Tag Archives: media

NAACP’s Attack on ‘Racist’ Tea Party Revives is Relevancy, According to Media

What’s the key to pulling your political organization out of “irrelevancy”? Well if you’re the NAACP, you can start by hammering on allegations of Tea Party “racism.” News coverage of the NAACP has exploded since the “nation’s oldest and largest civil rights organization” passed a resolution last week attacking the Tea Party for including “racist” elements in its organization. Not only has the story spawned hundreds of news articles, but the network news stations have also taken notice. In just six days – from July 13 to July 18 – the NAACP’s feud with the Tea Party was discussed on eight network news shows on ABC, CBS and NBC. “And what about the NAACP`s new charges of racism against elements of the Tea Party? We`ll bring in the head of the NAACP, Ben Jealous, and one of the leaders of the Tea Party, David Webb,” Bob Schieffer said on “CBS Evening News” on July 18. On “World News with Diane Sawyer” on July 13, Sawyer reported that “the NAACP has just adopted a resolution this evening at its annual convention condemning ‘racist behavior’ by Tea Party members. Tonight, Tea Party is fighting back…” But Americans might want to ask themselves why this story is even making news. In recent years, the media has buzzed over the NAACP’s “irrelevancy” – and even the NAACP itself raised the question over whether it was relevant as a political and social arm just two years ago. The organization cited “declining membership, closing of regional offices and ineffective marketing” as reasons critics used to attack its political significance. At this time last year, as the NAACP prepared to hold its centennial conference, several commentators and reporters dismissed the group as ineffective and unnecessary. “I fear that the NAACP is making itself irrelevant,” Clarence Page wrote in the Chicago Tribune on July 15, 2009. “If we did not have the NAACP these days, would anybody notice the difference?” Robert Smith, a sociology professor at San Francisco State University, echoed Page’s concerns in a July 16, 2009 Newsday article. “[T]he NAACP as an agent of national change has been irrelevant for a long time now,” he said. Last week, UPI raised a similar question, publishing an article titled, “NAACP strives to stay relevant” on July 14. “The NAACP is facing the question of whether it remains relevant after the election of the nation’s first black president, officials say,” reported UPI. “In its upcoming 101st annual meeting, President Benjamin Jealous and the new NAACP chairwoman, Roslyn Brock, say they intend to inject energy into the organization as it aims to stay a force in national debates, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.” But with all of the media attention the NAACP has been receiving over their Tea Party resolution, it seems like irrelevancy is becoming less of a problem. On July 13, the NAACP passed a resolution stating that it “condemns the bigoted elements within the Tea Party and asks for them to be repudiated. The NAACP delegates presented this resolution for debate and passage after a year of vitriolic Tea Party demonstrations during which participants used racial slurs and images.” The media’s sudden interest in the NAACP’s Tea Party resolution supports the liberal narrative of Tea Party racism. This is evidenced further by how the media have aided in the character assassination campaign directed at conservative demonstrators by repeating unfounded allegations of Tea Party racism. One example is the unproven claim that Tea Partiers spit on civil rights leader. In a column for The Politico, University of Maryland School of Law professor Sherrilyn Ifill said that “elements in the movement that have displayed racist posters of President Barack Obama, spit at black congressmen and used veiled language to warn that ‘our way of life’ is threatened by our first black president.” In another instance in a July 18 Washington Post column, Sophia A. Nelson wrote that “I abhor and reject anyone who would spit upon or yell racial epithets at an esteemed public servant such as Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), and other black members of Congress, as tea party supporters reportedly have done.” Even some news articles reported this unsubstantiated claim. “Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights movement, was called the ‘n-word’ during the protest, while others in the crowd used anti-gay slurs against Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass,” reported RTT News on July 17. “Further, the NAACP said that Missouri Representative Emmanuel Cleaver was spat on at the protest.” However, according to video footage from the event, claims that a congressman was spit on were never confirmed. Andrew Breitbart, founder of BigJournalism.com, even offered $100,000 for video of the alleged incident. However, even though many cameras were recording the scene, nobody came forward with evidence of an assault. Other newspapers have lent a platform to the claims that the Tea Party movement is about racism as opposed to supporting principles of free market and limited government. “[N]o president in history has had so much racist vitriol directed at him as the current one, including being compared to a monkey and having his birthplace and religion endlessly questioned,” Lynne K. Varner wrote in the Athens Banner-Herald on July 17. “The tea-party movement tries to hide behind limited government and restrained spending, classic – and in my view, unassailable – conservative tenets. But what separates this movement from the traditional Republican Party is the former’s virulent anger directed at anyone who is not white, straight and Protestant,” Varner continued. It’s telling that the media would resurrect the NAACP from irrelevance just at the moment the NAACP produces a resolution that supports what many writers and reporters have incorrectly believed all along – that the Tea Party is a racist organization that opposes President Obama for the color of his skin as opposed to his policies. Like this article? Sign up for “Culture Links,” CMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter, by clicking here.

J. Cole Is A Top-Five Finalist For ‘Hottest Breakthrough MC Of 2010’!

Winner will be revealed on MTV2’s ‘Sucker Free Summit’ Sunday at noon. By Shaheem Reid J. Cole Photo: Roc Nation It is here: As promised, the top-five vote-getters in our poll for “Hottest Breakthrough MC of 2010” will be revealed this week. These are the artists you guys voted for over the past month, and we can’t express enough how overwhelmed we were by your participation in this project. More than 200,000 votes came in, and they were tallied as of midnight Friday. Keep in mind, the unveiling of the names this week are the top five, but in no particular order. The winner of the “Hottest Breakthrough MC of 2010,” as voted on by the MTV News audience, will be revealed Sunday (July 25) at noon on the “Sucker Free Summit.” Chosen One: J. Cole Rising in the Ranks : Jermaine Cole was focused, then lost it, and now his vision is as lucid as ever. The 25-year-old rapper was no ordinary jock in high school, back in his hometown of Fayetteville, North Carolina. Just like fans applaud him when he performs concerts, J. was highly acclaimed by his high school teachers for his academia. Pretty soon, the students began to love him as well. He cut his teeth in freestyle ciphers at football games. Rather than accepting a scholarship locally, he wanted to kill two birds with one stone: go to the media mecca of New York City to pursue music while gaining higher education at the esteemed St. John’s University. But the allure of the bright lights and all the other trappings of the big city put J. in a chokehold. His first two years in school, he partied and chased girls, but he finally snapped out of his haze his junior year, graduating magna cum laude. Cole gained the following he has now by showing off his ever-evolving lyricism with the mixtapes The Come Up and The Warm Up. In between those projects, Cole signed to Jay-Z’s Roc Nation. Like Kanye West, Cole was first introduced to Jay as a producer, but Hov quickly discovered J.’s blue-chip verbal acumen. Cole got the ultimate co-sign, appearing on Jigga’s “A Star Is Born” from Blueprint 3 last year. Now with “Who Dat” rising as the first look from his still-untitled debut LP, the fans are looking at Cole as one to crack the mainstream hard any minute. Early Insight : “Anything I do, whether it’s a freestyle I drop or [a song], man, I feel like I got a lot to prove — not just to people, but to myself,” Cole said. “I’ve been wanting this a long time. I didn’t want to just get a deal. I didn’t want to just put out an album. I want to be here for a long time. I’ve got big goals and big dreams, even beyond where I’m at right now.” Blistering Ballistics : “The mind state of a winner/ When you thinkin’ bout summertime/ I’m thinkin’ ’bout the winter/ When you thinkin’ ’bout breakfast/ I’m heatin’ up my dinner/ I was plottin’ this moment back when y’all was ridin’ spinners/ Now I’m a menace/ God as my witness, with this pen I’m insane, yup/ Hungry like the n—a who ain’t got the taste of fame yet/ Cloud told me, ‘Ain’t you Roc? Well, where the f— yo chain at?’ ” — from Cole’s “Who Dat” Forecast : Cole hasn’t hit the home run smash out of the park yet, but he’s laying the all-too-essential groundwork to establish himself as not just at the top of his weight class as far as lyricism goes, but his live shows have displayed his potential to be one of the great performers in the coming years. Win, lose or draw with his album, Cole is banking on himself. He says there will be no features on his debut, because he has too much to say. MTV News will be rolling out the top-five candidates for “Hottest Breakthrough MCs of 2010” all week — with the winner being revealed on MTV2’s “Sucker Free Summit” on Sunday at noon! Related Videos Top Five 2010 Hottest Breakthrough MCs

Visit link:
J. Cole Is A Top-Five Finalist For ‘Hottest Breakthrough MC Of 2010’!

Dylan Ratigan Shouts Down Conservative Guest for Objecting to Liberal Dogma

On his July 20 afternoon program, Dylan Ratigan shouted down the Washington Examiner’s J.P. Freire for challenging the MSNBC host’s liberal orthodoxy and accusing him of giving more air time to the liberal panelist appearing opposite him. Eschewing any sense of balanced reporting, Ratigan thundered: “I said I’m in charge of the show. I decide who I’ll talk to. I might spend the entire time talking to Jonathan Capehart and not talk to you at all. And then you can choose never to come on my show again.” “I’m sorry, Jonathan was taking up a lot of my time earlier in the segment,” explained Freire. “Look at the amount of time he’s been talking and the amount of time I was talking.” Discussing institutionalized racism in America, Freire attempted to argue that a “government monopoly on education” hinders the ability of ethnic minorities to succeed, but the liberal agitator was only interested in Washington Post editorial writer Jonathan Capehart’s liberal spin on the issue and instructed Freire to “please be quiet” before berating him. “Who’s hosts the show, J.P.?” asked Ratigan. “Just because you’re on my show doesn’t mean you get as much time as you decide you want. Do you understand that?” Freire fired back: “What I’ll do is I’ll interrupt if I have something to say.”              “Right and I’ll tell you to be quiet if someone else is speaking,” sputtered Ratigan, who seemed all to eager to assert his authority with a conservative guest while defending the right of the liberal guest to speak freely. A transcript of the relevant portion of the segment can be found below: MSNBC Dylan Ratigan July 20, 2010 4:19 P.M. E.S.T. DYLAN RATIGAN: I’m not saying there’s some grand racist in the sky who is doing that. J.P. FREIRE, Washington Examiner associate editor: But it’s somehow systematic? RATIGAN: It’s systematic in that the way our education resources are distributed, the way our law enforcement practice is distributed, the way our populations are distributed, these things yield themselves out. That is not good for America, period. So how do you deal with that? FREIRE: Well look, I think that maybe the expectation is that a conservative is going to go on the air and say everything is hunky-dory. RATIGAN: Hold on, J.P. I like you, I like you, I like you, I’m not jumping to any conclusions about you, I’m taking your words at face value. I expect you’ll do the same with me. I want you to pretend you’re not on MSNBC; I want you to pretend you’re talking to your friends Dylan and Jonathan. Okay, can you do that? FREIRE: Yeah sure, absolutely. Yo Dylan and John, I was thinking today that the idea that there are so many systems in place that do make it so difficult for people that are underprivileged to succeed in this country is because we constantly put in place more and more systems and that more people are saying “hey, if we fiddle with these systems, maybe it will give us the right output.” The best way to allow people to rise up is by getting out of the way. It’s not that we’ve made it easier for white people to get along – RATIGAN: So how are we getting out of the way if we have 19,000 different school districts, some of which are incredibly well capitalized and can yield the finest education in the history of the world, and the vast majority of which have no money – FREIRE: Easy, a government monopoly on education. RATIGAN: Hold on a second. Say that again. FREIRE: A government monopoly on education is precisely how we make it more difficult for blacks and Latinos and many other ethnic groups and the poor to be able to rise up. I mean, that is how we get in the way. If we really want to – RATIGAN: So you’re saying the fact that rich people can take all of their kids out of the schools in the cities – FREIRE: Oh, heavens… RATIGAN: and leave ghetto schools uptown here in New York. No, not “oh heavens” J.P., I’ve lived in New York for almost twenty years, I have many friends who have children here, I have many friends who have grown up here and I can tell you the rich ones went to private schools and the poor ones didn’t and the more, anyway. You get the last word here, Jonathan. How do you view the systematic aspect of this? JONATHAN CAPEHART, Washington Post: Look, the systematic aspects, you laid them out, your graphics show the wide disparities there. My big concern is we spend a lot of time hurling accusations of racism and things like that and we allow that to get in way of having a really meaningful, deep conversation – FREIRE: A very difficult conversation. RATIGAN: J.P. please be quiet. FREIRE: I’m sorry, Jonathan was taking up a lot of my time earlier in the segment. RATIGAN: J.P., you know what? I want you to be part of this, I really really do. FREIRE: No, Jonathan has blockaded my entire part. RATIGAN: J.P., you’re not behaving in a way that’s constructive and I don’t know why that is but I do appreciate. FREIRE: Look at the amount of time he’s been talking and the amount of time I was talking. RATIGAN: Who’s hosts the show, J.P.? FREIRE: I’m just saying. RATIGAN: Who’s hosts the show, J.P.? FREIRE: If you’re saying it’s equal time, it should be equal time. RATIGAN: Did I say that? I said I’m in charge of the show. I decide who I’ll talk to. I might spend the entire time talking to Jonathan Capehart and not talk to you at all. And then you can choose never to come on my show again. FREIRE: I would never do that, I love being on your show. RATIGAN: Just because you’re on my show doesn’t mean you get as much time as you decide you want. Do you understand that? FREIRE: What I’ll do is I’ll interrupt if I have something to say. RATIGAN: Right and I’ll tell you to be quiet if someone else is speaking. FREIRE: Okay. RATIGAN: Coming up, I was concerned that might happen. –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.

Read more from the original source:
Dylan Ratigan Shouts Down Conservative Guest for Objecting to Liberal Dogma

Book of Poetry, Cartoons Helps Explain Conservative Values

Craig Wieland never set out to write a book of poetry. “I’m a contractor,” he said with a chuckle. But what began as family dinner-table conversations to help his daughters understand social issues in America have culminated in a book of poems and cartoons about conservative ideas. Wieland, the owner of a nationwide construction contracting company, proved you don’t need a writer’s background or even a college degree to communicate your beliefs. Wieland said he catered to his daughters’ love for Dr. Seuss and Shel Silverstein by putting stories poetic form. “If you put it in a rhyme and use poetry, all of a sudden it becomes unique,” Wieland said in a telephone interview with the Culture and Media Institute about his new book, “Pointed Poems: Tools for Teaching Conservative Thinking.” In the book, Wieland combines poetry and cartoon-like illustrations to convey the differences between conservative and liberal viewpoints on both economic and social issues in America . The book’s 280 pages touch on everything from industry to patriotism to taxes and incorporate over 400 graphic illustrations by Dennis Preston to “give the poetry a little more punch.” “Pointed Poems,” which Wieland described as “unique,” and “fairly provocative,” discusses social issues, such as compassion, the role that personal responsibility plays in government and the problem of social programs that “help” parents raise their children. Wieland said his main message is only hinted at subtly in the book. Wieland hopes his poems show readers “the hypocritical stance that people have of criticizing the very things that they’re using.” For instance, in the poem, “Just Give Us the Outlet… and Nothing More,” protesters of electric generation prevent the construction of a new power plant but soon show their dissatisfaction in the following lines:             “So that’s what happened to our little city.              The planned power plant was not built… what a pity.              But people got mad when their outlets grew quiet.              And when it got hot, they started to riot.” By exposing this hypocrisy, Wieland further hopes to knock liberals off their assumed “moral high ground” on issues like green energy and limited government—topics which liberals use to push their agenda as the “correct” viewpoint. To help conservatives understand the differences between the conservative and liberal viewpoints on a variety of issues, each chapter begins with a brief explanation of the poem and issue, followed by the poem itself and illustrations. Wieland also highlights the “Teaching Tool” for each chapter, a single summary statement of the issue. Following the “Teaching Tool,” each poem starts with a cartoon of a father and son carrying a conversation about politics and American values. The father responds to the son’s questions by giving simple answers that reflect conservative thinking. This father-son exchange further strengthens its use as a tool for teaching conservative values to middle-of-the-road adults as well as the next generation of Americans—children and grandchildren.

Read more:
Book of Poetry, Cartoons Helps Explain Conservative Values

Zac Efron is "So Proud" of Miley Cyrus

Last month, Miley Cyrus made one of the most confusing, ridiculous comments on record, saying there’s a double standard at work between the negative reaction she receives on stage and the praise heaped upon Zac Efron in movies. However, Miley also showed love for the former High School Musical star, telling Billy Bush: “Zac has a special place in my heart. If it wasn’t creepy and he wasn’t my friend, I would have posters of him on my wall.” After being shown this interview, Efron had the following to say to Access Hollywood about Cyrus: “I’ve known her since she was a little girl. It’s amazing what she’s done. She’s blossomed into this beautiful lady and taking the world by storm. I’m so proud of her.” In other words: Zac is the anti-THG when it comes to Miley Cyrus. As he tours the country in promotion of Charlie St. Cloud , meanwhile, Efron stopped by the Mall of America in Minnesota yesterday. Over 7,000 fans came out to meet and greet this handsome actor. Check out a trio of photos from the event below:

Excerpt from:
Zac Efron is "So Proud" of Miley Cyrus

Family of Levi Johnston Feeling Slighted

Levi Johnston’s feud with Sarah Palin was well documented. We’ll see if his own mother makes that look like child’s play. The Playgirl model’s mom, Sherry, and his sister, Mercede Johnston , are not pleased at the way in which they learned of Levi and Bristol’s second engagement. That would be via celebrity gossip publications … naturally. “You would think that a normal family would call you and say, ‘We’re getting married.’ We found out through the media, which is heartbreaking and rude,” Mercede, who recently started up an anti-Palin blog , told Inside Edition . Mercede Johnston, middle with Sarah Palin and Sherry Johnston. After first hearing about her son’s decision to walk down the aisle in a tabloid magazine, drug dealer Sherry even fears she won’t be welcome at the nuptials. “I would be absolutely devastated if I wasn’t invited to the wedding – it would be the last straw. They should elope if they can’t have both the Johnstons and the Palins together. But don’t leave us out of it. That would kill me,” she says. Speaking of the Sarah Palin, she must have been too busy making up words and comparing herself to Shakespeare, because she was out of the loop as well. She said in a vapid statement about the news: “Bristol at 19 is now a young adult. We obviously want what’s best for our children. Bristol believes in redemption and forgiveness to a degree most of us struggle to put in practice in our daily lives.” What do you think? Will it last?

Link:
Family of Levi Johnston Feeling Slighted

Network Morning Shows Ignore Resignation of USDA Official Who Made Racist Comments at NAACP Meeting

On Monday, Andrew Breitbart, on his blog Big Government, revealed video of a Department of Agriculture official making racially charged comments at a 2009 NAACP meeting. While the media were quick to jump on the civil rights organization accusing the tea party of racism last week, they have failed to provide any coverage of this controversy. The comments were made by the USDA’s Georgia Director of Rural Development Shirley Sherrod at a 2009 NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. As the video clearly shows, Sherrod’s description of discriminating against white farmers was well received by the audience. The comments, which were reported throughout the day Monday on Fox News, stirred so much controversy that Sherrod resigned Monday night and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was forced to issue a statement on the matter: ““There is zero tolerance for discrimination at USDA, and I strongly condemn any act of discrimination against any person.” As NewsBusters’ Noel Sheppard earlier reported , none of the network evening news broadcasts touched the story on Monday . On Tuesday, the CBS Early Show, NBC’s Today, and ABC’s Good Morning America were all silent on the controversy and resignation. However, all three morning shows did manage to focus on a recent verbal gaffe made by Sarah Palin. —Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here.

Read more:
Network Morning Shows Ignore Resignation of USDA Official Who Made Racist Comments at NAACP Meeting

Morning Joe Libs Sweep Sherrod, Voter Intimidation Under Carpet: Let’s Not ‘Scratch A Sore’

It’s pretty hard—even for media liberals—to defend a guy in paramilitary duds swinging a billy club outside a polling site, or a government official bragging about having declined to do everything in her power to help someone because of the white color of his skin.  So on today’s Morning Joe, Margaret Carlson, Norah O’Donnell and Mike Barnicle were obliged to engage in a modicum of hand-wringing over the incidents.  But once having discharged that duty, the trio set about doing what libs do best: finding ways to minimize the matters and excuse the MSM’s failure to cover them. To be sure, Carlson did call the statement by the USDA official “hateful” and said one should be “ashamed.” And Norah O’Donnell and Mike Barnicle agreed with Joe Scarborough that the MSM can fairly be criticized for undercovering these stories. But then the three started their excuse-a-thon: Carlson: “I mean, there’s more [racism] on one side [whites] then the other,” though that didn’t change the fact that what Sherrod did was wrong. O’Donnell: On this [Sherrod] particular case, while this egregious in my mind, it is an isolated, we believe, incident.  There’s no suggestion that the USDA is doing this as a systematic problem.  So I worry that in a climate that there have now been, that there is an effort to pile up a lot of these racially-charged stories , that concern me about things, that we’re, you know, setting up these black versus white stories in this country, that these instances are, because, are trying to create some kind of narrative about where we are in this country.  And that makes me nervous.  Do you know what I’m trying to say?  Do you know what I’m trying to say?   Barnicle: Out there, in this big large universe beyond television, that people are more obsessed with other issues like their jobs and their incomes than they are with what someone said in March working for the Department of Agriculture. After agreeing that if the polling site intimidators would, if white, have been immediately arrested and that there would have been more media coverage, Barnicle continued . . . BARNICLE: At this point, the incessant coverage of it, with all of the questions, it’s like scratching a sore.  That’s all it’s doing. It’s pulling a scab. As Joe Scarborough observed: “But who’s covered it? Fox has covered it, but even the Washington Post said nobody else has covered it.” After Scarborough accused the MSM of ignoring the stories, Carlson had the last word. CARLSON: Maybe not ignored.  I mean, there’s so many stories that slip by and go through the cracks , you don’t know . . . They did prosecute the guy who was holding the billy club at an almost all-black precinct.  So, intimidating white voters at an all-black precinct?  would you go to another precinct where there might be more [abruptly ends at hard commercial break]. Let’s summarize the libs’ arguments:  The media shouldn’t make too much of all this. The Sherrod thing was an isolated case. Covering these stories is just going to stir up bad feelings.  And anyhow, the stories aren’t that important, compared to the economy.  And, hey, lots of stories slip through the media cracks: these just happened to be two of them. And you know, the voter intimidation was really pretty harmless.   All of which goes to prove a point that Scarborough made: with media liberals who think like this, were the racial tables turned, these stories would have been the subject of 28-part front page series.

See original here:
Morning Joe Libs Sweep Sherrod, Voter Intimidation Under Carpet: Let’s Not ‘Scratch A Sore’

Media Liberals on ‘JournoList’ Plotted to Bury the Jeremiah Wright Story in 2008

The Daily Caller has another scoop on the leftist JournoList e-mails today, recalling when they all wanted the Jeremiah Wright story to be dead and buried in the spring of 2008. Jonathan Strong explained “Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.” Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”…The tough questioning from ABC left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.” In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.” Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people .” “Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.” The most eye-opening quote may come from Chris Hayes, a regular guest and occasional guest host on The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, writing about how America is a murderous, torturing giant, and that’s much more outrageous than Wright. In fact, Hayes echoed Wright’s sermons: Chris Hayes of the Nation posted on April 29, 2008, urging his colleagues to ignore Wright. Hayes directed his message to “particularly those in the ostensible mainstream media” who were members of the list. The Wright controversy, Hayes argued, was not about Wright at all. Instead, “It has everything to do with the attempts of the right to maintain control of the country.” Hayes castigated his fellow liberals for criticizing Wright. “All this hand wringing about just how awful and odious Rev. Wright remarks are just keeps the hustle going.” “Our country disappears people. It tortures people. It has the blood of as many as one million Iraqi civilians — men, women, children, the infirmed — on its hands. You’ll forgive me if I just can’t quite dredge up the requisite amount of outrage over Barack Obama’s pastor,” Hayes wrote. For followers of the Clinton scandals, it gets incredibly rich when Katha Pollitt confesses: Katha Pollitt – Hayes’s colleague at the Nation – didn’t disagree on principle, though she did sound weary of the propaganda. “I hear you. but I am really tired of defending the indefensible. The people who attacked Clinton on Monica were prissy and ridiculous, but let me tell you it was no fun, as a feminist and a woman, waving aside as politically irrelevant and part of the vast rightwing conspiracy Paula, Monica, Kathleen, Juanita,” Pollitt said. “Part of me doesn’t like this s–t either,” agreed Spencer Ackerman, then of the Washington Independent. “But what I like less is being governed by racists and warmongers and criminals.” Ackerman went on: I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need to. It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear . Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

Once A Jolly Hangman Singapore Justice In The Dock

The cover of the book “Once a Jolly Hangman” by British author Alan Shadrake is seen in this handout image released to Reuters on July 19, 2010. Singapore police have arrested the British author on charges of criminal defamation and contempt of court, a day after he launched a book on death penalty in the city-state. The arrest was made pursuant to a report that was lodged by the government#39;s Media Development Authority on Friday, the Singapore police said in a statement. Alan Shadrake, 75,

See the rest here:
Once A Jolly Hangman Singapore Justice In The Dock