Everybody Hates Piers Morgan

The petition to deport Piers Morgan is now nearing 90,000 signatures — which is what I’d call “a good start” — and this groundswell of antipathy to being lectured by a smarmy Brit on CNN has now reached America’s youth, including Michael Butler at The High School Conservative:

Piers Morgan “has a case of the sads” over the deportion petition, tweeting things such as “Ironic U.S. gun rights campaign to deport me for ‘attacking 2nd amendment rights’ – is my opinion not protected under 1st amendment rights?” One witty twitter user responded with “You ignore the Constitution, why shouldn’t they?” For those of you wondering if we really can deport Piers Morgan for being stupid, we can. James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal explains, “Your opinion is protected, your presence in the U.S. is not. See Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972).” . . .
There is also a response petition from British citizens which reads, “We got rid of him once and why should we have to suffer again. The Americans wanted him so they should put up with him. We washed our hands of him a long time ago.”

The Brits don’t want him back and everybody in America hates him. Maybe we should send Piers Morgan to France — or even worse, Canada!

It doesn’t matter, as long as we #DeportPiersMorgan.

The Problem With Piers Morgan Is That Americans Don’t Hate Him Enough

If you haven’t yet signed the petition to deport Piers Morgan, what are you waiting for? Both the Constitution and the Bible are so “inherently flawed,” the CNN host says, that they must be amended to take away the right to keep and bear arms, and to legitimize homosexuality:

“Both the bible and the Constitution were well intentioned, but they are basically, inherently flawed. Hence, the need to amend it. . . . My point to you about gay rights, for example, it’s time for an amendment to the Bible.”

No, Piers Morgan is inherently flawed. Time to deport him, I say.

(Via Memeorandum; video via Hot Air.)

 

Category: CNN

Another Republican Lie!

In a ludicrously shameless attempt to lower expectations for Thursday’s vice-presidential debate beatdown, RNC chairman Reince Priebus calls Joe Biden “a gifted orator”:

“I think people realize that Joe Biden is a gifted orator. He’s very good at rhetoric. And I think he’s very relatable,” Priebus said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Reince — and everybody else on the planet — knows that Biden is a gaffe-prone dimwit who is likely to be humiliated by Paul Ryan.

Reince’s poor-mouthing of Ryan and risible praise of Biden reminds me of how University of Georgia coach Vince Dooley used to talk about upcoming games against lightly-regarded opponents: “Gosh, Larry, Vanderbilt has a really strong special teams unit and we can’t afford to take anything for granted against them.”

Then the Bulldogs would go out on Saturday and whomp Vandy 49-3, with Georgia’s third string playing the entire fourth quarter.

Same deal here: Reince is obligated, as a matter of professional courtesy, to pretend that Thursday’s debate is going to be competitive, but nobody believes it for a minute.

‘STATE OF THE UNION’ TRANSCRIPT (VIA CNN):

CROWLEY: I’m Candy Crowley. And this is State of the Union .
It was not unanimous, but there was overwhelming consensus among viewers and pundits that Mitt Romney shined in Denver ‘s debate season opener and the president did not. The New Yorker magazine summed it up with a cover cartoon of Romney debating an empty chair, the captain “Mitt Stands Alone.”
Campaigns are only as good as their last news cycle, so on to Danville , Kentucky , and Thursday night’s battle of the number twos.
Joining me now are Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter, a long-time friend of Joe Biden, and Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus, a confidant of Paul Ryan and a fellow cheese head. Mayor Nutter, stand by with me a minute, and I want to get to the party chairman, and we’ll be back with you.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for joining us. I want to talk about the great burden of great expectations. There was a CNN/ORC poll, and we said who is going to win the vice presidential debate? And the answer was Biden, 39 percent, Ryan, 55 percent. So in many ways this mirrors what happened to the presidential debate. Everyone thought President Obama would win. So there’s great expectations here for Ryan.
How much of a microscope do you think there will be on him?
PRIEBUS: Well, I’m not so sure about that. I mean, I don’t dispute your polling there, but I think most people understand that Joe Biden has been debating for a long time, I mean, since the early 1900s he has been debating.
CROWLEY: This is a smart young man that he is debating. And he knows his stuff.
PRIEBUS: Right. Right. I think what you see, though, in some of that polling is that some of the, you know, Joe Biden as of late put his foot in his mouth a few times in very public ways. I mean, he said that the middle class was crushed under, you know, the policies of Obama and Biden, and he said some things that were problematic.
However, Paul is a smart guy. He has committed his life to understanding the problems of our economy, presenting a plan for the American people, so I think that Paul is going to do – he’s going to do a great job, but I also think it’s very important for people to understand, and I think people realize that Joe Biden is a gifted or orator. He is very good at rhetoric, and I think is he very relatable. So I think they are very two different people. And I think it’s going to be a great night.
CROWLEY: Have you talked to Ryan at all about his debate performance, what he needs to do, that kind of thing?
PRIEBUS: Well, sure.
I mean, Paul is one of my very good friends. I talk to Paul all the time about a lot of different things, But, you know, I think he is taking it very seriously. He’s prepared. But…
CROWLEY: Nervous?
PRIEBUS: Well, sure. I think people — you know, I think both parties should be nervous. I mean, it’s a big night. It’s a big — it’s always going to be a big night.
CROWLEY: Do you think it makes a difference? I mean, there are a lot of people who say, look, VP debates, they’re just – they’re a side show. It’s all about these top guys. Do you think that Ryan has to keep the momentum going from what was widely seen as a Mitt Romney win in Denver?
PRIEBUS: We had a good week last week. There’s no doubt about it. We have to have a good week this week and the week after. So I think we take it one day at a time.
You know, I don’t know, I think that the VP debates are very important. You saw in our presidential primary season, Candy. I mean, we had, what, 22 debates. And at every one of these debates, whether it was on CNN or on Fox or whatever the station, we had broken records for a primary debate. People enjoy these debates. I would expect a lot of people to be watching. And I think Paul is going to do a great job, but I also think that Joe Biden is incredibly gifted when it comes to debating and understanding policy. And he is a good orator.
CROWLEY: Let me ask you about — there’s a Colorado poll that came out — University of Denver poll that came out right after the debates, and it shows that Colorado is certainly a swing state, kind of shrinking. The lead of Barack Obama 47 percent, Mitt Romney, 43 percent. I want you to focus on this, someone else 4 percent.
How worried are you about the fact that Gary Johnson, as you know is a libertarian candidate, is probably going to be on all 50 ballots, and the conventional wisdom is he is going to draw from Mitt Romney. It makes a difference in Colorado . It makes a difference in Virginia. It will make a difference in North Carolina. Does that worry you?
PRIEBUS: No, it doesn’t worry me.
CROWLEY: Really?
PRIEBUS: Because I think people understand that they’re not going to throw their vote away when we have an election here that’s about the future of America . So I don’t see that happening, Candy.
You know, this was a widely debated thing in 1980 with John Anderson, Gary Johnson is nowhere where…
CROWLEY: Sure, but Ross Perot made a difference.
PRIEBUS: Sure.
CROWLEY: I think if you talk to the Bush campaign, they think that Ross Perot is why they lost.
PRIEBUS: Right. But we don’t have a third party candidate anywhere near the name recognition or the popularity of Ross Perot or John Anderson. I just don’t see that happening. In fact, I see that it’s almost a nonfactor, so I’m not worried about it.
CROWLEY: Let me ask you about the new economic figures that came out. Unemployment dipped below 8 percent, something I’m sure Republicans celebrate as well. But does it not undercut what has been the central theme of the Republican campaign which was that he has made the economy worse because we are right down looking at an unemployment rate after a really horrible year which you can’t blame President Obama for in totality, his first year when he sort of did inherit this big mess, now it’s down to 7.8%. Doesn’t that show that he is on the right trajectory and kind of undermine the central argument for you?
PRIEBUS: Oh, I don’t think so. You know, it’s like this, Candy, if you are getting blown out in a football game but you are scoring field goals once a quarter, you can’t point to the three points every quarter and say at least we’re scoring some points, you’re still getting clobbered.
I mean, the fact of the matter is the president and Joe Biden are getting clobbered on the policies that they put in place. They promised we’d be a heck of a lot better off than we are today. We’re nowhere close.
I was in Wisconsin yesterday. I’ve been in Ohio practically every other day. I’ll tell you what, people in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and Lanman (ph), Ohio don’t feel better off today than they were four years ago, and they don’t think this president has been very good at following through on his promises. That’s what this is going to come down to. And I’ll tell you what, last week you saw the difference, an unfiltered Mitt Romney and an unfiltered Barack Obama. You saw inspiration, heart, preparedness from Mitt Romney, and you saw a president that came in unprepared, uninspiring.
You know what, maybe Clint Eastwood was right, and I think that’s what the American people saw last week.
CROWLEY: Let me ask you about the — we have some idea of the Democrat’s fundraising in September, the totality, the re-election campaign as well as the Democratic Committee, $181 million in September. That’s 1.8 million individual donors, 567,000, more than half a million first-time donors, average donation $53. That’s a pretty impressive number. Are you going to match it?
PRIEBUS: I don’t know if we’re going to match it, but it is an impressive number.
CROWLEY: Are you close?
PRIEBUS: I can’t tell you that right now. But I will say this I think we all understand that this race isn’t going to come down to money, because we’ve been very competitive. And by the way if you roll the tape, I have been calling — I have been saying that President Obama is going to raise $1 billion for a year and a half. Remember we called him the billion dollar president. Well — so it’s no surprise to us. And I think we’ve surprised them by how well we’ve done at fundraising.
But look this isn’t going to come down to money. This is going to come down to heart. This is going to come down to work on the ground, plans, and I think the fact that this president didn’t fulfill his promises, that will undo him. And we’ll beat them on the ground and we’ll have all the money we need to be competitive.
CROWLEY: Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus, thanks for joining us.
PRIEBUS: Thank you.

UPDATE: Speaking of football, a certain UGA alumna had an excellent analogy for the Bulldogs’ 35-7 loss to South Carolina:

Meanwhile, Auburn lost 24-7 to Arkansas, which had previously lost 52-0 to Alabama, so I guess the Tide should be 69-point favorites in this year’s Iron Bowl.

The Most Biased Question, Ever

DAYTON, Ohio
Jim Acosta of CNN got an exclusive one-on-one interview with Mitt Romney yesterday in order that he could ask Mitt this ridiculous question:

“African-Americans have a tremendous sense of pride that there is the first African-American president in the White House. If you were to somehow beat the first African-American president, what would you say to the black community to assure them that you would be their president also?”

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters says Acosta “should be ashamed of himself,” but what shocks me is that, instead of punching Acosta in the face, Romney politely answered the question:

“I want to be the president of all the people of America. I want to help all the people of America. You don’t get into a race like this with myself and my family and do the kind of work and commitment that we’ve put forward without the passion to help all of America. And the people who really need the help right now are the people in the middle class, people who have fallen into poverty. I know how to get them help. The president doesn’t.”

Show of hands: How many of our readers would like to see Mitt Romney punch out a network reporter on live TV? 

Yeah — it’s unanimous. Do it, Mitt.

 


Classic: State Department Attacks CNN for Reporting Inconvenient Facts on Libya

We now know that, despite warnings from multiple sources — including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens — about the rising threat from Islamic extremists in Libya, the Obama administration failed to take necessary precautions. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans, the Obama administration dishonestly tried to deceive the public by characterizing the attack as part of a “spontaneous” protest inspired by an obscure video. As the truth of the matter has slowly emerged, the Obama administration has sought to avoid admitting its errors and deceptions, and instead attempted to distract from this catastrophic failure of its own policies by attacking media outlets that are reporting honestly on the Libyan disaster.

CNN news reported that Ambassador Stevens was concerned that he was on an “al-Qaeda hit list,” but the network failed to disclose that one source of that report was the ambassador’s journal, which the network’s reporters had recovered from the ruins of the consulate.

The State Department has scapegoated the network for that decision, and you can see the predictable dogpile at Memeorandum, although news that is favorable to the Obama administration — e.g., “secret video” — never provokes this kind of reaction. PJ Media’s Rick Moran comments on the ethical question:

One can sympathize with the family on this issue, but the murder of an American ambassador and publishing his thoughts leading up to his death is a story with worldwide significance. CNN felt it had an obligation to selectively air those thoughts, only after confirming them with other sources, and keeping secret any personal and intimate details contained in the journal.

It’s a rare day when I agree with Rick Moran, but he’s right here: While CNN’s conduct is certainly subject to criticism, that pales in comparison to the “worldwide significance” — the legitimate news value — of the story they were reporting. Attempting to distract from this important story by trying to indict CNN before the court of public opinion? Predictable and wrong:

CNN broke a pledge to the late ambassador’s family that it wouldn’t report on the diary, said State Department spokesman Philippe Reines, a senior adviser to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In a blistering statement, Reines called CNN’s actions “indefensible.”
The channel said in the story online that it took “newsworthy tips” from Stevens’ diary and confirmed them with other sources. Citing an unidentified source “familiar with Stevens’ thinking,” CNN said that the ambassador was concerned about security threats in Benghazi and a “rise in Islamic extremism.”
In a statement Saturday, CNN defended its use of the journal’s contents and asked “why is the State Department now attacking the messenger.”
“CNN did not initially report on the existence of a journal out of respect for the family, but we felt there were issues raised in the journal which required full reporting, which we did,” the channel said.
The public has a right to know what CNN learned from “multiple sources” about fears and warnings of a terror threat before the Benghazi attack, the channel said, “which are now raising questions about why the State Department didn’t do more to protect Ambassador Stevens and other U.S. personnel.”

Here is the CNN video report:

More commentary from Darleen Click, Ann Althouse,  The Lonely Conservative, Twitchy, Gateway Pundit and NewsBusters.

Related: “Fox News’ Chris Wallace Hammers Obama Advisor Robert Gibbs on Administration’s Libya Lies.”

 


A Blog Post That @SoledadOBrien Will Certainly Never Read On-Air at CNN

You recall the Aug. 13 incident in which the CNN anchor was caught reading from the liberal Talking Points Memo — which had been e-mailed to her by persons unknown — in an interview with Romney campaign surrogate Barbara Comstock.

What that incident suggested to me is that CNN has, in essence, outsourced its research to whoever sent O’Brien the e-mail, most likely a Democrat Party campaign operative. Because CNN has never explained that incident, it inspires the suspicion that much of the message-coordination we see in major media works like this:

  • Democrats know from experience which network personnel are most amenable to regurgitating their partisan spin. Democrats employ analysts to study and evaluate coverage, and have compiled dossiers/databases on all potentially influential media personnel, including the behind-the-scenes producers, editors and executives.
  • Known “friendly” personnel are targeted with key messages, including oppo-research, which they use in their broadcasts without revealing the partisan source.
  • Competitive pressures help spread these messages rapidly. For example, if a certain oppo-research item is first reported by MSNBC, then CNN feels compelled to “match” the story.
  • Democrats reward favorable coverage with access. You want to get a one-on-one interview with Obama or Biden? You’re gonna have to earn it, sugar.
  • Conversely, negative coverage is punished by witholding access and by other means. Because the news industry votes Democrat by margins of at least 7-to-1, those who don’t cooperate enthusiastically with the Democrat messaging operation may be subject to career-damaging reprisals.

This, I say, is merely a plausible suspicion inspired by the self-evident fact of message coordination distributed across multiple news organizations, with specific reference to this curious incident involving Soledad O’Brien. Somebody sent her that e-mail. It is reasonable to suspect that (a) the source of the e-mail was a Democrat campaign operative, and (b) O’Brien isn’t the only elite journalist who acquires her research in this decidedly non-random way.

Paranoid? No. Liberal bias is not a conspiracy, it’s a consensus.

Having been a working journalist since 1986, I’ve seen the news-making process from the inside and know — to borrow a favorite phrase from James Carville — that when you see a turtle on top a fence post, it didn’t crawl up there by itself.

People send me stuff all the time. “Investigative journalism” is, to an extent seldom acknowledged, mostly a matter of having good sources who will send you stuff. But when somebody sends me a press release, I feel kind of obligated to say, “Hey, this is from a press release,” rather than rewriting it to make it seem as if I were doing original reporting. And so the major reason that Soledad O’Brien will never read this blog post on CNN is not that it is critical of her “reporting,” but because it ends with this:

* PRESS RELEASE FROM THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN *

FOUR YEARS LATER, THE MIDDLE CLASS
ISN’T BETTER OFF

“This morning, President Obama doubled down on his big-government policies that have weakened the middle class and led to the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. With incomes falling, costs rising, and the middle class continuing to fall behind, the President’s answer is job-killing tax increases and a bigger role for government. After four years of Barack Obama, Americans are not better off – they are ready for new leadership that will grow our economy and strengthen the middle class.”
— Ryan Williams, Romney Spokesman

On “Face The Nation” This Morning, President Obama Stressed The Role Of Government In Helping People “Get Into The Middle Class”:

President Obama: “Government Can Be A Force For Good” When It Comes To Moving People Into The Middle Class. PRESIDENT OBAMA: “And I’m willing to do more on that front because, as I argued at the convention, those of us who believe that government can be a force for good when it comes to creating opportunity for folks who are willing to work hard and play by the rules to get into the middle class, we have an obligation to make sure government works.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 9/9/12)

  • · FLASHBACK: An Opening Video From The Democratic Convention Declared That “Government Is The Only Thing That We All Belong To.” (Democratic National Committee Video, 9/4/12)

But In The Last Four Years Under President Obama, Middle-Class Families Have Been Crushed By High Unemployment, Falling Incomes, And Rising Costs:

Lower-Paying Jobs Account For Nearly 60% Of The Jobs Added Since The Recession Ended In 2009. “Lower-paying jobs, with median hourly wages from $7.69 to $13.83, accounted for just 21% of the job losses during the recession. But they’ve made up about 58% of the job growth from the end of the recession in late 2009 through early 2012.” (Jim Puzzanghera, “Majority Of New Jobs In Recovery Are Low-Paying, Study Finds,” Los Angeles Times, 8/31/12)

  • · “The Findings Highlight Concerns About A Shrinking Middle Class…” “The findings highlight concerns about a shrinking middle class and pose another obstacle to getting the economy back on track, said Annette Bernhardt, policy co-director at the National Employment Law Project, which conducted the study.” (Jim Puzzanghera, “Majority Of New Jobs In Recovery Are Low-Paying, Study Finds,” Los Angeles Times, 8/31/12)

The Majority Of New Jobs Created In President Obama’s So-Called Recovery “Pay Much Less” Than Jobs Before The Recession. “Although six in 10 jobs lost during the Great Recession paid mid-level wages, the majority of new jobs created in the recovery — positions such as store clerks, laborers and home healthcare aides — pay much less, according to a new study.” (Jim Puzzanghera, “Majority Of New Jobs In Recovery Are Low-Paying, Study Finds,” Los Angeles Times, 8/31/12)

Since President Obama Took Office, Median Household Income Has Declined By Over $4,000. “In January 2009, the month President Obama entered the Oval Office and shortly before he signed his stimulus spending bill, median household income was $54,983. By June 2012, it had tumbled to $50,964, adjusted for inflation. (See the chart nearby.) That’s $4,019 in lost real income, a little less than a month’s income every year.” (Editorial, “Negative $4,019,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/24/12)

Since President Obama Took Office, Family Health Care Premiums Have Increased By $2,393. (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2011)

Since President Obama Took Office, The Average Price Per Gallon Of Gas Has More Than Doubled From $1.85 To $3.84. (U.S. Energy And Information Administration, Accessed 9/9/12)

Since President Obama Took Office, The Average Cost Of In-State Tuition At A Four-Year College Has Increased From $6,585 To $8,244 – A 25 Percent Increase. (“Trends In College Pricing 2009,” College Board, 2008; “Trends In College Pricing 2011,” College Board, 2011)

  • · The Cost Of College Is Currently At “An All Time High.” “Nationally, the cost of a full credit load has passed $8,000, an all-time high. Throw in room and board, and the average list price for a state school now runs more than $17,000 a year, according to the twin annual reports on college costs and student aid published Wednesday by the College Board.” (Justin Poe, “College Prices Up Again As States Slash Budgets,” The Associated Press, 10/26/11)

And President Obama Once Again Touted His Plan To Raise Taxes – But His Tax Hikes Will Hurt Our Economy, Harm Millions Of Small Business Owners, And Jeopardize Over 700,000 Jobs:

President Obama: “You Can’t Reduce The Deficit” Without Increasing Taxes. PRESIDENT OBAMA: “You can’t reduce the deficit unless you take a balanced approach that says we have to make government leaner and more efficient but we’ve also have to ask people like me or Governor Romney, who have done better than anybody else over the course of the last decade, and whose taxes are just about lower than they’ve been in the last 50 years, to do a little bit more.” (CBS’s “Face The Nation,” 9/9/12)

  • · President Obama’s Tax Hikes Would Subject 2.1 Million Business Owners To Higher Taxes And Would Jeopardize 710,000 Jobs. “Researchers determined the plan would actually subject 2.1 million business owners to higher rates; specifically, those who pay pass-through taxes, like most partnerships, LLCs and S-Corporations. The result, less capital in the hands of business owners and diminished labor supply, would cost the United States an estimated $200 billion in economic output and 710,000 jobs.” (J.D. Harrison, “Obama Plan To Lift Top Tax Rates Would Plague Millions Of Small Businesses, Study Warns,” The Washington Post, 7/17/12)
  • · President Obama’s Tax Plan “Would Hurt Small-Business Job Creators In Particular.” “New research, released today by the National Federation of Independent Business, shows that allowing tax relief on the top individual rates to expire will hurt job creation and the economy. The report, published by top accounting firm Ernst & Young, shows raising top individual rates would hurt small-business job creators in particular.” (NFIB, Press Release, 7/17/12)

* END OF ROMNEY CAMPAIGN PRESS RELEASE *

The reader will notice that this press release is backed up with solid facts that I could have easily cribbed and re-written, citing them as if I’d done the research myself and concealing the partisan source. But would that be honest journalism? Never mind all the fancy “ethics” stuff — I’m talking about basic honesty.

This is the final reason why Soledad O’Brien won’t read this blog post on the air at CNN: There is something dishonest in what she’s doing — who sent her that TPM post? Plouffe? Axelrod? one of their lesser henchmen? — and if the executives at CNN cared a whit about their credibility, they’d put an end to her lies.

Category: CNN

Caught! CNN’s Soledad O’Brien Uses Liberal Blog TPM for Show-Prep

America’s Least Popular Cable-News Personality™ graduated from Harvard, but Soledad O’Brien is so ill-informed that, when she got flustered during an interview with Republican spokeswoman Barbara Comstock, she resorted to reading a Talking Points Memo blog post to find some decent . . . well, talking points.

Ali Akbar caught this while watching CNN, and if you look very close at the enlarged image you can see that it’s an e-mail — this was something sent to her. By whom? We don’t know, but the point is that rather than doing her own research on issues, Soledad is relying on people e-mailing her liberal blog posts.

“The Most Trusted Name in News”? She’s a disgrace.

UPDATE: More reaction at Twitchy and at Newsbusters, where Noel Sheppard says, “Bravo, Ali! Bravo!”

UPDATE II: BTW, I’m not kidding about Soledad being America’s Least Popular Cable-News Personality™ — her ratings in March set a historic low for CNN. There’s just something about her that makes people change the channel.

Category: CNN