Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh was on a tear on Wednesday over the media’s response to President Trump’s widely criticized summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Limbaugh dedicated one segment of the three-hour show to providing some uncomfortable flashblacks for Trump’s Democratic critics.
Limbaugh led into the discussion by quoting a June 2018 story by Yahoo’s Michael Isikoff titled, “Obama cyber chief confirms ‘stand down’ order against Russian cyberattacks in summer 2016“:
The Obama White House’s chief cyber official testified Wednesday that proposals he was developing to counter Russia’s attack on the U.S. presidential election were put on a ‘back burner’ after he was ordered to ‘stand down’ his efforts in the summer of 2016.
Here’s the video of Obama’s chief cyber official Michael Daniel revealing the “stand down” order in a Senate Intelligence Committee:
“This is the Obama administration,” said Limbaugh. “They knew the Russians were hacking. They knew Russians were engaging in cyber warfare, and the Obama White House chief cyber official testified that he was told to stand down. Read the rest of this entry »
[VIDEO] ‘Speak Truth to…Oh, Never Mind’: CNN Anchor Admits Chilling Effect; Journalists Scared to Criticize TrumpPosted: January 30, 2016
“Donald Trump continues to call Megyn Kelly names, he continues to tweet out, this is what he does, to journalists he isn’t happy with.”
“It is troubling, and of course, we’ve talked about this. It does have a chilling effect, ’cause you do watch your words more. You don’t want all of his Twitter followers to come at you with that Twitter hate.”
— CNN’s Alisyn Camerota
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) January 30, 2016
Source: The Weekly Standard
[VIDEO] Harry Reid: ‘I think a lot of people, as I read, they kinda don’t like me as a person, and I think that’s unfortunate’Posted: April 15, 2015
Reid Denies He Got Beat Up By The Mob
“Why in the world would I come up with some story that I got hurt in my own bathroom with my wife standing there? How could anyone say anything like that?”
“In the last few days, a bunch of people are saying, ‘Reid, he didn’t have an exercise accident. He got beaten up by the mob,’” Harwood said.
“You know, I don’t really care. I think they’re all losers.”
“It shows the credibility of Rush Limbaugh. He’s the guy who got that started,” Reid responded. “Why in the world would I come up with some story that I got hurt in my own bathroom with my wife standing there? How could anyone say anything like that?”
“I think a lot of people, as I read, they kinda don’t like me as a person, and I think that’s unfortunate,” he added.”
In the final segment of Friday’s edition of HBO’s Real Time, host Bill Maher took aim at those who oppose free speech, especially taking liberals to task for the “Islamophobia kills” campaign and being against “bullying” when it’s convenient.
“Yeah, liberals hate bullying alright but they’re not opposed to using it when they causally throw out words like bigot and racist.”
“It does cower people into avoiding this debate. And if you’re doing that, you don’t get to wear the “Je suis Charlie” button; the button you wear is ‘Je suis party of the problem.’ And that goes for everybody,” he added.
[BONUS: The pro-censorship website crooksandliars.com disapproves of Maher’s defense of free speech with this thumb-sucking, pouting, infantile headline: Maher’s New Rule: Limbaugh Can Say Whatever He Wants, You Little People Can Just STFU]
Maher criticized Catholic League president Bill Donahue for blaming the publisher of Charlie Hebo for not understanding “the role he played in his tragic death. Maher says that’s essentially blaming a woman for rape because she was wearing clothes that were too provocative.
“Free speech only works if there are no waivers. No waivers. Including for religion.”
— Bill Maher
Next, Maher slammed frequent guest of the show Glenn Greenwald for saying anti-Muslim speech is a “vital driver” for the occupation of Muslim countries and killing the innocent.
“Really? Newspaper cartoons did all that? Wait until they get to the horoscopes and the crossword.”
“It reminds me of one of those protest signs that I saw up in Berkeley last month; it said: ‘Islamophobia kills.’ Does it? The phobia kills? Or maybe it’s more the AK-47s, and the beheadings, and the planes into buildings,” Maher responded.
— Pamela Geller (@PamelaGeller) January 17, 2015
“…Ironically you’re not even a proper liberal because you don’t get free speech. You’re just a baby who can’t stand to live in a world where you hear things that upset you. Oh, you’re not alone.”
FLASHBACK: June 10, 2008: ‘Impeaching George W. Bush, president of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors’Posted: August 3, 2014
For RealClearPolitics, Carl M. Cannon writes: One disconcerting feature of modern liberalism is that so many Democrats consider it reasonable to judge the Republican Party by its most rhetorically untethered adherents: Sarah Palin, for one. Or Rush Limbaugh. Texas Congressman Steve Stockman is another example.
Those three have been trying to nudge their fellow conservatives in the direction of impeaching President Obama. This suicidal idea has been duly ignored by the Senate Republican leadership, the House leadership, and every potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate.
“The sponsors of the Bush impeachment bill were congressional liberals in good standing with the Democratic leadership in the House, and most of them are still there, including—yes, you guessed it—Sheila Jackson Lee.”
It has been rejected out of hand, really, by almost every prominent Republican in the country, including the never-shy Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.
Limbaugh is a famous talk radio provocateur; Palin a failed vice president candidate who resigned from Alaska’s governorship after less than one full term to cash in as an author and Fox News talking head. Stockman is a fringe character departing the House after losing a Republican senatorial primary in landslide. In other words, these are not people in positions of authority or responsibility within the Republican Party.
The actual officeholders and party professionals stoking impeachment talk are all Democrats. This is disquieting for several reasons. For starters, having White House officials and leading congressional Democrats claim with straight faces that impeachment is a serious threat is cynical and dishonest. Its purpose is to frighten liberals into donating money to Democrats, a tactic that is working. But it suggests a political party that is out of gas and out of ideas.
Speaking in Kansas City last week, Obama sounded more Valley Girl than presidential. “We could do so much more if Congress would just come on and help out a little bit,” he complained. “Stop being mad all the time. Stop just hating all the time.”
On Capitol Hill, Democrats deliberately conflated the loose talk of impeachment with the House Republicans’ pending lawsuit against Obama over a series of executive orders and administrative waivers regarding the Affordable Care Act. This, too, is a nasty little ploy: Impeachment is a right-wing fantasy. Going to court over the separation of powers disputes is a way to address constitutional disputes. Read the rest of this entry »
For Breitbart.com, Ben Shapiro writes: On Friday, President Obama spent a good chunk of his public speech in Minneapolis complaining about how tough it is to be President Obama. “They don’t do anything except block me!” he complained of the Republican House of Representatives, as though it were the job of Congress to rubber stamp the Great Monarch’s imperial dictates. “And, and, and call me names!”
The most powerful man on earth is a petulant whiner.
But this isn’t the first time he’s had a crying jag over his sad, sad life. Get out your tiny violins.
Whining About The Press. Here’s Obama at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, channeling Richard Sherman:
Sometimes I feel disrespected by you reporters, but that’s okay…Jake Tapper, don’t you ever talk about me like that. I’m the best president in the game!
He was joking. But not about how he feels disrespected. After all, he told Bill O’Reilly in his Super Bowl interview that O’Reilly is “absolutely” unfair for asking basic questions about issues like Benghazi. Poor baby. And in January, he mewled to The New Yorker’s David Remnick that he couldn’t “penetrate the Republican base” because he couldn’t break through the right-wing media firewall to show conservatives he’s “not the caricature that you see on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh.”
Whining About Republicans. In December 2012, Obama stated that Republican opposition to a fiscal cliff deal sprang from personal hatred of him. “I don’t know if that just has to do with, you know, it is very hard for them to say yes to me.” And again in March 2013:
I recognize that it’s very hard for Republicans leaders to be perceived as making concessions to me… Is there something else I could do to make these guys — I’m not talking about the leaders now, but maybe some of the House Republican caucus members — not paint horns on my head?
And just yesterday: “We’ve got a party on the other side whose only rationale, motivation seems to be opposing me.” Read the rest of this entry »
[VIDEO] President Obama Makes Appeal to Tuned-Out Young People With Controversial Appearance on Wierdo Comedy ShowPosted: March 11, 2014
Oh, wait. That’s not President Obama. It’s that other president who stonewalled Congress, lied to the press, deceived the American public, kept enemies lists, spied on reporters, used the IRS to harass political opponents, rigged his second-term election victory, and spent his last days in office engulfed in corruption, scandal, and disgrace.
Warren Henry writes: In the internet era, the Left’s grip on the mediaspace has weakened, but not nearly to the degree needed to move America onto a better cultural or political trajectory. Moreover, if the Right is not proactive and creative, the Left could regain the upper hand. What follows is an immodest suggestion for the Right to compete and gain influence at the highest levels of media.
Mike Gonzalez, Vice President of Communications at The Heritage Foundation, recently wrote in these pages about the degree to which the internet — from independent, right leaning punditry to social media — has weakened the grip of traditional, left-leaning Big Media on our national discourse.
[See also Understanding The Left’s Grip On Media]
Although the piece recalls past themes of blogger triumphalism which may be unwarranted in the current political climate, it is undeniable that Big Media — an artifact of the industrial age — continues to struggle and perhaps wither in the internet age. Mr. Gonzalez notes that Heritage’s Foundry is transforming from a blog to its own media outlet, a welcome development that likely fueled the optimism of much of his column.
Crackpot Climate Scientist’s Defamation Suit Against Combative Mark Steyn, National Review a Go, Says JudgePosted: January 31, 2014
Good summary, except the Washington Times buried the lead. Here it is:
“Mr. Steyn is representing himself after firing the magazine’s legal team over a dispute related to how the judge was handling the case.”
Often not the most advisable way to go, in court. But, who knows. Maybe he’s a better advocate than his former legal team. Steyn’s been around the block with frivolous lawsuits and harassment. We wish Mr. Steyn luck. I hope National Review turns around and sues the snot out of Michael Mann. See the Washington Times for the full article, but here’s a sample:
A climate change scientist’s defamation suit against National Review writer and frequent Rush Limbaugh fill-in Mark Steyn will proceed, a judge decided earlier this week, ruling against the magazine’s attempt to dismiss the case.
The case stems from Mr. Steyn’s written reference to Michael Mann’s climate change data as fraudulent, according to news website Raw Story.
“the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data.”
At the time of the suit, several months ago, National Review editor Rich Lowry didn’t appear too worried.
The cultural critic on why ignoring the biological differences between men and women risks undermining Western civilization itself
Bari Weiss writes: ‘What you’re seeing is how a civilization commits suicide,” says Camille Paglia. This self-described “notorious Amazon feminist” isn’t telling anyone to Lean In or asking Why Women Still Can’t Have It All. No, her indictment may be as surprising as it is wide-ranging: The military is out of fashion, Americans undervalue manual labor, schools neuter male students, opinion makers deny the biological differences between men and women, and sexiness is dead. And that’s just 20 minutes of our three-hour conversation.
When Ms. Paglia, now 66, burst onto the national stage in 1990 with the publishing of “Sexual Personae,” she immediately established herself as a feminist who was the scourge of the movement’s establishment, a heretic to its orthodoxy. Pick up the 700-page tome, subtitled “Art and Decadence From Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, ” and it’s easy to see why. “If civilization had been left in female hands,” she wrote, “we would still be living in grass huts.”
The fact that the acclaimed book—the first of six; her latest, “Glittering Images,” is a survey of Western art—was rejected by seven publishers and five agents before being printed by Yale University Press only added to Ms. Paglia’s sense of herself as a provocateur in a class with Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern. But unlike those radio jocks, Ms. Paglia has scholarly chops: Her dissertation adviser at Yale was Harold Bloom, and she is as likely to discuss Freud, Oscar Wilde or early Native American art as to talk about Miley Cyrus.
Ms. Paglia relishes her outsider persona, having previously described herself as an egomaniac and “abrasive, strident and obnoxious.” Talking to her is like a mental CrossFit workout. One moment she’s praising pop star Rihanna (“a true artist”), then blasting ObamaCare (“a monstrosity,” though she voted for the president), global warming (“a religious dogma”), and the idea that all gay people are born gay (“the biggest canard,” yet she herself is a lesbian).
But no subject gets her going more than when I ask if she really sees a connection between society’s attempts to paper over the biological distinction between men and women and the collapse of Western civilization.
Save the Sick Save Democrats
Dr. Susan Berry writes: The President Americans were told was “brilliant” suddenly does not seem to know much of anything, least of all about his own signature health reform law.
What he does know, however, is that Democrats hoping to regain control of the House and keep the Senate are in a panic over the disastrous launch of ObamaCare. While Barack Obama lies and manipulates to calm fearful Democrats, what can be said of parents of sick children who are fearful that ObamaCare’s high costs and bureaucratic red tape will prevent them from getting the health care their children need?
Time to be honest about racial violence
Thomas Sowell writes: One of the reasons for being glad to be as old as I am is that I may be spared living to see a race war in America. Race wars are often wars in which nobody wins and everybody ends up much worse off than they were before.
Initial skirmishes in that race war have already begun, and have in fact been going on for some years. But public officials pretend that it is not happening, and the mainstream media seldom publish it at all, except in ways that conceal what is really taking place.For
American society, a dangerous polarization has set in. Signs of this polarization over the years include opposite reactions between blacks and whites to the verdict in the O. J. Simpson murder case, the “rape” charges against Duke University students, and the trials resulting from the beating of Rodney King and the death of Trayvon Martin.
More dangerous than these highly publicized episodes over the years are innumerable organized and unprovoked physical attacks on whites by young black gangs in shopping malls, on beaches, and in other public places all across the country today.
President Barack Obama is damaging his presidency, weakening America’s standing in the world, and displaying “inexplicable” incompetence. Read the rest of this entry »
Sandra Fluke, the infamous former Georgetown law student who begged for free birth control in front of Congress, “rallied” a crowd of just 40 people on the University of Florida campus yesterday.
Women’s rights activist Sandra Fluke made an appearance on Turlington Plaza on Wednesday to encourage students to utilize early voting for next week’s presidential election.
Fluke stopped at UF as part of her “It’s On You” Youth Early Vote Campus Outreach tour.
About 40 students gathered by the potato statue to listen.
I’m not even going get into why they chose to name Fluke’s campus outreach tour “it’s on you” but it’s clear Fluke’s 15 minutes are over. There is only so long you can stay legitimate based on demanding people pay for your sex life and by complaining about Rush Limbaugh calling you a slut. Not to mention, her “rally” crowd really is an indicator of just how unenthused youth voters are this time around. If there’s one place liberals should be able to get young liberals whipped into a frenzy, it’s on a college campus (not to mention, college professors are always talking about how much they hate Rush Limbaugh) and that clearly didn’t happen here.
- Noted moocher makes appearance at University of Florida, no one notices (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
- Hilarious: Sandra Fluke draws ‘crowd’ of tens to Florida rally for Obama (twitchy.com)
- Sandra Fluke’s 15 Minutes of Fame Are Up (happolatismiscellany.wordpress.com)
- Obama surrogate Sandra Fluke speaks to crowd of 10 in Nevada (foxnews.com)