By Jerry A. Kane | Monday, June 28th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
A Senate committee unanimously approved major cybersecurity legislation which would allow Brother O to shut down Internet networks, block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries, and force private websites to comply with broad cybersecurity measures.
Last Thursday the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee agreed to send the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 to the Senate floor for a vote. The Act will create a White House Office of Cyberspace Policy and a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) center to adopt cybersecurity policies related to federal and private sector networks.
The legislation, crafted by Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Tom Carper (D-DE) is aimed at bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the federal government. Lieberman’s “Kill switch” bill parallels last year’s legislation by Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) granting the government power to disconnect certain websites.
“We need this capacity in a time of war…. for the president to say, ‘Internet service provider, we’ve got to disconnect the American Internet from all traffic coming in from another foreign country, or we have to put a patch on this part of it’.” –Joe (Droopy Dog) Lieberman on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley
“Companies would be required to take part in ‘information sharing’ with the government and certify to the NCCC that they have implemented approved security measures. Furthermore, any company that ‘relies on’ the internet, telephone system or any other part of the U.S. ‘information infrastructure’ would also be ‘subject to command’ by the NCCC under the proposed new law.” — Andy Chalk
Privacy and civil liberties groups fear that Droopy Dog’s “Kill switch” bill would grant Brother O the power to declare a “national cyber-emergency” at his discretion, which could force private Internet service providers and search engines to limit or cut off a whistle-blowing or political site’s connection to the Web for blaming or criticizing the Bread and Circuses administration.
“We have seen through recent history that in an emergency, the Executive Branch will interpret grants of power very broadly.” –Gregory Nojeim, from the Center for Democracy and Technology, a group that promotes Internet freedom
“The way it seems to be worded, the bill could easily represent a threat to free speech.” –Wayne Crews, vice president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute
Droopy Dog is pushing his “Kill switch” bill “at lightning speed” because he says the country’s “economic security, national security and public safety are now all at risk from … cyber-warriors, cyber-spies, cyber-terrorists and cyber-criminals.”
“The need for this legislation is obvious and urgent.” –Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT)
“We cannot afford to wait for a cyber 9/11 before our government realizes the importance of protecting our cyber resources.” –Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME)
Ginning up fears to rush legislation helps to mask the “Kill switch” bill’s real purpose, which is to keep the alternative Internet media from exposing the mainstream media propagandists in their whitewashing of government favoritisms, cover-ups, and atrocities. After all, the fear card worked to rush through and hide the real agenda behind the Wallstreet/Automotive industry bailouts, the Porkulus package, and the ObamaCare bill.
Interestingly, the communist Chinese also claim the need to police and censor the Web to maintain security and combat cyber warfare, but the totalitarian government’s real agenda is to silence those who criticize it. It would appear that Droopy Dog, whom Glenn Beck heralds as a man of honor, wants to add a technological iron curtain to quell America’s ambiance.
“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too.” –Lieberman told Crowley
First Iran shuts down the Internet to quash a revolution, then Pakistan shuts down Facebook and Google to blackout “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day,” and now members of the U.S. Senate are mimicking communist China’s censorship and coercion policies to stifle Internet media outlets and bloggers who are quickly displacing the statists’ mainstream press organs.
Lieberman, whom Sean Hannity embraces as a friend and a “good guy,” declares his bill is “not a big deal,” and that his critics are over reacting and “intentionally peddling misinformation.” According to the conscience of the Senate, the President already has the authority under the Communications Act to close any facility or station for wire communication, “So I say to my friends on the Internet, relax.”
In the wake of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) floating of the Drudge tax as a way to fund mainstream newspapers and to tax out of existence their competitors in the alternative media, George Orwell’s discernment might be better suited for Lieberman than either Hannity’s or Beck’s.
“Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
Today, in the case Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Citizens United. This was a landmark First Amendment case, and the ruling will overturn two decades of limitation on campaign finance spending. Spending by corporations from their general treasuries to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress is now unrestricted.
However, corporations must spend the money on their own initiatives and ads. They still cannot make unrestricted donations directly to a candidate. Essentially, what this does is to affirm the right of free speech for the stockholders.
At first glance, some thoughtful citizens may not like this result. Most of us feel that money corrupts politics, and do not like the idea that an election goes to the highest bidder (e.g., Bloomberg). But let’s consider an example that most conservatives and gun rights advocates will understand: Firearms manufacturers can create television ads supporting candidates that defend our Second Amendment rights. That puts it in a different light, doesn’t it?
As another example, an American sugar refinery could support a candidate who favored high taxes on imported foreign sugar, keeping jobs in the United States. Or, more specifically, Boeing can now spend big bucks to support the candidacy of U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahart (KS-4th) in his run for the senate as he fights to keep the Air Force from awarding its refueling tanker contract to European Aerospace and Defence Company — an all-out effort to save Boeing jobs in Wichita.
We all want to prevent the hijacking of our political process by nefarious organizations with deep pockets. But the way to do that is not by restricting free speech. Such sacrifice of principle is a cop-out that relieves us of our duty to remain well informed, so that no amount of costly propaganda can sway us from the right choices.
What we should do is to put in place laws requiring transparency in campaign finances. Ellen Miller of the Sunlight Foundationmakes this point:
Today’s decision underscores the necessity of creating comprehensive real-time disclosure for all election spending – across the board — from when and how often candidates, individuals and PACs report their contributions and expenditures to those involved in independent expenditures, issue ads or direct election advocacy.
Citizens United is an advocacy organization that describes its mission as follows:
Citizens United is an organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizens’ control. Through a combination of education, advocacy, and grass roots organization, Citizens United seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security. Citizens United’s goal is to restore the founding fathers’ vision of a free nation, guided by the honesty, common sense, and good will of its citizens.
One of the ways that they do this is by creating videos that expose facts many politicians would rather not have in evidence. During the presidential primaries of 2008, they created a DVD titled Hillary: The Movie that detailed all the Clinton scandals. Because the movie was funded party with corporate contributions, the Federal Election Commission ruled that it was restricted by the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which at that time severely limited its distribution and airing. So that was the genesis of the case Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, which they won today.
By Jerry A. Kane | Saturday, October 17th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
The leftist elite establishment has blinded the people in this nation through its educational institutions, mainstream media outlets, and the entertainment industry to garner power for a repressive society. While Brother O and his Bread and Circuses Administration zealously dismantle the sleeping middle class, Americans have become unwitting accomplices to a growing underclass.
During education’s ongoing paradigm shift to a postmodern pedagogy in the mid-1980s, a fellow graduate student recognized that tenure and promotion in the academic world depended on the ability to “quack like a duck,” i.e., absorb and regurgitate the academy’s leftist world view and withhold personal opinions. In other words, outspoken conservatives are both persona non grata and underemployed in academia.
The duck motif not only extends to “journalists” in the mainstream media, but as Rush Limbaugh recently discovered, it extends to the National Football League (NFL), a league he greatly admires.
“[T]he NFL … is the most politically correct environment I’ve ever seen in my life,” said Dennis Miller on The O’Reilly Factor. “I don’t even know why Limbaugh would want to be in [it] quite frankly.”
Like many outspoken professors and journalists, Limbaugh now suffers from the pangs of outrageous injustice, being denied his dream for criticizing and mocking the nanny notions of the statist-minded elite. Limbaugh will not be afforded the opportunity that he has earned through achievement to work in the profession he loves for no reason other than his outspoken conservative views are abhorred by the leftist elite establishment.
Since it was leaked that Limbaugh was part of a group intending to buy the St. Louis Rams football team, the propagandists in the mainstream media have worked feverishly to malign his reputation, undermine his creditability, and destroy his character. They overturned rocks for race-baiting poverty pimps and scoured the NFL for nitwit jocks or any feckless team owner they could find to denounce Limbaugh as a bigot and racist before the nation.
The attack and subsequent defamation of Limbaugh adds to the list of media assaults on outspoken conservatives in order to prevent the resurgence of Reagan conservatism from entering the mainstream of American politics and undoing the leftist elites’ socialist agenda. The leftist elite establishment fears the resurgence of a conservatism of individualism, not of country clubs and boardrooms. The establishment dreads the Reagan conservatism championed over talk radio and at town hall meetings and tea parties, which respects the law and reflects the values and traditions of the people.
Statists demagogues live in constant terror of individualists who are independent, loosely connected to groups, and don’t know their place. They commission media propagandists, ready at their beckon call, to seek out and destroy them. The statist diktat is not to refute an opponent’s argument, it is to “wipe him from the face of the earth,” Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas, and Robert Bork are noted recipients of the left’s scorched-earth and personal destruction politics.
The mainstream media have been frantically trying to deflate Sarah Palin’s ascendancy to the leadership of a national conservative movement since her dazzling acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in September 2008. Had she been a Democrat and espoused the statist ideology of Brother O or Hillary Clinton, Palin’s astounding rise from housewife, to mayor, to governor, to vice presidential candidate would have been praised by propagandists, extolled by environmentalists, lionized by leftists, and fawned over by feminists throughout the nation.
People who use common sense and apply the principles of the Constitution obstruct progressive governance, which explains why the media upended Robert Bork’s nomination and tried to stop Clarence Thomas’ confirmation to the Supreme Court. The media permitted and perpetuated the malicious, baseless allegations of the Democrat smear merchants to damage the reputations and destroy the creditability of both men.
Such reprehensible media campaigns, waged to disgrace both men, “did not resemble an argument so much as a lynching.” Bork was depicted as a judicial tyrant, his wife was falsely accused of being a Holocaust denier, and even his movie viewing habits were called into question. Likewise, Thomas was caricatured as a freakish feel-copping porno pervert in order to humiliate him, strip him of his dignity, and dishonor him for life.
The NFL’s management, owners, and players union along with most of the mainstream media and entertainment industry detest and despise Limbaugh as much as they do Palin, Thomas, and Bork. Yet Limbaugh persists in his love for the National Football League regardless of whether the sentiment is mutual.
Like the pedestaled wife of a fawning cuckold, the NFL graciously accepts Limbaugh’s lavish praises, glowing endorsements, and personal expenditures, yet abhors the very thought of embracing him. When the NFL’s leftist elite establishment denied Limbaugh limited ownership in a football franchise, it denied all outspoken conservatives and sent a subtle message to its owners, coaches, and players to suppress conservative opinion and quack like a duck.
The environment is ripe to don the special sunglasses, face the unadorned reality, and see the hideous leftist potentates and mindless moguls for the despicable fascists they truly are. In the grand scheme of things, the significance of the NFL pales in comparison to that of the USA. The country needs a wake up call, and the time has come for Limbaugh to stop chewing bubble gum and phone it in.
By Jerry A. Kane | Thursday, September 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Two MSNBC commentators accuse conservative talk hosts of inciting Americans to assassinate political leaders. The media meme suggests that the Tea Party and Town Hall protesters’ placards and rhetoric likening Brother O to Hitler is an implicit or a coded call to incite violence against him.
The anti-government, anti-Brother O sentiment expressed by some of the white protesters has caused two political propagandists to demonstrate their overt hypocrisy. Jolly old Chris “Tingle” Matthews notified TV and talk radio hosts that they would be held accountable for any violence that happens to Brother O.
In Rachel “Mad Mad Mad” Maddow’s world the right-wing media and the corporate-funded anti-reform movement are invoking political assassination by deliberately and systematically using Hitler as a rhetorical weapon against Brother O and the progressive Democrats in Congress. Mad Maddow says she’s afraid that the right-wingers don’t understand the implications of their actions and is even more afraid that they do.
If MSNBC’s Chris Tingle and the stark raving mad Maddow are really concerned for Brother O’s well being, why didn’t they alert Americans to the dangers of the Nazi slogans, Hitler placards, and vituperative language when members of leftist groups used them to demonize George W. Bush and his administration?
Better yet, how would the two peas account for their anti-Bush rhetoric had a leftist “looneytune” “fruitloop” committed a violent act against Bush? Would political commentators have held them responsible for complicity and for unleashing anti-democratic, anti-American forces in this country?
Paul Williams has pieced together a video montage exposing the blatant hypocrisy of leftists Chris Tingle and mad Maddow. Williams uses the audio portion of a mad Maddow interview, in which she asks Frank Schaeffer whether or not calling Brother O Hitler is an implicit call for politically motivated violence.
Williams overlays the audio portion with video snippets of demonstrations that occurred when George W. Bush was president; the end result is quite revealing.
The hypocrisy of Chris Tingle, mad Maddow, and Frank Schaeffer is rivaled only by Seth Pecksniff, a character Charles Dickens likened to a sign post, “which is always telling the way to a place, and never goes there.”
Louise Slaughter (D-NY) has issued her latest unspeak rules of decorum for House members. The nanny Chair of the House Rules Committee permits the terms “disgrace” and “nitwit,” used to malign the actions of recent Republican presidents, but makes verboten the use of the terms “liar” or “sexual misconduct” that accurately define the actions of recent Democrat presidents.
Slaughter updates section 370 of the House Rules and Manual to control what Representatives can and cannot say on the floor and in committee regarding improper references to Brother O. The Slaughter House rules decree that Members can:
refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”
Conversely, Members must never:
call the President a “liar.”
call the President a “hypocrite.”
describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”
The Slaughter House rules graciously permit political criticism on matters of policy, but prohibit offensive criticism of the Democrat President. Members may say Brother O is unworthy of re-election, but they must never mention personal misconduct, for in doing so is to incite animosity and antagonism among House members and members of other branches of Government.
Aside from being openly subjective and imprecise, the Slaughter House rules are an overreaching attempt to impose political correctness and to strip the people’s representatives of their right to point out the progressive leader’s “terminological inexactitude.”
Titles can be bestowed, but genuine respect must be earned. To gain Americans’ respect for the man as well as the office, Slaughter and the Democrat ilk must refrain from treating their President like a victim.
Life used to be so hard
Now everything is easy ‘Cause of you
By Jerry A. Kane | Monday, September 14th, 2009 at 7:09 am
Instead of filing charges against ACORN employees for criminal violations captured on tape by hidden camera, Baltimore City State’s Attorney is looking to prosecute two investigative reporters for violating Maryland’s wiretap laws in filming the group’s lawbreaking acts.
State’s Attorney Patricia Coats Jessamy, a Brother O supporter and contributor who worked on the Maryland Women for Obama Steering Committee, issued the following statement concerning the criminal acts committed by the Association of Community Organizations For Reform Now (ACORN) employees at its Baltimore office:
“The only information received in reference to this alleged criminal behavior was a YouTube video…. [T]he audio portion could possibly have been obtained in violation of Maryland Law, Annotated Code of Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article §10-402, which requires two party consent.
If it is determined that the audio portion now being heard on YouTube was illegally obtained, it is also illegal under Maryland Law to willfully use or willfully disclose the content of said audio. The penalty for the unlawful interception, disclosure or use of it is a felony punishable up to 5 years.” [emphasis mine]
Jessamy, who has held the office since 1995, is looking to prosecute 20 year-old journalist Hannah Giles and 25-year old film maker James O’Keefe for failing to acquire ACORN’s permission to expose its heinous underbelly to the world. A nonpartisan state’s attorney would be looking to prosecute ACORN as a criminal enterprise under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes.
In the video, O’Keefe and Giles show up on ACORN’s stoop seeking advice for purchasing a house to serve as a brothel. O’Keefe poses as a pimp with plans to run for Congress, and Giles is his prostitute girlfriend who intends to staff their brothel with smuggled teenage girls from El Salvador.
After making their intentions known to the ACORN workers, O’Keefe and Giles are given instructions on how to go about getting a loan to purchase the house, with further advice to list the girls as dependents on their tax returns and to train them to keep quiet about the prostitution activities.
Jessamy seems to be more interested in prosecuting violations of unauthorized taping than in prosecuting “child abuse, interstate transportation for purposes of prostitution, tax evasion,” and illegal immigration violations that may have been committed by the ACORN workers.
If Jessamy has an obsession with enforcing Maryland’s unauthorized taping law and prosecuting its violators, she fought her compulsion to selectively apply Maryland’s law on at least two occasions in 2006 and in 2000 when WMAR-TV in Baltimore used “undercover journalists with cameras to record people without their knowledge, and won awards for their efforts.”
But that was then, and 2009 is now, so when two young journalists with hidden cameras go undercover to expose a group of lawbreakers that support Brother O’s politics and policies, for Jessamy it’s more a matter of aligning with kindred spirits than with the rule of law.
Jessamy is obviously more interested in protecting fellow travelers and in enforcing the law against those who threaten Brother O’s power and policies than in carrying out her sworn duty and in upholding her oath of office.
If Jessamy presses to file charges down-the-road, will any fair-minded person look on her prosecution as anything but retaliation for uncovering the criminal activities of her president’s favorite group of community organizers? Will fair-minded people regard her authoritative actions as anything other than a tread-lightly warning for anyone who dares to uncover and expose the misdeeds of Brother O’s Obots?
By Jerry A. Kane | Friday, September 4th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
My meeting! My rules! My office! And don’t tell me what to do! Understand? Thus sprach the Hoosier Overman to constituents at a town hall in Bloomington, Indiana.
The exchange between Indiana “blue dog”Democrat Representative Baron Paul Hill (IN-9th) and a young journalism student has ironically put the arrogant “Red Baron” in the very compromising position his adoptive rules were created to avoid.
The student, who was working on a project, asked Hill why she was being denied her right to film the town hall meeting, and Indiana’s beneficent leader responded with the following:
“Well, this is my town hall meeting. I set the rules, and I’ve had these rules. Now let me repeat that one more time! This is my town hall meeting for you. And you’re not going to tell me how to run my congressional office.” [emphasis mine]
In essence, Hill told voters, “You work for me, this means you respect me! Got it? Now, let’s move on.”
Following his rebuke, he went on to explain his filming rule:
“Now the reasons why I don’t allow filming is because usually the films that are done end up on YouTube in a compromising position.” [Overman prescience]
And here’s the scene, duly clipped from the news coverage and posted on YouTube! Enjoy:
After his initial town hall debacle, he came prepared for the second and reportedly devised a green and purple tee shirt identity system to distinguish the friendly union officials, teachers, and other mindless Obot questioners.
Come November 2010, Hoosiers may help Hill understand that Baron is a given name, not a title.
The Bloomington Herald Times streamed Baron’s entire town hall live online. The exchange with the student begins at the 18:43 mark.
The Bay Patriots of Panama City, Florida held their long-scheduled town hall yesterday. Democrat Rep. Allen Boyd (FL-2nd) was a no-show:
Bay Patriots Hold Town Hall Despite Absent Congressman
08/28/09 – 06:24 PM
A Panama City town hall meeting continues tonight, despite an absent congressman.
Representative Allen Boyd is in the process of rescheduling, but the Bay Patriots press on. The group gathered at Gulf Coast Community College.
Congressman Boyd was not at this event. He says he’s heard the concerns of the Bay Patriots, and those concerns are part of the reason to reschedule and relocate.
According to the Patriots, it was still a town hall. Congressman Boyd, who was in Panama City today, was invited to attend.
This discussion isn’t just about health care, participants say they have many issues they want to discuss with Boyd.
“I was going to go either way … my plan was to come to the town hall and actually talk to Boyd … but that was cancelled but we’ll still get information,” said Bay County resident, William Horvat.
“I just feel like he kinda chickened out,” said Bay Patriot, Ed Willis.
“We’re here because we feel like we’re losing some freedom in this country and we want all the information that we can get,” said Bay County resident, Beverly York.
Despite Boyd absence, all are eager to have him come back to the panhandle and say they would attend a rescheduled town hall.
Our correspondents who were at the meeting estimate the crowd at between 1,000 and 1,500. It was an orderly, typically American group, carrying signs, waving flags, cooking hamburgers and hot dogs and listening to speakers.
Obama’s crew pressured advertisers to dump The Glenn Beck Program. Beck’s ratings soared, over three million viewers in non-prime-time by Wednesday. An appetite for truth has been rekindled in America. To put this in perspective, Beck left Anderson Cooper and Larry King in the dust, and they both air in prime time when the pool of TV viewers is much larger. (Big Beck)
The current flap began when Beck did a program exposing the communist affiliations of Van Jones, Obama’s “green jobs czar.” In 2005, Jones co-founded ColorOfChange, an African American political advocacy group. ColorOfChange sent a petition signed by some of their members to all of Beck’s advertisers, urging them to withdraw support from Beck’s cable television program.
According to news sources, some companies did pull their ads — Allergan (maker of Restasis), Ally Bank (a unit of GMAC Financial Services), Best Buy, Broadview Security (formerly Brinks), CVS, GEICO Insurance, Healthy Choice (a division of ConAgra Foods), the advertising service Lawyers.com (run by LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. and misspelled Nexus Lexis in news reports), Men’s Wearhouse, Procter & Gamble, Progressive Insurance, RadioShack, Re-Bath, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis (Plavix), Sargento Foods, SC Johnson, State Farm Insurance, Travelocity, Wal-Mart.
In response, Beck’s viewers organized a boycott of those companies. Websites supporting Beck sprang up. Two really good ones are:
Defend Glenn, which got 850,000 page views during its first day online, and
Support Glenn Beck, which includes a pro-Glenn-Beck petition to advertisers and great contact information.
There is just one problem for those companies that bowed to the pressure to suppress free speech. ColorOfChange claims that they have over 600,000 members, and that 75,000 of those signed their petition in response to an email request sent to all the members. Beck has over three million viewers, most passionately loyal. On top of that, ColorOfChange draws membership from a demographic that is on average less affluent than Beck’s largely middle class viewership. So advertisers who withdraw are shooting themselves in the foot.
And cost them it has. In the first three days of the DefendGlenn movement:
9,000 GEICO accounts gone
297 Ally Bank accounts closed
7,200 boycotting CVS
14,700 boycotting Sargento
10,000 Travelocity accounts cancelled
And now it appears that claims made by ColorOfChange about the success of their effort to silence Glenn Beck were somewhat exaggerated (I’m being kind here). Several of the companies they claimed to have influenced did not advertise on the Beck program in the first place. It appears that the mainstream media just accepted the list of companies in the ColorOfChange press release and reported them without checking.
Bond Action Inc., a black organization focused on supporting the family, traditional moral values, and positive and honest race relations has come out in support of Beck — Black Group Comes Out In Support Of Glenn Beck:
BOND Action, Inc., a national cultural action organization, has come out in support of FOX News Channel broadcaster Glenn Beck. Beck has been under attack from the radical left-wing group ColorOfChange.org after he said last month that he believes President Obama is “a racist.” ColorOfChange.org was founded by Van Jones; a self-described “rowdy black nationalist.” Jones now serves as White House environmental advisor (czar). So far advertisers including Geico, Ally Bank, and Sargento Cheese have been intimidated into pulling ads off The Glenn Beck Show. “BOND Action, Inc.,will be working to expose the source behind the boycott and counter it,” said Founder and President, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson.
“Glenn Beck is right, Obama is a racist!” added Rev. Peterson. “Where were the boycotts and outraged activists when President George W. Bush was being falsely maligned as a ‘racist’? This is a blatant double standard. This boycott is an attempt to silence Beck from continuing his expose’ of Barack Obama’s socialist agenda and his radical ‘green jobs czar’ Van Jones.”
ColorOfChange.org claims some 33 advertisers have pulled their ads off The Glenn Beck Show, but that number is reportedly exaggerated. ColorOfChange.org has a checkered past. The group reportedly endorsed outrageous statements by rapper Kanye West that former President Bush gave troops permission to go to New Orleans and shoot black people during Hurricane Katrina. Beck’s television program draws more than 2 million viewers and BOND Action, Inc., is calling on advertisers not to cave in to pressure.
Rev. Peterson said, “ColorOfChange.org claims that it exists to ‘strengthen Black America’s political voice’ — but it’s clear that they are a left-wing, racist political group that deal in lies. This attempt to silence Beck is an attack on free speech and must be countered.”
Audiotapes of Michelle Obama alternately threatening and cajoling bloggers over their coverage of her husband’s presidential campaign are soon to be released on Fox News, according to African Press International (API).
For those who are tuning in late, this is a credible group of African bloggers with journalistic credentials who have been operating unheralded for the last two years, providing general news coverage of events in Africa. Many of their nineteen reporters are actually in African countries, but their posting is headquartered in the relative safety of the Norwegian diaspora.
Back on October 13, Israel eNews posted an article describing the conflicting stories about Obama’s birth, and cited the Philip Berg lawsuit requiring Obama to produce a valid birth certificate. On October 14 API simply quoted the story, thinking it would be of interest to their African readers. API did not take a position on the story pro or con — they simply shared the Israel eNews material with their readers, leaving the readers to make their own judgement about the merits of the story.
To the complete surprise of the API folk, their Africa-targeted report caused a firestorm in the American Blogosphere. This apparently earned the wrath of Michelle Obama, who was reportedly put in touch with API by a mutual contact in Africa. The entire drama that unfolded then is described in our earlier article — Michelle Obama’s “Whitey” Moment.
The folk at API were truly caught off guard. They had never intended anything like this. Suddenly they were caught between demands of American conservatives for release of the tapes, and threats of legal action from Obama supporters. They had not advised Michelle Obama that the call was being recorded, something that they likely did not from nefarious motives but simply to take notes.
Understandably, it took API some time to seek counsel and cover for their predicament. The liberals have used the intervening time to attempt to discredit these ordinary bloggers, in much the same vicious way that they went after “Joe the Plumber.” And the original Israel eNews article has, at the time of this posting, been taken off-line. But not to worry, we have archived a copy here at ADMC!
If the current negotiations go through, Fox News is a good choice from the viewpoint of those in the US who simply want to know the truth. Any of the other networks are likely to excerpt the tapes in such a way as to make the material meaningless, or at least to hide the attempted intimidation. And if the Obama juggernaut is going to threaten our freedom of speech, we would like to know now.
Media Footnote: As a courtesy to our dial-up visitors, our audio and video media are configured to download completely before play is enabled. The control buttons in the media bar will highlight when the selection is ready for playback. Selections must be started manually by clicking the PLAY button.
License: Unless otherwise expressly stated all original material, of whatever nature, created by the American Daughter staff and included in this website, its related pages and archives, is licensed under a Creative Commons License, some rights reserved.
Disclaimer: This is a personal website. The views expressed here are those of the authors and no one else. This is also an experiment in thinking out loud, so there are no warranties as to the reliability or accuracy of anything presented here. Source material -- references, citations, quotes, photos, and other elements -- is gathered from publicly available materials and some of this material may be restricted. Any trademarks used are the property of their respective creators or owners. All are reproduced under the principle of Fair Use.
Bill Gives Obama Absolute Control of Internet
