Michelle Malkin » Fight the smears…against Rush and the Right

Fight the smears…against Rush and the Right

By Michelle Malkin • June 13, 2008 12:06 PM

The ogling Obamedia is so incorrigibly predictable I can’t even get mad about this crap anymore.

They took a break from staring at Barack’s loins and weeping over his nomination to blame Rush Limbaugh for spreading the left-wing Larry Johnson-spearheaded, Bob Beckel-fueled rumors about a purported Michelle Obama rant– even though Rush, as he noted yesterday, was one of the last to even mention the rumor-mongering:

How old is this story? Obama denied this ten days ago or sometime last week. Obama denied this last week. All of a sudden I started noticing this last night on my RSS feeder. There must have been 35 newspapers last night which had the same AP story in it, so I got all 35 newspaper versions and some TV stations like this. I was last in line on this one. I was a nonfactor on this. But, what happens is, this is as far as the Drive-Bys are concerned, folks, and this is an example of the power of this program. When the Drive-Bys are looking at Republicans or conservatives to really nail us to the wall, until I mention it, it doesn’t matter. ‘Til I bring it up, it doesn’t exist. Well, I mean what the hell, I was last in line. Hannity was denying on the radio for days that he had the tape. Let’s go back. This is me on May 30th, and this is what I said about this.

RUSH ARCHIVE: There are these rumors circulating — and I don’t know if this is true, but there are a number of people suggesting — and I first heard this, by the way, when I was gone Monday and Tuesday of last week.

RUSH: Okay, stop the tape, stop the tape. That would have May 14th and 15th or whatever when I was out there playing Torrey Pines, so the middle of May. That’s when I first heard this. What is it now? June the 12th. So this is about a month ago that I said this, and all of a sudden now this becomes front-page news, thanks to the AP and the Drive-By Media.

RUSH ARCHIVE: And that the Republican Party supposedly has it now, of Michelle Obama speaking from the pulpit of this church talking about whitey. I don’t care if it’s unacceptable, Snerdley, I mean I’m just reporting what’s out there. I’m reporting on a rumor that is out there.

…RUSH: Okay, so we have learned here that the Democrats and the Obama campaign have decided to go back into two-week-old history, start a website designed to protect Michelle (My Belle) Obama from any, shall we say, criticism out there. Here’s what’s going on. The Drive-Bys are gearing up and laying the groundwork to protect Michelle (My Belle) Obama, and they are putting in the record that I am the one leading the attack on it. That’s what this AP story is about. AP is a news monopoly, and all the TV stations and all the newspapers get AP. That’s why this story’s in thousands of newspapers today. And, of course, my name is in there in the first paragraph or so. I mean, I look at this as an honor, of course, ’cause they think I’m the devil. I’ve got two horns coming out of my head and they think if they put my name in the story where Ms. Obama is being criticized, all of a sudden that’s gonna rally the troops. It’s to get it in the Nexis database. So this is one of these things that’s going to live for five years, that I attacked Michelle (My Belle) Obama.

Then you’ve got tools like Time’s Jay Carney lying about conservative bloggers spreading the reckless rumors, even though it has been conservative bloggers dispelling and deconstructing them.

Jimmie at Sundries Shack nails the insidiousness of the AP’s distortions:

Not only is it the very same smear that is whirling around the echo-chamber of the elitist, with the odd push by MS-NBC and the AP, left-wing media until it reaches hysteria (who goes by the name of Keith Olbermann, by the way) but it also has the advantage of placement. Not many people, a couple hundred or so, likely saw Jay Carney on MS-NBC. Hundreds of thousands of people will see this AP article since it will end up being reprinted in city and country newspapers just like other AP articles. It won’t be filed under “opinion”. It’ll be stuck in with the rest of the national news and hundreds of folks who have no idea what the rumor really was will end up seeing how conservatives were spreading a mean story about a helpless candidate’s wife.

I’d say at this point that the Obama campaign doesn’t owe [AP reporter Nedra] Pickler a check. They owe her the job of Press Secretary. They’d be hard-pressed to find someone willing to dance on the edge of a lie with such skill and aplomb. If she’s do it for them for nothing today, imagine how well she’d deliver their smears if she was working for them!

The Associated Press and associates have a pre-fab narrative: Conservative talk show hosts and bloggers are evil hate-mongers. They will distort and omit facts and nuance by all means necessary to fit the narrative and bolster their candidate and causes. In the same way Rush is being blamed for the Michelle Obama tape rumors, as a result of a frenzy of MSM coverage, I am now being accused by legions of profane moonbats of calling her a “baby mama” despite having nothing to do with the stupid caption Fox News ran during my interview.

Not long ago, there was no way to fight back against the MSM monopoly. Their word was scripture. This is why they hate Fox News, Rush, and the conservative blogosphere. This is why they seize on every opportunity, large and small, to discredit the Right. And this is why the fight over the (Un)Fairness Doctrine affects us all. The smear masters and liberal water-carriers who pass for journalists want their monopoly back. Without government intervention, they can’t reclaim it.

***

Note that the much-ballyhooed “Fight the Smears” website from the Obama camp specifically whines about “right-wing” smears:

Someone notify Larry Johnson, Bob Beckel, and the Hillary blogger/rumor-mongers that they are now “right-wing.”

Update: And more smearing of conservative blogs from the New York Times, of course.

***

Related: Fairness Doctrine news: GOP leader John Boehner sent the following letter to the FCC yesterday…

June 11, 2008

The Honorable Kevin J. Martin

Federal Communications Commission

445 12th Street SW, Suite 844

Washington, DC 20554

Re: Report on Broadcast Localism and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MB Docket No. 04-233

Dear Chairman Martin:

Under the rubric of “broadcast localism” it is clear the Commission is proposing no less than a sweeping takeover by Washington bureaucrats of broadcast media. The proposals and recommendations for Commission action contained in the NPR amount to the stealth enactment of the Fairness Doctrine, a policy designed to squelch the free speech and free expression of specifically targeted audiences.

Forcing licensees to recreate so called “advisory boards” of a by-gone era will encumber broadcast media with onerous bureaucratic burdens not faced by cable, satellite, or Internet. The report’s assertion these boards would help stations “determine the needs and interests of their communities” or promote “localism and diversity” borders on fantasy. The recreation of pre-1980s advisory boards will place broadcast media squarely on a path toward rationed speech.

Two other proposed rules completely disregard a generation of technological and media advancement. Both the Main Studio Rule and rules regulating the physical operation of stations suggest the Commission has apparently decided to regulate broadcast media based on the needs of 1934 (the year FCC was created) instead of the proven realities of 2008.

Licensees and stations should serve the needs of local citizens. But adding more restrictions and Washington mandates is retrograde considering the constant technological evolution of the media market. I urge the Commission to rescind these proposed rules.

Sincerely,
John Boehner
Republican Leader
Member of Congress

Posted in: Barack Obama, Fairness Doctrine, Michelle Obama

Send to a Friend
Printer Friendly

comments (92)

trackbacks (13)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

#1

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:11 pm, William Amos said:

ITs a white noise campaign against conservatives. The idea is to spread a bunch of rumors and divert conservtive attacks on Obama.

In other words to do to us what they long claim we have been doing to them.

The best answer is to ignore the smears. Just stay on the offensive and keep Obama feet to the fire.

No one plays the fear and smear game better than liberals.
#2

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:14 pm, greenfairie said:

The strange thing is it’s now more than ever that the media is so nakedly partisan. It was always biased but now it’s really crazy. This is why we need blogs and talk radio.
#3

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:14 pm, tre said:

Maybe Rush should have just pointed out how Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a ~~lightweight~~, oops, I mean Lightworker, instead.

The “Drive-By Media” constantly report things without proof, like “Global Warming” for example. But, when a Conservative simply mentions something that is rumored, while saying that it’s a rumor, they get raked over the coals for it.
#4

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:16 pm, DanVanSmak said:

This tactic is not surprising, given that people are gullible enough to believe in “change you can believe in.” *out*
#5

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:16 pm, Blind_Mule said:

Rush has some broad shoulders, He takes all kinds of crap from these A Holes on the left, what is funny is they don’t realize they just keep this crap going and it all leads back to their man. what a Bunch O Maroons.
#6

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:16 pm, ajmontana said:

They sat in a church for twenty years that blames whitey. tape or no tape, nuff said.
#7

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:18 pm, DesertLover said:

Liberals remind me of the playground bully … every school had at least one …

Like that bully the libs are always trying to coerce everyone into their way of thinking and acting …

And just like that bully as soon as someone quit taking the abuse and stood up and punched back you only saw their backside as they went off sulking and whining …

Now doesn’t sound like what is going on here …

And these clowns are going to stand up to our enemies? …

Bunch of wimps and wuzzes …
#8

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:19 pm, Barry F. said:

Is this really helping Michelle “My Belle” Obama’s kids?
#9

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:20 pm, DesertLover said:

correction … should read “Now doesn’t that sound like what is going on here …”
#10

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:21 pm, Goldwater Knight said:

Time for conservatives to go on the offensive.
#11

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:21 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:18 pm, DesertLover said:

Hey! I’m all for punching liberals in the face! Oh, wait. Were you just using them as a comparison, DL?
#12

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:22 pm, Christian Soldier said:

Why am I not surprised that the anti-free speech (fairness doctrine) was initiated under that great paragon of virtue FDR.!
Didn’t he have LOTS of Commies in his administration?

TREASON by A Coulter gave us the documentation.
#13

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:22 pm, Spare Change said:

It appears that “smear” will be the Obama campaign meme this summer. This spam email landed in my Inbox this morning. I don’t know a “Dan Codiga”, and I’m pretty sure I don’t want to, now. [Warning: DO NOT go to the link -- it may be a cheap phish or spoof site that may play mischief with your computer!]
= = = = =

From: Dan Codiga [mailto:dan.codiga@comcast.net]
Sent: Thu 6/12/2008 9:15 PM
To: [Redacted]
Subject: Fight the smears against Barack Obama

Hey,
As the general election heats up, we’re seeing a lot of smear tactics.

One of these smears is an email being circulated with fake quotes from Obama’s books, “Dreams From My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope.”

Learn more about this and other anti-Obama smears and help learn the truth:

http://my.barackobama.com/fightthesmears

Together we can make sure these negative and divisive attacks don’t affect this campaign.

Thanks for your help.

———
A user has sent this message from BarackObama.com. The sender’s name, email address, subject and message have not been verified.
#14

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:22 pm, Blind_Mule said:

BO just said he had a plan to make sure that as a U.S Senator he had a comfortable retirement and that as President that he has a comfortable retirement. I can’t believe he just said this in Ohio, wonder if anyone picked up on that? did anyone else hear that or was I imagining it?sorry not trying to go off subject.
#15

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:25 pm, Brian72 said:

Now people are talking about what I warned the last time this was on our minds. The Fairness Doctrine can be brought back without any Congressional vote. The FCC is an executive branch agency, so the President can reinstate the Doctrine with an executive order just as President Reagan dismantled it without Congress.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) is leading the charge to make a vote in Congress required to change the FCC regulations.
Another tool is Campaign Finance Reform, you guessed it, McCain-Feingold.

This will be an important issue this summer and fall. Get on board!

Brian C. Anderson at City Journal wrote a lengthy and detailed article about this in 2006. Check it out.

Though campaign-finance madness is the Number One regulatory threat to the new media, it’s not the only one. The Left is now pushing Congress to restore the Fairness Doctrine, which would kill talk radio and possibly conservative-friendly Fox News, too.

For those who don’t remember, the Federal Communications Commission’s Fairness Doctrine, formalized in the late forties but dating back to 1929, required radio and then broadcast television stations to cover “vitally important controversial issues of interest in the community served by the broadcaster” and to provide “opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints on such issues”—what came to be known as the “equal time” rule. Any broadcaster who didn’t follow these regulations could face fines, free time given to voices that federal regulators felt hadn’t gotten fair treatment, and even loss of operating license. Concern that particular partisan views could dominate what was then a very limited broadcast spectrum, which government felt it had to parcel out with the public interest in mind, drove this meddling. But politicians and advocacy groups frequently used (or abused) the Fairness Doctrine to go after their political enemies, as one former Kennedy administration official acknowledged: “Our massive strategy was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass the right-wing broadcasters, and hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too costly to continue.”

The doctrine made it hard to program political talk radio in today’s Rush Limbaugh–Sean Hannity sense—boisterously opinionated, unafraid to name names, informative, and, if you disagree with the host’s politics, infuriating. If a station ran a show like Limbaugh’s, drawing upward of 20 million listeners a week, it would also have to run a lefty alternative, even if— as has been the case with ratings-challenged Air America in some markets—it can’t get any sponsors. Too risky, most radio execs concluded, and kept opinion programs off the air. In 1980, talk shows of any kind numbered fewer than 100 nationwide.

All that changed in the eighties, when Ronald Reagan’s free-market-minded FCC stopped enforcing the Fairness Doctrine and then dumped it entirely in 1987. Because cable and satellite television and FM radio had vastly expanded the number of television and radio stations, “the new technological abundance,” in regulatory theorist Peter Huber’s phrase, had robbed the doctrine of any plausible “scarcity” rationale.

That the doctrine was also “chilling to free speech,” as FCC head Mark Fowler argued, became crystal clear after it was gone: AM radio exploded with political talk shows. From under 5 percent of all programming, “informational” programming expanded to over 20 percent of the AM mix just seven years after the Fairness Doctrine’s demise. Today, more than 1,400 stations feature the talk format exclusively—and the vast majority broadcast conservative voices, because that’s what draws the listeners, desperate for an alternative to the liberal mainstream press.

Small wonder, then, that House Democrats proposed two bills in 2005 to bring the Fairness Doctrine back—and as a law, rather than a mere agency regulation. New York Democratic representative Louise Slaughter, who introduced the first of the two bills, says that Right-ruled radio is a grave threat to American freedoms, “a waste of good broadcast time, and a waste of our airwaves.” People “may hear whatever they please and whatever they choose,” she tells PBS’s Bill Moyers, in a statement as incoherent as it is illiberal. “And of course they have the right to turn it off. But that’s not good enough either. The fact is that they need the responsibility of the people who are licensed to use our airwaves judiciously and responsibly to call them to account if they don’t.” In other words, people can’t be trusted with freedom but need the supervision of a paternalist government.

Slaughter doesn’t want to re-regulate only radio. When asked by Moyers if she was also proposing the new Fairness Doctrine for Fox News or MSNBC, Slaughter responded: “You bet. . . . Fairness isn’t going to hurt anybody.” If there’s anything liberals hate more than talk radio it’s Fox News, which has dominated cable news by appealing to conservative viewers fed up with the networks’ liberal bias. New York Democratic representative Maurice Hinchey, sponsor of the second Fairness Doctrine bill, went so far as to host a special Capitol Hill screening of Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, a “documentary” hit job. Slaughter, Hinchey, Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders, Washington State congressman Jay Inslee, and several other House lefties have recently formed the Future of American Media Congress to push for a media crackdown.

That’s just an excerpt. Read the whole thing.
#16

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:25 pm, Goldwater Knight said:

The only way BO will be elected is through liberal smear and attacks; we all know BO wouldn’t be able to stand on his own two feet otherwise. There will be a heavy liberal offensive and the smothering of the opposition.
#17

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:31 pm, brooklyn red said:

Rush is having some fun with this on his show right now…
#18

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:32 pm, William Amos said:

I will believe Obama is for change when he fights “Smears” against our troops by people like Dick Durban or John Kerry or John Murtha.
#19

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:33 pm, terrig said:

Goldwater Knight, I’m afraid he’ll be elected though. There’s a lot of dumb people who want to be in with the in crowd and they just don’t care.
#20

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:33 pm, grumbles said:

Until and unless anyone actually produces a video, I’m not going to mention it again.

hummm………..
#21

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:34 pm, wise_man said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:11 pm, William Amos said: No one plays the fear and smear game better than liberals.

You are mostly true. In 2008, some “conservatives” are coming into a very close second with the fear and smear game for this presidential election. Too bad it’s not against Obama. (as all of the above commentary and links obviously prove.)
#22

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:34 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F.

Whatever floats your boat there …

I have known more than one with a proverbial glass jaw, figuratively as well as actually, once someone called them on their BS and stood up to them …

It takes guts to stand up for what is right …

It takes nothing to scream and holler and complain and whine and play the victim …
#23

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:37 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:31 pm, brooklyn red said:

Heh. He is going to town on it, isn’t he, BR?
#24

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:37 pm, Gabe said:

All this hysteria by the Obama camp makes me wonder if they are not trying to hide many things about their candidate. . .and are hysterical that these things might come out.

When you see such an overreaction, it makes you wonder.

Okay, stop the tape, stop the tape. That would have May 14th and 15th or whatever when I was out there playing Torrey Pines, so the middle of May. That’s when I first heard this. What is it now? June the 12th. So this is about a month ago that I said this, and all of a sudden now this becomes front-page news, thanks to the AP and the Drive-By Media.

My guess: They are very worried about the Barack Hussein Mohammed Obama birth certificate rumors. They can’t even mention this rumor for fear that people will start demanding the release of his birth certificate and proof that he actually is a natural born American citizen. So they are bringing up “whitey rant” rumors to deflect attention for the birth certificate rumors.
#25

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:38 pm, wise_man said:

Slaughter doesn’t want to re-regulate only radio. When asked by Moyers if she was also proposing the new Fairness Doctrine for Fox News or MSNBC, Slaughter responded: “You bet. . . . Fairness isn’t going to hurt anybody.” If there’s anything liberals hate more than talk radio it’s Fox News, which has dominated cable news by appealing to conservative viewers fed up with the networks’ liberal bias. New York Democratic representative Maurice Hinchey, sponsor of the second Fairness Doctrine bill, went so far as to host a special Capitol Hill screening of Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism, a “documentary” hit job. Slaughter, Hinchey, Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders, Washington State congressman Jay Inslee, and several other House lefties have recently formed the Future of American Media Congress to push for a media crackdown.

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:25 pm, Brian72 said: That’s just an excerpt. Read the whole thing.

Wow. As Michelle stated, it’s reaching the point of disgust fatigue, where the hypocritical democrats have gone so far for so long, that most reactions to this form of insult to our intelligence and their own blatant arrogance .. only garner the same frustratingly numb reaction.
#26

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:40 pm, mymanpotsandpans said:

Considering that Limbaugh was blamed for Timothy McVeigh by none other than Caligulon himself, I think LImbaugh has mellowed.
#27

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:42 pm, DesertLover said:

Too bad these A$$hats aren’t as passionate about defeating terrorism, securing the border, deporting illegal aliens, allowing us to drill our own oil, tort reform, and saving social security … and that’s just for starters …
#28

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:46 pm, letget said:

It is nice to mess with Rush. He does not take lies about him from any one. Our dear bho plowed up a snake going after him.
L
#29

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:49 pm, Chief RZ said:

lying is what communists and liberals do best.
#30

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:50 pm, 30 pcs of silver said:

DL,
Their only concern is power… all encompassing, replete and unchecked.
#31

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:50 pm, Brian72 said:

I hope you all chew on that article for awhile today. Sure opened my eyes when I read that. I’ve got to go contribute to Global Warming through lawn mowing overkill. I have a Kubota F3060, which has a 6ft. wide triple bladed mowing deck, driven by a power takeoff shaft from the 4cylinder 30 horsepower fuel injected diesel engine, belching carbon credits everywhere. It will power through 4ft. tall grass like it isn’t even there.

Will I have to turn it in for a non-powered push-mower when a pro-green President decides I don’t need that much power for my yard? We shall see!

Gotta go beat the thundershowers to my grass. CYAL8R!
#32

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:51 pm, WarTip said:

One of these smears is an email being circulated with fake quotes from Obama’s books, “Dreams From My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope.”

Why would anyone use fake quotes? Anyone remember the movie “Hook”?

I would never lie to you, the truth is far too much fun!
#33

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:52 pm, wise_man said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:46 pm, letget said: It is nice to mess with Rush. He does not take lies about him from any one. Our dear bho plowed up a snake going after him. L

I really like that from him. And as well, it’s very easy for him because he has the truth on his side. I wish so many more people would spend the time rebutting liberal/democrat’s (and now as of late, conservative) lies.
#34

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:57 pm, DesertLover said:

30 pcs of silver

Yep … I was just sort of daydreaming and verbalizing there …
#35

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:57 pm, iamsaved said:

It’s going to be up to the conservative talk show hosts and bloggers to uncover and expose “truths” about Obama and his Bahama Mama Obama.

Unfounded rumors don’t have to be created and spread - there’s enough truthful facts out there just waiting to be exposed to the light of day.

Obama really starts squirming when unflattering truths are mentioned about him. He then goes on the attack immediately denying; calling it a “distraction”; and bringing up irrelevent facts about his opponenet hoping to throw the topic off course.
#36

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, Christian Soldier said:

Rush just played a McCain “talk” (oil companies…control)

Rush sounded fraustrated ….

w/ Mc..

Keep telling like it is -Rush- and thank you.
#37

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, mattymatt10 said:

I wonder if “smear” will take on the same meaning as “swift-boating” in this election. Which, of course, means telling the truth about someone.
#38

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:00 pm, wise_man said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, mattymatt10 said: I wonder if “smear” will take on the same meaning as “swift-boating” in this election. Which, of course, means telling the truth about someone.

That and “racist.” You speak the truth about Obama and then you are a racist.
#39

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:06 pm, DesertLover said:

I’ve posted this before but I think it fits again on this subject of Democrat smearing …

D enial
E vasion
M isinformation
O bfuscation
C onfusion
R ejection
A rrogance
T ruculence
S tupidity

Need I say more?
#40

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:08 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

I don’t know about fake quotes from BO’s books, but Hugh Hewitt has played excerpts from Obama’s audio recordings of his books, and hearing Obama reading the passage from his book on Reverend Wright’s “Audacity of Hope” sermon, including Obama intoning ‘White mans greed runs a world in need’, well, it becomes pretty obvious Obama and Wright do think alike.
#41

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:09 pm, letget said:

Rush is now defending our Michelle on the baby momma thing. Go Rush!
L
#42

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, Barry F. said:

I hear Rush talking about how Fox News had the graphics up under your image the other day about the “Baby Mama” thing.
#43

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, mattymatt10 said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:00 pm, wise_man said:
That and “racist.” You speak the truth about Obama and then you are a racist.

You’re spot on with that, too. And heaven forbid you comment on Michelle “My Belle.” There’s apparently a special ring of hell devoted just for those folks, according to ol’ Dick “Turban” Durbin. Man, Rush comes up with some great nicknames.
#44

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:16 pm, valleygreaser said:

At the Obama site, the candidate (presumably) asks for help fighting Rush and the other “right wing attack dogs.” Dogs? It is now okay to call people DOGS?
#45

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:16 pm, Brian72 said:

Well, crap. I didn’t make it. I got around the perimeter once and the bottom fell out of the sky and drenched me from head to toe. I’ll add to my carbon footprint if it dries out enough today.

So, liberals are trying to say that Michelle said “babymomma” herself, even though the graphic said that and she couldn’t have seen it from where she was.

Typical libs.
#46

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:29 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:16 pm, Brian72 said:

They appear to by trying very hard to tie it to her, Brian. It defies logic. But, since when has that stopped liberal from trying to do things that defy logic?
#47

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:30 pm, wise_man said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:16 pm, Brian72 said: So, liberals are trying to say that Michelle said “babymomma” herself, even though the graphic said that and she couldn’t have seen it from where she was. Typical libs.

Of course she didn’t, but with the screenshot with the graphic below, that’s all they need to make the connection.

BLITZER: We can take a look. Maybe he will and maybe he won’t but she looks like she’s about to introduce him. Let’s listen in.

MICHELLE OBAMA, WIFE OF BARACK OBAMA: My baby’s daddy Barack Obama. Yeah!

BARACK OBAMA, SENATOR-ELECT, ILLINOIS: Thank you, Illinois. Thank you. Thank you, Illinois. I don’t know about you but I’m still fired up. I am fired up. Look at this crowd. Thank you, Illinois.

CNN LIVE EVENT/SPECIAL

America Votes 2004

Aired November 2, 2004 - 22:00 ET

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0411/02/se.06.html

Meanwhile, the origin of the supposed “racist” remark.
#48

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:31 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F. said:

since when has that stopped liberal from trying to do things that defy logic?

Hard to defy something that they don’t have Barry …
#49

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:34 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:31 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F. said:

since when has that stopped liberal from trying to do things that defy logic?

Hard to defy something that they don’t have Barry …

Ignorance is no defense nor are their intellectual failings, DL.
#50

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:35 pm, tbear44 said:

The Dohbamma camp is getting the word out about “smears” so even when real things come out about what an idiot Dohbamma is they can all claim it is just another smear.
#51

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:38 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F.

The only logical conclusion when a Lib is involved in decision making or analyzation at any level is that the end result will be totally illogical …
#52

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, Barry F. said:

This is off topic but I want to know what Michelle “My Belle” Obama thinks about Barack “My Baby’s Daddy” Obama’s frequent e-mail exchanges with Scarlet Johansson.

Do you suppose she is turning his own words back on him and telling him to “lay off“.
#53

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:38 pm, DesertLover said:

Just as they prove, time after time, DL.
#54

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

Ok but let us NOT get too involved with defending ourselves, Rush and others BUT continue the attack on Obama.

Time’s Jay Carney lying–Bob Beckel

And the sun came up this morning. Both happen everyday. That is what Liberals do. My dog barks at blowing leaves. Chris Matthew’s leg tingles.

I will continue the attack right after I get over the pain and shame of Dick “Turban” Durbin’s rebuke. Between Turban and that Pleger fellow I am not sure just who sits on the Judge Throne! ):
#55

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, KaosKlerik said:

Next time a liberal says Republican is in the dictionary between “repulsive” and “reptile“, point out that…

Democrat is between “demagogue” and “demonize“.
#56

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:58 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

Johannson and Alba may be hotties, but apparently they aren’t the brightest girls in the world…
#57

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:06 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 1:58 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:

Intelligence is not a pre-requisite for Hollyweird, Ed.
#58

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:09 pm, Brian72 said:

Ha! Rush just got the audio of Michelle Obama introducing her “baby’s daddy”, after he won his Senate seat.

Rush is going to bat for MM big time, and just hit one over the fence.
#59

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F. and Ed …

hmmm … are we taking applications for the Harem already? …

sorry … couldn’t resist …
#60

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, letget said:

Michelle, Rush just played the tape of mo saying the baby momma thing twice and mentioned you twice. Rush defending you big time. Three times played the baby thing.
L
#61

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:11 pm, maurelius said:

Al-Pazeera strikes again
#62

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:16 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, DesertLover said:

Barry F. and Ed …

hmmm … are we taking applications for the Harem already? …

sorry … couldn’t resist …

If so, the Hollyweird list of applicants is getting pretty long with intellectual lightweights.
#63

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:31 pm, drfredc said:

Hmm, seems a curious distraction for the left to attempt to take on talk radio and the RW blogs. Because they are bashing media outlets who can respond indefinately AND make money while doing it because it’s their job to talk about things, the left will lose ground in these skirmishes with all but the moonbat crowd. Meanwhile, McCain plods along untouched.

Too bad the GOP in Congress can’t figure how to get some attention in all of this.

Perhaps obfuscation of the GOP in Congress trying to get some traction on the energy and corruption issues is really what the left’s strategy in attacking Rush is all about.
#64

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:32 pm, Barry F. said:

Well, well, well…..

It would appear the BO is going to be visiting his Hollyweird supporters this month.

Michelle O. had better make sure he has his manhood in the lock box, before he gets out there around Johansson, Walsh, et al.
#65

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:36 pm, right_on said:

‘My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.’

- Barack Obama

Is this a misquote?
#66

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:45 pm, Barry F. said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:36 pm, right_on said:

‘My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.’

- Barack Obama

Is this a misquote?

Probably not.
#67

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:49 pm, khan said:

John Boehner doesn’t go far enough. The FCC needs to be completely decommissioned and eradicated. The airwaves are not public. Government didn’t create them, government did not discover them, government does not own them. Had our founding fathers been able to foresee broadcasting abilities, they would have included its protection it with the other means of information, such as the press. It is a very dangerous thing that we’ve allowed the government to control a means of information.
#68

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:01 pm, fighterDC said:

Why don’t we start infiltrating the MSM by planting high school and college independent or conservative “journalists” who act liberal enough to get to positions of authority within MSM outlets and then all on the same day 5 or 10 years from now they take the media back.
#69

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:04 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

On June 13th, 2008 at 2:49 pm, khan said:
The FCC needs to be completely decommissioned and eradicated

And while we are at it I can think of a few other agencies, commissions and departments need a paring or more.
#70

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:12 pm, txvet2 said:

Just a suggestion, but there’s a link to report smears on the Obama site. You can report the Obama smears of Rush and Michelle back to their own servers. I’ve already sent them an e-mail myself, complaining about the “whitey” smear.
#71

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:13 pm, DesertLover said:

The licensing aspects of the FCC are needed or there would be nothing to stop someone from broadcasting on someone else’s frequencies … whether accidentally or intentionally …

But as far as the censorship and other BS they should be shut down …
#72

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:22 pm, Bob in Myrtle Beach said:

Since they’re gonna give out coupons to get a HD adapter for old TV sets, why don’t they also hand out free buckets of mud for everyone to sling?
#73

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:30 pm, love2rumba said:

Maybe Boehner is seeing the writing on the wall and growing a pair….will John “Close Down Gitmo” McCain grow a pair too?
#74

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:51 pm, tuffy said:

I’d consider the whiners silly if they weren’t so mean spirited and calculating. No, I still consider them silly. Whine on.
#75

On June 13th, 2008 at 3:57 pm, Regulus said:

Note that the much-ballyhooed “Fight the Smears” website from the Obama camp specifically whines about “right-wing” smears

No surprise. Consider this historical comparison:

On the eve of their invasion of Poland, the Germans hauled out a bunch of convicts, dressed them up in Polish army uniforms, shot them all, and then arranged the bodies near a radio station just across the border from Poland. They then shot up the radio station, before claiming that their own invasion of Poland was in “response” to this “violation” by the Poles.

What today’s donkeys are doing is the same in concept: to prepare the media battlefield for their own campaign of half-truths, distortions, flat-out lies, smears and dirty tricks, they first have to convince their base — who only read the headlines and believe whatever they’re told — that it’s all a “response” to conservative “provocations.”

This way, the lib/lefty True Believers in the cult of “Two Wrongs Really Do Make a Right” don’t have to question themselves when they project onto conservatives what they themselves are going to be doing and thinking.

They’re as transparent as an open window.
#76

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:03 pm, tbear44 said:

In the spirit of not smearing Obummer it is once again time to go over the “do’s and don’t’s.
Don’t talk about his ears.
Don’t talk about his wife.
Don’t talk about the people he associates with.
Don’t talk about his church.
Don’t talk about Rezko.
Don’t talk about his gaffes.
Don’t talk about where he was born, in fact DON’T talk about his past at all.
DO talk about “hope” and “change”.

Bow down to the Obammasiah.
#77

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:06 pm, DesertLover said:

tbear44

You forgot the last and most important one …

DO … Ignore everything above and give them Hell …
#78

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:16 pm, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

“do’s and don’t’s.
Don’t talk about his ears.
Don’t talk about his wife.
Don’t talk about the people he associates with.
Don’t talk about his church.
Don’t talk about Rezko.
Don’t talk about his gaffes.
Don’t talk about where he was born, in fact DON’T talk about his past at all.
DO talk about “hope” and “change”.

Bow down to the Obammasiah.

Hallelujah Bro tbear44 I has come to Obama. He heals the sick, he raises the dead, he done flapped his ears. Obammasiah done come. Hallelujah.

He will save AmeriKKK of A! Hallelujah.
#79

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:20 pm, lonewolf said:

It is comforting to find about 99.9% kindred souls on this forum but it is infuriating to continually have to combat leftist lies and distortions.
The problem is we are preaching to the choir. I cannot stomach a leftist forum and suspect most liberals have to same reaction to this forum so how do we refute them?
#80

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:20 pm, Lan Astaslem said:

Wow — a quick perusal of the Obama “Smear” site just brought up more questions than answers. Aside from the twisted story they tell about BabyMama:
1) They claim to have his Birth Certificate on one page. It’s not his Birth Certificate. It was printed in 2001. (At least that’s what the notation in the bottom left reads.) Why are they so afraid to release the real thing? Maybe it’s nothing, but the longer they wait, and the more they try to misdirect, the curiouser and curiouser I become.
2) One of the “right wing” smears on the first page is from a “Hillary” website.
3) Add your own — there’s plenty out there!

And those who bow down to the Obamessiah will fall for it all — hook, line, sinker.
#81

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:21 pm, orlandocajun said:

Who cares if Obama smears Rush? Rush will get the better of that battle. Rush isn’t running for office either. The more attention they give Rush the better for business. They’re definitely picking on the wrong guy.
#82

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:32 pm, brooklyn red said:

Re: Lan Astaslem #80 “2) One of the “right wing” smears on the first page is from a “Hillary” website.”

Well your right of course, however it is sad to say that from where BHO is standing Hillary’s web site is right wing…
#83

On June 13th, 2008 at 4:38 pm, cicerokid said:

What’s fascism without control of the media?
#84

On June 13th, 2008 at 5:31 pm, CO2 Producer said:

Liberals think that the government, as representative of the people, owns the airwaves. It regulates the airwaves. But with the liberals now in charge of Congress, they want to retain that “ownership.”

This next part may echo the part of the article that Brian72 (#15) quoted, but I’ll go ahead anyway. When radio first emerged, the airwaves were unregulated, which meant that anyone with the means could air any sort of content they wanted, sort of like an early-1900’s version of the internet. Radio became clogged. As an example of being careful what you wish for, a Chicago KKK advocate hired bodyguards to prevent his program from being shut down. The Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 (the latter of which formed the FCC) brought the chaos under better control, even though the fairness doctrine became part of the FCC policy during the 1950’s and stayed around until the 1980’s. (If the fairness doctrine still existed, then all the network and cable news shows would have to abide by the same rules, and who is truly objective enough to judge what consists of equal time? Imagine the bureaucratic mess. Everyone’s so hyped up on wanting change lately, so let’s alter the buzzword from “change” to “reversion” in this instance.) Now, conservative talk radio has evolved and found its audience, not because of overregulation or not enough deregulation, but because an audience exists. If liberals want to keep trying to find a radio audience, they can go right ahead.

If one feels that strongly about it, options such as low-power FM (LPFM) exist. Consider it a grassroots movement. If your LPFM show becomes popular enough, it will get picked up for a larger audience.

Why would a broadcaster want to air content that no one listens to? If no one listens, the broadcaster makes no profit. We’ve seen the lack of liberal talk radio’s success, even with George Soros’s vast resources. Even he knows there’s no money to be made (so far).

Don’t blame big business. Blame the listenership. But in doing so, you are insulting each and every one of those listeners.
#85

On June 13th, 2008 at 5:55 pm, Yashmak said:

It’s vital to push the narrative that conservative pundits, radio and TV talk show hosts are hateful lying racists.

Once the narrative is firmly established, the public outcry against the Fairness Doctrine will consist solely of voices the AP can explain away as hate-mongering or smearing.

It’s coming folks.
#86

On June 13th, 2008 at 6:27 pm, swmbo said:

You guys have convinced me, (like I needed convincing) liberals are bullies. Who knew?

They are also major whiners. When they “misspeak” (aka LIE) and get caught at it all they do is whine about smears. GEEEEZZZZZZ, give me a break.
#87

On June 13th, 2008 at 8:29 pm, emjem24 said:

It’s gonna be a “blame Bush” and “Conservatives are to blame” sorta year I believe.

What I’ve learned from the creation of this childish, “fight the smears” website is that Obummer and his acolytes have very thin skins. Perhaps, because a) they only sleep with Dems or b) Republicans/Conservatives aren’t as superficial about such things (though I’ve seen some try) about the choice of prospective “late night catch” (a term one of my liberal girlfriends used to use about her one night stands).

No, it’s better to say…wahhhhh, those Conservatives are hypercritical, they’re not glomming onto Mr. HopenGlow quick enough. It’s time for the big guns!

I got news for the Obamabots: you think this website shows the best of you? It only demonstrates that those who can’t actually engage the country on the issues (especially Obummer) would rather do some smearing of their own.

Obummer is becoming a bigger muck slinger than Jefferson during the Adams/Jefferson campaign.
#88

On June 14th, 2008 at 1:07 am, Speakup said:

And this is why the fight over the (Un)Fairness Doctrine affects us all.

The Pres. doesn’t need the congress to institute the (un)fairness doctrine.
How long after inauguration day does it take Pres. Obama to get it done?

McCain isn’t my choice, I’ve never voted for him but the damage an ultra liberal Obama can do while well shielded by the MSM makes any Republican a better choice.
#89

On June 14th, 2008 at 9:17 am, misterbee241 said:

I went to the obama smear site where he accused Rush as a liar. Rush doesnt need defending, but I had been listening to his show about the tape rumors. He only repeated what had already been said, that there were rumors of a tape. I also saw Bob Beckel on Fox saying the same thing. Beckel heavily implied that Hillary had this tape and it would be the “other shoe to fall.” Rush was right on his reporting. Obama is the liar.
Two things the left can never say about Rush: one, he’s a liar, and two, he’s wrong.
#90

On June 14th, 2008 at 11:49 am, pressto said:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/patriot

Lie 1:
Barack Obama won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance.

Lie 2:
Barack Obama won’t put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance

It seems Sen. Obama does not address the Time photo that started this all.
Senator Barack Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand during the national anthem.

The Time magazine photo and issue about was the National Anthem, not the Pledge and when he was asked about it he stated you only put your hand over your heart during the pledge, not the National Anthem. I still want to know if anyone on his staff enlightened him to the US Flag Code and clued him into the fact that yes are suppose?

Don’t question his patriotism for not know knowing these things and instead I guess you can blame the school systems and his grandparents who failed to teach him this.
#91

On June 14th, 2008 at 12:25 pm, Dimsdale said:

Remember the Willie Horton Lesson: Al Gore dug up the story about the paroled killer while campaigning against Shorty Dukakis, but George Bush was blamed for it when his campaign used it.

Wanna bet Beckel etc. were put up to doing this on purpose for the very reason of starting another “smear” campaign against Obama?

It is reverse Goebbelism: repeat a lie just enough to enrage people, and when your opponents even mention the contrived scandal, immediately blame them, and you can accuse them of what you are actually doing. With the help of the lick spittle press, of course.
#92

On June 14th, 2008 at 12:28 pm, Dimsdale said:

lgm seems strangely silent on this issue…