CNN Tastes Its Own Medicine

CNN is in a mess because it chose to mention a report with unbelievable (and unverifiable) tales of sex, depravity and espionage concerning Donald Trump and the Russians.

One can debate whether or not CNN actually reported the vile accusations found in a report or just reported that the report was out there but the fact remains it was something that no reputable (if we still have those) news source could verify so many left it alone.

CNN wanted to mention it and while it might not have actually reported “fake news” as Buzzfeed did when it released the entire report the fact remains that CNN mentioned it in hopes that people would look for it. CNN hoped to give itself plausible deniability by claiming it never released the details of the report while enjoying the reality that its reporting tacitly encouraged people to look for the information.

Donald Trump was having NONE of it and he made his dissatisfaction known to CNN when he refused to allow a reporter to ask a question and told him that he (his network) was “fake news.”

CNN is doing the song and dance today trying to convince anyone who will listen that the network never released the information and only mentioned the report. It is asking that folks do not judge it by what Buzzfeed did.

CNN wants people to think of it as an honest news network and not to give in to accusations that it peddles “fake news.”

Isn’t it ironic that CNN is fighting back at allegations that it claims are not true and are unfair when the accusations are that CNN reported something untrue and that was not fair?

I find this and Trump’s treatment of the network delicious. I am glad he lashed out so that he could set the pace from the start. He showed the media that he will not take kindly to these kinds of things and that he has no issue belittling anyone involved. He has no issue with punishing a network by removing its White House press credentials if that network does something that calls into question journalistic integrity.

I hope Trump removes their credentials and if they are ever allowed back (or if he can’t pull them for some reason) he assigns them a seat in the back and never calls on them for a question. They need to be shunned and they need to suffer so the other networks can see what happens when they are dishonest.

They have played fast and loose for years. They have been openly hostile to Republican presidents while treating Democrats like they walk on water. Hell, they still fawn over Obama and they gave Clinton a pass on his sexual escapades and treated his walking dead wife like she was a queen.

I am all for a free press that is hard on politicians when that press is busy protecting the American public as they are supposed to do. I have no sympathy for a press that is part of the problem and that has become nothing more than the media wing of the Democrat Party.

The attempt to smear PE Trump backfired in an awful way and now CNN is trying to convince people it is not fake news and these things being said about them are not true.

It looks like they are experiencing what they tried to do to Trump.

They are getting a taste of their own medicine and I think they are finding it slightly bitter.



Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


Should Have Taken Candy From The Baby

There was a town hall format presidential debate last night and Mitt Romney had his hands full because he had to debate Obama and the moderator, Candy Crowley. Crowley did not stick to the debate format that was agreed upon by the candidates but that should not be a surprise because she said she was not going to do so. There is a reason that Crowley did not follow the agreed upon rules and that is so she could help Obama out during the debate.

That might come back to bite them both in the rear. More on that later.

Obama came out more feisty and ready to swing in this debate. The left knew he would after his dismal first debate performance and the left also knew he would need cover. The cover started when Crowley had the questions submitted prior to the debate so she could screen them. She then picked questions that would play to the topics believed to be Obama’s strong points. She claims that the questions were not provided to either candidate early but some of the responses gave me the impression that Obama was aware of what was going on.

In any event, Obama hid behind Crowley’s skirt during the debate and let’s face it that is a big place to hide. The Chinese army could hide behind that skirt. Ironically, but not surprisingly, that was not the first time that day Obama had hidden behind the protection of a woman’s skirt. Earlier in the day, Hillary Clinton took responsibility for the complete foreign policy failure in Libya thus providing Obama cover.

He took responsibility during the debate but let’s face it, Hillary manned up before Obama did.

Now back to the act that might bite them both. During the debate the topic of Libya came up and Obama addressed it. Romney made the claim that it took Obama 14 days to call it an act of terror. Obama claimed that he called it an act of terror the very next day in the Rose Garden. Romney asked him two or three times if that is what he was claiming and Obama told him to proceed (as if he realized he was lying and wanted to move on) and then Crowley did the unthinkable. She injected herself into the debate and said that Obama had, in fact, called the Libya attack and act of terror the day after it happened. This seemed to stop Romney in his tracks because he was stunned at the revelation. He was rebuffed by the moderator.

Obama told people to look at the transcript.

Well, I and tens of thousands of other people have done just that. Barack Obama DID NOT call the Libya attack an act of terror in the Rose Garden the next day. He mentioned terror attacks in general as part of his remarks but only as they related to 9/11 and the general attacks on our people. He DID NOT call the Libya attacks acts of terror as he claimed during the debate and as his debate partner “confirmed” for him. They both lied and they did so in a concerted effort to thwart Romney.

This will come back on both of them. You see, Obama was drowning in his Libya lie and Crowley threw him an anchor. The Libya issue will now have new life and be the talk of everyone with fewer than three weeks left until the election. Obama will be shown to have lied. The meme will continue over and over that he lied AND that Crowley helped him.

Liberal journalists have already fact checked and reported that Obama did not call it an act of terror and Crowley admitted after the debate that Romney was correct.

If anyone out there had any lingering doubts that the media were biased and wanted to help Obama win Crowley took those doubts away. She ruined her credibility, the credibility of CNN and the credibility of the liberal media in general because she prostituted herself out for Obama (and he walked across the stage like a pimp so it worked out well for her).

Crowley made it clear before the debate that she did not intend to follow the format rules and she kept her word in that area. She injected herself into the debate as a fact checker only to have her fact checking shown as totally untrue. Suppose she had done this to both candidates?

Suppose she had injected herself in the debate when Romney claimed that Obama had cut federal leases for oil drilling in half. Maybe when Obama was saying that was untrue Crowley could have said no, Mr. Obama, he is correct you did do that (fact checkers have shown that Obama cut them about 60% for off shore and 33% on land). Perhaps when the question about equal pay for women came up and Obama talked about how he was all in favor and worked for that Crowley could have pointed out that Obama has historically paid female staffers less money than male staffers.

And perhaps when Barack Obama was defending Planned Parenthood and claiming that defunding it would mean a lot of women would not get mammograms Crowley could have injected her fact checking self into the debate to inform Mr. Obama that Planned Parenthood DOES NOT provide mammograms.

I mean, if her job was to fact check the debate one would expect that she would do so for both sides. But then again, she was only there to help Obama.

And she did so by lying for him.

Ladies and gentlemen who won that debate last night depends on whom one supports. Obama supporters think he won, Romney supporters think he won and about 33% think it was a tie. Undecideds in focus groups moved toward Romney so it looks like it was a good night for him.

Obama needed a knockout, not just a win, and he did not get it.

Romney gave a strong performance even though he had to fight a handicap match with Obama and Crowley tagging in and out all night.

Get used to saying it.

President Mitt Romney.

And just as importantly get used to saying this:

FORMER president Barack Obama…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


This Is The Amnesty Obama Is Looking For

Obama said that illegals would not get health care. He might be right because the amnesty bill that the Democrats are working on would grant legal status after 24 hours even if the background checks were not completed (none will be). It will also grant amnesty to gang members and all they have to do is say they don’t want to be in a gang any more.

This video is from sometime ago, perhaps around May. I never noticed it and I imagine others failed to see it because it is on CNN and no one watches that show except a few people who would be happy with the amnesty.

Watch the video here and voice your opinion in the comments.

I can think of two commenters who will think this is wonderful.

And these people wonder why there are costumes like this.

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Al Gore Is Mistaken

One would think the guy who claimed to invent the Internet would be able to use it to verify something before making a statement that is completely inaccurate. Politico reports that Gore was interviewed on CNN where he was critical of former VP Dick Cheney’s criticisms of Barack Obama. Gore stated that he waited two years before he was critical of George Bush:

“I waited two years after I left office to make statements that were critical,” Gore said during an interview on CNN, pointing out that his critiques were focused on “policy.”

George Bush took office in January 2001 so Gore would have had to remain silent until January 2003. A quick search of Google using the term “Gore criticizes Bush” yields a ton of results. A few of them are before January 2003 which means that Gore was either mistaken or untruthful. Regardless of which, he was careless because this information can be found very easily.

“But instead of embracing the bipartisan national consensus to improve our environment, the Bush administration has chosen to serve the special interests instead of the public interests and to subsidize the obsolete, failed approaches of the past instead of the exciting new solutions of the future.” The Berkeley Daily Planet 23 April 2002

Ten days after criticizing President Bush’s handling of Iraq, Al Gore offered a scathing assessment today of Mr. Bush’s stewardship of the American economy. Mr. Gore said Mr. Bush’s policies had created a “crisis of confidence in U.S. economic leadership throughout the world.” The New York Times 3 October 2002

Gore called for increasing the international security force in Afghanistan and broadening its mandate beyond Kabul, the capital, to the whole country. He urged Bush to pay greater attention to the views of NATO allies, and criticized him for pursuing a more unilateral foreign policy than President Clinton. CNN 13 February 2002

The second quote indicates that Gore criticized Bush ten days prior to this criticism. To be fair, the third quote is from an article in which Gore almost completely agrees with Bush’s positions on the war on terror and he praises Bush for some of the things he accomplished.

The fact remains, Al Gore was critical of George Bush earlier than the two years he claimed in the CNN interview. In his rush to smear Cheney and defend Obama, Gore made himself look like a fool. Not that the MSM would follow up on that and not that Gore needed this to look like a fool.

Perhaps it is Al Gore who has a fever…

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

The Dems Said Fox Was Dishonest?

Not to long ago the Democratic candidates all decided to cancel a debate sponsored by Fox. They made their claim that Fox was biased to the right and that they would not conduct a fair and open debate. The Democrats were more comfortable with the 70% left leaning “unbiased” MSM so that is the route they went. Republicans have not canceled any debates based upon distrust of a network though it appears they should have.

CNN hosted last night’s debate and I wrote a post informing that the gay general who asked the question about gays in the military was affiliated with the Hillary Clinton campaign and had endorsed her. Now it seems that this guy was not the only “undecided” voter who already supported a Democratic candidate. At least three other people who asked questions have endorsed a Democrat. Two of them for Edwards and one for Obama. The abortion girl Journey even posted a video about her response to the answers to her question while she was wearing her John Edwards T Shirt. The mom with the lead paint toy question is a union manager for a union that has endorsed Edwards and her video is displayed on the union’s website.

So somebody tell me again why the Democrats were worried about Fox but not concerned about CNN. Oh, because CNN seems to be in the tank for the left. There is no way that someone at CNN could not have known about these people. Perhaps they figured they would not get caught.

The Democrats canceled the Fox debate because they wanted fair. How fair is it that the gay general got more time to speak than Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter? For that matter, he got longer than any candidate for a single response. They were limited to 90 seconds and 30 seconds for a follow up. The gay general got 2 minutes to talk about his lifestyle.

Michelle Malkin has quite a bit of detail.