wanted: a highly coveted spot on the paper’s bestseller list. Cruz’s memoir, A Time For Truth, will appear at No. 7 on the Times‘ list for hardcover nonfiction, reflecting its second-week sales, a Times spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday.”
Two more nuggets:
Yeah, they’re not even trying to hide it any more.
Short summary: Republican staffer Elizabeth Luten making unflattering remarks about the clothing of Obama’s daughters is such an outrage that not only was she fired, but two network news vans camped outside of her parents’ home and ” the Washington Post ran eleven separate stories (and counting) on her, and even “took a ‘foreign affairs’ reporter and put him on the investigation of Lauten.”
Meanwhile, Democratic Congressional staffer Donny Ray Williams, Jr., just plead guilty to rape and the Washington Post thought it worthy of…one article on the original charge, and one on him pleading guilty. Williams “worked for panels chaired by Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.). He also said he worked for Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).”
Because making a mildly critical comment about the President’s daughters’ clothes is so much more important than a congressional staffer pleading guilty to rape.
That’s the headline on this Dallas Observer story by Jim Schutze (who you may remember from my piece on Tom Leppert’s term as Dallas Mayor).
The Hall piece details what members of the conservative Texas blogsphere (myself included) have been saying for over a year: Hall was right, his critics were wrong:
When Hall began to criticize the way UT-Austin was run on strictly administrative grounds, he was roundly denounced as a sort of fifth-columnist for Perry’s assault on tenure. Later when he accused the university of corruption, he was hunted like a witch.
A campaign launched against Hall included impeachment proceedings in the Legislature and a criminal complaint brought to the Travis County district attorney. Even the establishment press turned on Hall, whose greatest sin was doing what the press is supposed to do — ask questions that make powerful people uncomfortable. An unbroken chorus of editorial page shrieking from Texas’ biggest newspapers denounced Hall and called for his resignation.
The dramatic denouement is threefold: Hall has been vindicated of charges he abused his role as a regent. The charges of mismanagement and corruption he brought against UT are all being re-investigated because now people are admitting he was on to something. And finally, Hall’s biggest accusers are starting to look like the biggest rats, the ones who had the most to hide.
In fact it’s hard to recall a case in Texas history where a person so roundly denounced has been so completely vindicated.
More:
Williamson, the reporter at The National Review, said in an email: “The Texas dailies have fallen down on the job covering this story, mainly because reporters perceive this as a confrontation between Rick Perry and the University of Texas, and they are reflexively hostile to Rick Perry.
“I’ve spent most of my life in the newspaper business, and I know bias when I see it: If there were a suggestion that Rick Perry were twisting arms to get family members into A&M, it would be on the front page of The Austin American-Statesman. But when the malefactors are UT administrators and the whistle-blowers are Perry appointees, reporters in Austin, Houston, Dallas and San Antonio become strangely incurious.”
While there isn’t a whole lot new to Schutze’s piece if you’ve been following the story on this and other blogs, the fact that even lefty alternative weeklies now have the same take on the scandal as Michael Quinn Sullivan is a big step forward for justice and transparency, and I commend the entirety of the piece to your attention.
(Hat tip: Push Junction.)
Doing a bunch of stuff, so here’s a more-or-less random linkSwarm:
So remember right after assault on our Libyan embassy in Benghazi, Mitt Romney issued a statement, then clarified those statements the next day?
Let’s roll the video, shall we?
Remember how the press jumped all over him, said it was a potentially campaign-ending gaffe?
Since then we’ve learned that:
This video timeline might help:
Watching and listening to Romney now, who do you agree with more: Mitt Romney, or reporters sounding outraged at his criticisms of the Obama Administration?
Both the Obama Administration and their lapdog media surrogates seem far more interested in defeating Obama’s political opponent than America’s Jihadest enemies, or telling the American people the truth.
Have a nice cup of randomness: