Tag Archives: Little Green Footballs

Fox News haters prefer herd journalism

O’Reilly asks: “Why does Media Matters, which admits it’s in business to hurt [Fox News], receive tax-exempt status?”

Gosh, Bill, with a Democrat Senate and White House, do you really wonder why? Isn’t working, anyhow, as Fox continues to beat the competition like the dusty rugs they are.

Silly as Media Matters is (I mean, really, how dare the right-wing dissent from the dominant left-wing media view?), even more amusing was Little Green Footballs recent pointer to a preference for herd journalism, so long as it suits their politics, of course.

They branded Fox News a (gasp) outlier for finding a new headline buried in the Left’s latest consensus reporting. Yep. Obviously, initiative is bad when it departs from the official line. Mustn’t confuse the weak minds who need confirmation of their political opinions in order to feel secure.

LGF’s gone loopy

I used to enjoy Little Green Footballs, back when proprietor Charles Johnson mainly defended Israel against the jihadi Musselmen. Then he began to get rather shrill about people who disagreed with him about evolution. Lately he’s become a fulltime assaulter of the Tea Party movement, and tosses around words like racist and white supremacist to describe his enemies. He’s become, as one commenter here, puts it, a Kos Kiddie Day Care Center. My blogroll is already full. He won’t be missed.

Obama was really born in…

…wait for it…are you ready?…are you sure you’re ready?…okay now…here it comes: Area 51!

What’s up with Explorer 7?

First it was FireFox freezing all the time. So I switched to IE7. Now it’s refusing to load some pages, including my own here, throwing up "abort" messages. LGF says it’s somehow related to Sitemeter. Swell. Well, there’s always Safari, I guess. Or Opera, if push comes to shove. Could we please go back to Web 1.0? At least it worked, most of the time.

UPDATE:  Seems to be fixed. Except for visits to Sitemeter, itself.

Baby Barry was a Muslim

Some say the presidential election will turn on the economy. Some say on national security. Alan Sullivan, the Seablogger, says it will turn on faith, since there is evidence that Baby Barry is hiding (indeed, denying) another blockbuster. He grew up a Muslim, says his own half-brother. BB’s Indonesian stepfather, while not particularly observant, when he did go to mosque on Fridays, took his stepson with him. Now BB claims he’s a Christian, though of the Black Liberation Theology variety, which has about as much to do with Jesus as the Nation of Islam. So, as Alan concludes, in all probability, BB really is an atheist, or at best an agnostic. Although the Muslims consider him theirs, despite his apostasy. Should it matter? It surely will to some American voters. But I wouldn’t vote for him, anyhow–too inexperienced, too lefty, and way too dishonest.

Via Fresh Bilge.

UPDATE:  Rick Moran at Pajamas says all this is a smear. It’s complicated, that’s for sure, but I’m not persuaded by his "evidence," which is accompanied by numerous insults for anyone who doesn’t agree with him–except for one cite of ABC’s Jake Tapper’s demonstration that BB’s half-brother’s remarks were misinterpreted by the Jerusalem Post. That looks conclusive. But I still think Daniel Pipes’ analysis (linked above) is persuasive. Moreover, BB has demonstrably prevaricated about so many other things in his background that I see no reason to trust his denials on this one. FWIW, Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi thinks BB is still a Muslim. Heh.

The elite are such phonies

Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs posts the official Davos clip from which Lurch’s tendentious remarks, including calling the US "sort of an international pariah," have been…erased. But Johnson also has posted underneath the official one a YouTube clip showing Kerry uttering the remarks. History’s not so easy to manipulate these days, is it now?

Bias for all to see

I must admit, at first I didn’t see what the complaint was when LGF and a few others went off on what seemed to me to be this fairly innocuous Associated Press lede on a slow news day:

"The U.S. military announced the deaths of seven American soldiers Tuesday, raising the U.S. death toll since the beginning of the Iraq war to at least 2,978 — five more than the number of people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks in the U.S."

Just another in the MSM’s relentless focus on the grim and bloody, I thought. But Meryl Yourish helped put it in perspective for me by rewriting it this way as if it was during World War II:

"Earlier Tuesday, the military also announced the deaths on Monday of three American soldiers. The U.S. military death toll [rose] to at least 2,978, 575 more than the number killed in the Dec. [7], 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor."

Makes little sense that way, unless you are complaining about the reason for the war itself.