<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Media Matters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/media-matters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Media Matters in Twitter War Over Chelsea Clinton Speaking Fees</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-in-twitter-war-over-chelsea-clinton-speaking-fees/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-in-twitter-war-over-chelsea-clinton-speaking-fees</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-in-twitter-war-over-chelsea-clinton-speaking-fees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2014 21:18:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chelsea clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maureen Dowd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=236268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[She is commanding up to $75,000 per appearance...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David Brock has prematurely climbed into the tank for Hillary and that has led to embarrassing moments like this one. The New York Times&#8217; Maureen Dowd<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/13/opinion/sunday/maureen-dowd-isnt-it-rich.html"> blasted Clintonworld for its greed</a>, writing of Chelsea Clinton, &#8220;It’s strange to see her acting out in a sense now, joining her parents in cashing in to help feed the rapacious, gaping maw of Clinton Inc.&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p>As the 34-year-old tries to wean some of the cronies from the Clinton Foundation — which is, like the Clintons themselves, well-intended, wasteful and disorganized — Chelsea is making speeches that go into foundation coffers. She is commanding, as The Times’s Amy Chozick reported, up to $75,000 per appearance&#8230;</p>
<p>There’s something unseemly about it, making one wonder: Why on earth is she worth that much money? Why, given her dabbling in management consulting, hedge-funding and coattail-riding, is an hour of her time valued at an amount that most Americans her age don’t make in a year? (Median household income in the United States is $53,046.)</p>
<p>If she really wants to be altruistic, let her contribute the money to some independent charity not designed to burnish the Clinton name as her mother ramps up to return to the White House and as she herself drops a handkerchief about getting into politics.</p>
<p>There was disgust over Politico’s revelation that before she switched to a month-to-month contract, Chelsea was getting wildly overpaid at $600,000 annually — or over $25,000 per minute on air — for a nepotistic job as a soft-focus correspondent for NBC News.</p>
<p>Chelsea is still learning the answer to a question she asked when she interviewed the Geico gecko: “Is there a downside to all this fame?”</p></blockquote>
<p>Even though Maureen Dowd is about as liberal as it gets, Media Matters jumped into action as Clinton&#8217;s bodyguards. Its minions couldn&#8217;t mount a credible defense of the Clintons so instead they called Dowd a hypocrite for only getting paid half as much as Chelsea, and possibly not donating her fees to charity.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t much of an argument since Chelsea&#8217;s fees go to the private Clinton Foundation which isn&#8217;t a real charity. And what do Maureen Dowd&#8217;s speaking fees have to do with anything? The larger point is that Chelsea Clinton is getting paid because of who her parents are.</p>
<p>On the Media Matters site, hysterical liberals running off their old anti-Republican talking points began shrieking about the &#8220;free market&#8221;. But things didn&#8217;t go as well on Twitter.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SpeakerFee?src=hash">#SpeakerFee</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IncomeEquality?src=hash">#IncomeEquality</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NotMyBossBusiness?src=hash">#NotMyBossBusiness</a></p>
<p>&mdash; The Right Pfeil (@Cowboy__Country) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cowboy__Country/statuses/488761207906508800">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> why would anyone pay anything to hear Chelsea Clinton speak?</p>
<p>&mdash; David Ballard (@faulsename) <a href="https://twitter.com/faulsename/statuses/488761451897565184">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> You spend too much time promoting the Clinton political operation &amp; agenda</p>
<p>&mdash; Avanti Sempre (@avantisempre) <a href="https://twitter.com/avantisempre/statuses/488761894720008192">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p>.<a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> Other than her lineage, what exactly does Chelsea Clinton bring to a speaking engagement? NOTHING&#8230; <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/tcot?src=hash">#tcot</a></p>
<p>&mdash; Kristie (@ConservTXmom) <a href="https://twitter.com/ConservTXmom/statuses/488762478113730560">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/upayr">@upayr</a> of course. do you really think cc is paid more for whatever the hell she has done (or not) on her own?</p>
<p>&mdash; Jesús B Ochoa (@viejolex1) <a href="https://twitter.com/viejolex1/statuses/488793533470363649">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> Your point being? Are you dumbasses <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Hillary?src=hash">#Hillary</a> cheerleaders? Because if you are I&#39;m dropping your sorry asses</p>
<p>&mdash; Jeremy Meserve (@isolotus71) <a href="https://twitter.com/isolotus71/statuses/488797916203450370">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/MattGertz">@MattGertz</a> do you think it had something to do with the fact that <a href="https://twitter.com/mmfa">@mmfa</a> is a third rate <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Microblog?src=hash">#Microblog</a>? Hmmm?</p>
<p>&mdash; The Right Pfeil (@Cowboy__Country) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cowboy__Country/statuses/488763982589620224">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p>To be like Chelsea, Dowd should donate her speaking fees to the Dowd Foundation for Tripping In Colorado. <a href="https://twitter.com/MattGertz">@MattGertz</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/joanwalsh">@joanwalsh</a></p>
<p>&mdash; bitingtea (@bitingtea) <a href="https://twitter.com/bitingtea/statuses/488765278378287104">July 14, 2014</a></p></blockquote>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p>
<p>So much for that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-in-twitter-war-over-chelsea-clinton-speaking-fees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters&#8217; Michelle Leung Calls Anti-Terrorist Muslim &#8220;Anti-Muslim&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-michelle-leung-calls-anti-terrorist-muslim-anti-muslim/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-michelle-leung-calls-anti-terrorist-muslim-anti-muslim</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-michelle-leung-calls-anti-terrorist-muslim-anti-muslim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michelle Leung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan Mauro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=233211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's Goebbels 101]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/media-matters/">Media Matters</a>&#8216; <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/michelle-leung/">Michelle Leung</a> <a href="http://sheikyermami.com/british-crackpot-baroness-lets-hand-over-rushdie-to-the-iranians-its-good-for-business/">launched a lame attack </a>on national security analyst <a href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/author/ryanmauro/">Ryan Mauro</a> that consisted of her repeating Islamophobia over and over again.</p>
<p>Michelle Leung&#8217;s exercise in childish name-calling mixes the political terms &#8220;Islamophobe&#8221;, &#8220;<a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/Islamophobia/">Islamophobia</a>&#8221; and &#8220;Islamophobes&#8221; in between random words. Sometimes she combines it with &#8220;notorious&#8221; or &#8220;virulent&#8221; for the even scarier &#8220;Notorious Islamophobe&#8221; or &#8220;Virulent Islamophobe&#8221;.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s Goebbels 101, but it&#8217;s Media Matters so the standards are bound to be low. All you have to do to get a job at Media Matters is find ways to use &#8220;Islamophobe&#8221; four times in one sentence. No wonder it&#8217;s <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-supports-unionization-just-not-for-its-employees/">fighting attempts to unionize its employees</a>.</p>
<p>In seven paragraphs, the only time Michelle Leung bothers providing any proof for her claim that Ryan Mauro is a super-notorious virulent Islamophobe who notoriously and virulently Islamophobes all over the place, is near the end.</p>
<p>Showing that even an elementary amount of research is beyond Michelle Leung, she writes that, &#8220;Mauro himself has penned numerous pieces for the anti-Islam blog Islamist Watch.&#8221;</p>
<p>The<a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/4404/muslim-enclaves-usa"> article she links to is actually</a> <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/ryan-mauro/munslim-enclaves-u-s-a/">from Front Page</a>. IW credits Front Page at the very top. But maybe lying for Media Matters long enough makes you go blind.</p>
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/david-brock.png"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-233212" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/david-brock-450x255.png" alt="david-brock" width="450" height="255" /></a></p>
<p>Michelle Leung writes that, &#8220;he has tracked his progress in identifying &#8220;Muslim enclaves&#8221; in the United States that he says will become &#8220;&#8216;no-go zones&#8217; where governments admit to having little authority over Muslims living there&#8221;</p>
<p>Leung doesn&#8217;t bother to inform her readers that the article is about camps set up by Islamist groups <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/ryan-mauro/munslim-enclaves-u-s-a/2/">and is thoroughly backed up by research</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>Another collective aspiring to create autonomous Muslim regions in the U.S. is called the Ummah. On October 28, 2009, the FBI tried to arrest one of its leaders, Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, for his involvement in criminal activity alongside some of his followers. A shootout ensued that took the life of Abdullah and one police dog. Like Muslims of the Americas, Abdullah offered his flock martial arts training and, in some cases, firearms instruction. He also had his own armed security team and preached war against the U.S. government and solidarity with bin Laden, the Taliban, and Hezbollah.</p>
<p>The FBI describes the Ummah as a “nationwide radical fundamentalist Sunni group consisting mainly of African-Americans” and says that its goal is to create “a separate, sovereign Islamic state (‘the Ummah’) within the borders of the United States, governed by Sharia law. The Ummah is to be ruled over by Jamil Abdullah al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown.” The death of Luqman Ameen Abdullah did not destroy this aim.</p></blockquote>
<p>The facts are virulently and notoriously Islamophobic. Anyone repeating them should be banned from TV.</p>
<p>So Michelle Leung&#8217;s entire basis for claiming that Ryan Mauro is not a &#8220;credible source&#8221; to discuss Islamic terrorism is a fact-based article about Islamic groups setting up armed compounds.</p>
<p>Then having exhausted her interest in researching Mauro (which was limited to citing out of context one article he wrote in 2010), she launches an even more bizarre attack on Zuhdi Jasser, a Muslim activist who is opposed to terrorism.</p>
<p>Michelle Leung calls<a href="http://www.mzuhdijasser.com/"> Zuhdi Jasser</a>, &#8220;Fox&#8217;s go-to anti-Muslim activist&#8221;.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a bizarre accusation since Jasser is a Muslim and the head of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. And in January, Michelle Leung had also called Jasser &#8220;Fox&#8217;s go-to anti-Muslim activist&#8221; giving her a consistent pattern of engaging in Goebbels 101 tactics.</p>
<p>Michelle Leung, like the Islamist groups she defends, somehow feels entitled to decide who is and isn&#8217;t a real Muslim.</p>
<p>Maybe Media Matters and Michelle Leung would like to explain the source of their religious authority for declaring that Zuhdi Jasser is not a Muslim.</p>
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AP120305130961.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-233213" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AP120305130961-450x315.jpg" alt="Zuhdi Jasser" width="450" height="315" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-michelle-leung-calls-anti-terrorist-muslim-anti-muslim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hillary, the Left-Wing Money Machine and a New IRS Crackdown</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-the-left-wing-money-machine-and-a-new-irs-crackdown/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hillary-the-left-wing-money-machine-and-a-new-irs-crackdown</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-the-left-wing-money-machine-and-a-new-irs-crackdown/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 04:58:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Leviathan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patrick Henry Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revoke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax exempt status]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=224107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The hammer comes down on the Patrick Henry Center while the New Leviathan of leftist non-profits runs amok. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/irs.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-224108" alt="irs" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/irs-450x300.jpg" width="315" height="210" /></a></span><strong>[To order David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin&#8217;s <em>The New Leviathan</em>, <a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=QXL3SUOKZ05M">click here</a>.]</strong></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The Internal Revenue Service has revoked the charitable status of a conservative nonprofit group that disseminated statements critical of Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry a decade ago.</span></p>
<p>This is President Obama&#8217;s unambiguous warning shot calculated to intimidate conservative activists ready to work against Hillary Clinton if she decides to seek the presidency.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And it is the latest outrage committed by an administration that has been on a vindictive rampage in recent years, using the feared tax collection agency to vex and persecute its political enemies, especially those associated with the Tea Party movement. And yet, absurdly enough, President Obama claimed in a Super Bowl weekend interview that there has not been even &#8220;a smidgen of corruption&#8221; at the IRS under his watch.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">All of this is a sobering reminder of how the scales are tipped in favor of the Left. Left-wing nonprofit groups, many of which rely on radical billionaires for funding, vastly outspend conservative groups, which tend to rely more on grassroots donations. Leftist organizations operate with almost complete impunity nowadays, unimpeded as they influence and pervert American politics in an effort to fundamentally transform our republic.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The conservative organization with a bulls-eye painted on it is the Manassas, VA-based Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty. The Center “has shown a pattern of deliberate and consistent intervention in political campaigns” and issued “repeated statements supporting or opposing various candidates by expressing its opinion of the respective candidate’s character and qualifications,” according to a ruling </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/irs-revokes-conservative-groups-tax-exempt-status-/">released</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> a few days ago by the IRS.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">On its website, the Patrick Henry Center </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.patrickhenrycenter.com/">describes</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> its mission as &#8220;fostering, promoting, and advocating the restoration of Liberty as the primary object of American society.&#8221; The Center &#8220;has committed itself to eight core principles that define the ideals of liberty and freedom as exemplified by our Founding Fathers, and articulated in our Constitution.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Those core principles are listed as: &#8220;Individual Liberty&#8221;; &#8220;Limited Government&#8221;; &#8220;Personal Responsibility&#8221;; &#8220;Constitutional Rule of Law&#8221;; &#8220;States&#8217; Rights&#8221;; &#8220;Free Market Economy&#8221;; &#8220;Provide for the Common Defense&#8221;; and &#8220;Protection of National Sovereignty.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The IRS ruled that the group functioned as an &#8220;action organization&#8221; by publishing alerts on its website for columns written by its president, former FBI agent Gary Aldrich.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The agency reached back in history to provide several examples of supposedly over-the-line behavior. It cited a 2004 column in which Aldrich wrote, “if John Kerry promises otherwise ill-informed swing-voters lower gas prices at the pump, more than a few greedy, registered ignoramuses will follow him anywhere.&#8221; A 2005 item cited by the IRS was titled &#8220;Stop Hillary Now&#8221; and was aimed at &#8220;Clinton haters&#8221; to inform voters of Mrs. Clinton&#8217;s &#8220;atrocious conduct.&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Let us examine the legal test that was applied in this case.</span></p>
<p>The IRS <a href="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/1416011.pdf">determined</a> that the Patrick Henry Center had ceased to qualify for an exemption from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In a letter to the Center, the IRS explained that a 501(c)(3) &#8220;organization must &#8216;not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.&#8217;&#8221;</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">An organization that engages in this conduct &#8220;is classified as an &#8216;action organization,&#8217; which is an organization deemed to not have operated exclusively for tax-exempt purposes&#8221; and is not eligible for tax-exempt treatment.</span></p>
<blockquote><p>You operated as an action organization because you participated or intervened in political campaigns on behalf of and in opposition to candidates for public office by publishing and distributing statements.</p></blockquote>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The revocation of the tax exemption is to take effect this July 1 unless appealed by the group.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Left-wing groups nearly always get treated gently by the IRS and this is especially true in the Obama era.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Incendiary racial demagogue Al Sharpton&#8217;s 501(c)(4) nonprofit, National Action Network (NAN), has a habit of </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/24/al-sharptons-acorn-wannabe-group-in-financial-trouble/?onswipe_redirect=no">not paying</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> taxes owed to the federal government. In 2010 the group owed at least $1,556,059 in federal taxes and $108,489 in New York taxes. Instead of taking aggressive action against the group, the IRS merely filed tax liens against the group.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Although MSNBC host Sharpton, one of the most polarizing figures in America, relentlessly attacks Republican elected officials using harsh, vitriolic language and promotes the most radical Democratic politicians and policies, there is no indication his group has been audited by the IRS or has had its tax-exempt status placed under official review. Sharpton is a close ally of President Obama and is prone to using his organization to advocate for the president and the Democratic Party, including during election cycles.</span></p>
<p>For instance, two months before the presidential election of 2012, well after Mitt Romney had accepted the nomination for GOP presidential candidate, the NAN website featured an endorsement of President Obama written by Sharpton. The article, titled &#8220;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-al-sharpton/poverty-rate_b_1885259.html">Latest Poverty Numbers a Wake-Up Call: We Must Continue to Support This President</a>&#8221; and published by the Huffington Post, was featured at Sharpton&#8217;s NAN <a href="http://nationalactionnetwork.net/rev/">blog</a>.</p>
<p>&#8220;For anyone who mistakenly thinks a Romney/Ryan ticket would somehow serve the middle-class and poor better in this country, let me give you a quick wake-up call,&#8221; the article stated. Sharpton warned voters,</p>
<blockquote><p>[I]t&#8217;s vital that we not forget what we stand to lose in this election. &#8230; If Romney were elected as President, and Ryan the Vice President, we can bet that their interests would not be with the people, but rather with the wealthy 1%[.]</p></blockquote>
<p>Sharpton concluded with promoting Obama for president:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: left;">As we fast approach the November elections, it&#8217;s imperative that we understand what we stand to lose. &#8230; While there is much work that remains in improving this economy and further reducing these poverty numbers, there&#8217;s no question in my mind that this President is the one who will continue fighting for us and not for the status quo.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Media Matters for America, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation that even the </span><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">New York Times</i><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> describes as a “highly partisan” organization, has been mysteriously immune from IRS audits. Every working day the lavishly funded outfit churns out political propaganda calculated to pressure journalists into unquestioningly backing the Democratic Party line. It has absurdly characterized Chris Matthews and former </span><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">New York Times</i><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> editor Bill Keller as sellouts to the left-wing cause.</span></p>
<p>The organization’s CEO, the emotionally unstable former journalist and self-described “hit man” David Brock, declares that MMfA’s mission is to wage “war on Fox (News)” as well as “to disrupt [News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch's] commercial interests” and to turn regulators against his media outlets. MMfA claims to combat “conservative misinformation,” but concentrates its fire on Fox because it dares to air political viewpoints that sometimes overlap with the views of Republicans. The ultimate purpose of Media Matters is to silence opposition to the Left.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">C. Boyden Gray, White House counsel to President George H.W. Bush, has complained to the IRS about MMfA, which he accurately describes as a “Democratic training camp.”</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Giving Media Matters tax-exempt status affords it an advantage not enjoyed by its victim, Fox News. That tax-exemption in effect legitimizes MMfA “by having the government affirm that the organization’s operations are truly ‘charitable’ and therefore consistent with the nation’s public policies,” according to Gray.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">And don&#8217;t forget the infamous Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), which used to employ Barack Obama and filed for bankruptcy in 2010, is the poster child for left-wing nonprofit abuses for the 40-year reign of terror it perpetrated against American taxpayers.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">For decades ACORN, with its intricate network of hundreds of nonprofit entities, defrauded taxpayers by spending government grants and tax-privileged dollars on partisan campaigns and voter drives that benefited Democrats exclusively. Every election cycle Project Vote, the ACORN affiliate President Obama worked for in 1992 and that Obama White House officials remain in close contact with to the present day, spends millions of tax-exempt dollars getting Democrats, dead or alive, to the polls.</span></p>
<p>Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department never lifted a finger to investigate a nearly $1 million misappropriation from ACORN by Dale Rathke, the socialite brother of ACORN founder Wade Rathke, as I detailed in my book <a href="http://tinyurl.com/vadumbook"><i>Subversion Inc.</i></a></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">President Obama’s 501(c)(4) goon platoon, Organizing for Action, also enjoys tax-exempt status. The Saul Alinsky-inspired, in-your-face group grew out of Obama’s election campaign and was previously called Organizing for America when it was an unincorporated project of the Democratic National Committee.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Meanwhile, in light of the Patrick Henry Center decision, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen was surprisingly defensive in an interview with the </span><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">Washington Post</i><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">. He said that the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury will probably rewrite controversial proposed guidelines to better define “candidate-related political activities.&#8221; Conservatives say the draft rules will allow the Obama administration to escalate its abuse of right-of-center groups.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">“My bottom line is that it’s in everyone’s interest to have clarification,” Koskinen said. “My position since I started more than four months ago is that we ought to have clarity, and that any rule that comes out ought to be fair and easy to administer.”</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Of course, this is the same Obama-controlled agency whose tax exempt organizations division, then headed by hyper-partisan Democrat Lois Lerner, </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/06/True-the-Vote-Founder-on-IRS-I-Was-Targeted-Because-of-My-Political-Beliefs">singled out</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> for harassment the heroic Catherine Engelbrecht, leader of the Houston-based good government group True the Vote, for special treatment.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Engelbrecht, whose group aggressively combats election fraud, told a congressional panel in February that she believed she had been &#8220;targeted because of my political beliefs.&#8221; She received 15 visits from four federal agencies for two years after True the Vote sought tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code in 2010. Her family business, Engelbrecht Manufacturing Inc, of Rosenberg, Texas, which does precision machining, was also audited by government agencies.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Conservative groups have been swimming against the tide for decades but the Obama era has made things far worse.</span></p>
<p>The activist Right is <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/irs-targeting-of-conservatives-indisputably-political/">severely outgunned</a> by the activist Left, as David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin exhaustively documented in their 2012 book, <a href="https://secure.donationreport.com/productlist.html?key=QXL3SUOKZ05M"><i>The New Leviathan: How the Left-Wing Money Machine Shapes American Politics and Threatens America’s Future</i></a>.</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">This vast network of left-wing funders and activist groups dwarfs anything the activist Right has to offer. It is “self-sufficient and self-perpetuating … an aristocracy of wealth whose dimensions exceed any previous accumulations of financial power, whose influence already represents a massive disenfranchisement of the American people and whose agendas pose a disturbing prospect for the American future,” according to the authors.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Unlike organizations on the Right, left-wing activist groups can count on a seemingly endless supply of cash from radical, deep-pocketed philanthropists such as anti-American hedge fund manager George Soros, predatory lender Herb Sandler, Taco Bell heir Rob McKay, Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, singer Barbra Streisand, and Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">As Horowitz and Laksin reported, the collective assets of liberal-progressive grant-making foundations are in fact 10 times the size of the assets of conservative foundations.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The Left, they wrote, thoroughly dominates two huge areas of interest-group warfare today: immigration and environmentalist activism.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In immigration, there are nine major conservative groups “that support traditional immigration policies” and 117 progressive groups “that support radical departures from traditional immigration policies and notions of sovereignty.”</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The conservative groups (e.g. Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA Foundation) have net assets of $15.05 million (based on annual revenues of $13.8 million), compared to the $194.67 million in net assets (based on annual revenues of $306.11 million) held by progressive groups (e.g. National Council of La Raza, Redlands Christian Migrant Association).</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In other words, progressive immigration groups have 22 times the revenues that their conservative counterparts have.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In the world of environmental activism, there are 32 major conservative groups that “promote market-friendly solutions” and 552 progressive groups that “promote radical views that are anti-business.” Collectively, the conservative groups have net assets of $38.24 million, a figure that seems insignificant compared to the $9.31 billion figure representing the progressive groups’ combined net assets.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The progressive environmental groups enjoy a 37 to 1 advantage over conservative environmental groups in revenues ($3.56 billion compared to $96.17 million).</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Left-wing groups almost never face the kind of heightened IRS scrutiny to which conservative groups are subjected. In fact, abuse of the IRS that rises to the level of political persecution is almost exclusively the province of left-wingers.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Although Republican President Richard Nixon considered using the IRS as a weapon against perceived enemies &#8212; he reportedly backed off when the IRS chief refused to play ball &#8212; IRS abuse is generally a tool of Democratic administrations.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">President Franklin Roosevelt directed the IRS to target newspaper publishers opposed to the New Deal and John F. Kennedy “raised the political exploitation of the IRS to an art form,” according to author James Bovard.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">It is fairly clear that the Obama administration goes to great lengths to leave its friends in the nonprofit community alone.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">News of the Patrick Henry Center&#8217;s tax status change comes as the public learns that the IRS has rewarded more than 1,000 of its employees with bonus pay even though they failed to pay their taxes to Uncle Sam, their employer.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">A Treasury Department inspector general&#8217;s report stated that the IRS </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/04/22/irs-bonuses-employees-delinquent-taxes/8012195/">lavished</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> $2.8 million in bonuses upon staffers with disciplinary problems, including more than $1 million funneled to 1,146 employees who didn&#8217;t bother to get around to paying their own federal taxes.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">According to USA Today:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The bonuses weren&#8217;t just monetary. Employees with tax problems received a total of 10,582 hours of paid time off — valued at about $250,000 — and 69 received permanent raises through a step increase, the report said. The report looked at bonuses in 2011 and 2012.</span></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The dishonest IRS employees committed what would probably be deemed tax fraud if any ordinary citizen did the same thing. The deadbeat feds&#8217; wrongdoing included &#8220;willful understatement of tax liabilities over multiple tax years, late payment of tax liabilities, and under-reporting of income,&#8221; the internal watchdog report said.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Some of these workers are the same people enforcing the widely despised Obamacare law that imposes monetary penalties on the uninsured.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Defaulting bureaucrats are everywhere in the federal government, which doesn&#8217;t take the problem seriously. According to the IRS, 311,536 federal employees were tax delinquents in 2011, having failed to pay a total of $3.5 billion owing.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Republicans have introduced legislation in the current Congress to fire federal workers whose taxes are seriously delinquent.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">President Obama and congressional Democrats will see to it that the bills go nowhere. </span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">That&#8217;s the Chicago way.</span></p>
<p>Conservative groups have now been put on notice with the revocation of tax-exempt status of the Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty. The IRS has made clear it will not only prevent new organizations from forming, but that established organizations are not safe either.</p>
<p>The question is: who&#8217;s next?</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/hillary-the-left-wing-money-machine-and-a-new-irs-crackdown/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>61</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters Supports Unionization&#8230; Just Not For its Employees</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-supports-unionization-just-not-for-its-employees/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-supports-unionization-just-not-for-its-employees</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-supports-unionization-just-not-for-its-employees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2014 02:29:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEIU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223661</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Media Matters for America is taking advantage of the Republican’s “anti-union” agenda]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/David-Brock.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-223662" alt="David-Brock" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/David-Brock.jpg" width="450" height="309" /></a></p>
<p>Card check? Media Matters is 100 percent on board. <a href="http://freebeacon.com/issues/media-matters-forces-secret-ballot-union-election/">Just not for its employees</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>Leftwing lapdog Media Matters for America is taking advantage of the Republican’s “anti-union” agenda to stonewall the SEIU’s attempt to unionize its staff.</p>
<p>MMFA is forcing its employees to conduct a secret ballot election that will determine whether or not they can join SEIU Local 500, a Maryland union, according to papers filed with the National Labor Relations Board.</p>
<p>Media Matters has a long record of slamming Republicans and conservatives who want to protect secret ballot union elections.</p></blockquote>
<p>Unionize Wal-Mart? Media Matters is all for it. <a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2547370/">Just don&#8217;t unionize Media Matters</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p> MMFA has regularly presented itself as a supporter of organized labor. It has argued that &#8220;economists point to declining union participation as one cause of the growing economic rift in America&#8221; and claimed it was a fact that &#8220;unions increase productivity [and] do not reduce business competitiveness.&#8221;</p>
<p>It seems to be somewhat less enthusiastic regarding unionization when it is applied to itself, though.</p></blockquote>
<p>Well why would it be? Lefty social justice programs are always meant to apply to someone else. Someone else should pay more taxes. Someone else should volunteer more. Someone else should unionize.</p>
<p>Somewhere David Brock is squatting in a bunker with a tin oil helmet on his head surrounded by Gaddafi&#8217;s old bodyguards while muttering something about the vast right wing conspiracy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/media-matters-supports-unionization-just-not-for-its-employees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters&#8217; Mission to Bury Benghazi</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/joseph-klein/media-matters-mission-to-bury-benghazi/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-mission-to-bury-benghazi</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/joseph-klein/media-matters-mission-to-bury-benghazi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 04:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[60 minutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=210489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Left-wing propaganda mill twists CBS's mistake to Obama's advantage. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/article-2202979-150018E4000005DC-23_964x608.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-210492" alt="article-2202979-150018E4000005DC-23_964x608" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/article-2202979-150018E4000005DC-23_964x608-408x350.jpg" width="245" height="210" /></a>The George Soros-funded left-wing propaganda mill known as Media Matters continues its campaign to whitewash the Obama administration’s Benghazi failures and cover-up. Media Matters has seized on CBS’s retraction of its October 27, 2013 60 Minutes story on the Benghazi attacks to discredit anyone who dares question the Obama administration’s actions leading up to, during and following September 11, 2012, when four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, were killed.</p>
<p>CBS correspondent Lara Logan, who originally reported on the story, ended up apologizing on the air for her interview with Dylan Davies, an ex-security officer identifying himself by his pseudonym Morgan Jones. Davies evidently lied during the interview about his true whereabouts on the fateful night of the Benghazi attack. Logan and her producers failed to check out adequately the veracity of Davies’ account before it aired. Davies claimed that he had entered the Benghazi special mission compound where he had supposedly confronted one of the attackers. He also said he had seen the body of Ambassador Chris Stevens in a local hospital. It turns out that Davies gave a very different account to the FBI and in an incident report he filed with his employer, which CBS did not catch or take seriously enough before it highlighted Davies in its story.</p>
<p>Media Matters is now crowing over how Lara Logan and her employer CBS were forced to eat crow. The episode, Media Matters wants us to believe, proves its contention all along that any criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi matter amounts to nothing more than a “right-wing hoax.” For this reason, it had made the debunking of the 60 Minutes story, in its own words, “priority one, priority two, and priority three.”</p>
<p>Here’s the problem for Media Matters and its fellow left-wing revisionists. Other portions of the 60 Minutes story, as well as prior congressional testimony by unassailable sources, still provide overriding proof of the Obama administration’s malignant neglect of requests for better security beforehand that might have held back the attackers. The sacred promise relied on by the brave men and women serving their country in dangerous parts of the world &#8211; &#8220;No One Left Behind&#8221; – was violated. The commander-in-chief was apparently AWOL that night, leaving it up to his subordinates to decide whether and how to respond militarily to the attacks which lasted more than seven hours. The evidence establishes that there was a stand-down order and that the right military assets to rescue the Americans under siege were not made available in time. And Media Matters refuses to face the truth that the Obama administration deliberately covered up the fact that it was aware almost immediately of al Qaeda’s involvement in the attacks. Instead, President Obama, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and other administration officials continued to peddle their false talking points for weeks thereafter, blaming an obscure anti-Muslim video for the tragedy.</p>
<p>Senator John McCain put it best when he said in response to the liberals’ exploitation of the botched CBS story to chill any further criticism of the Obama administration’s botching of the Benghazi matter: &#8220;It appears to me as if they are trying to shoot the messenger here, rather than try to explain the total mishandling of this whole situation.&#8221;</p>
<p>None of this excuses CBS for botching its story with respect to Dylan Davies and not properly vetting his account before putting him on the air. CBS would do well to bring in an independent panel to investigate what went wrong and make recommendations for improvement, as it did in the case of Dan Rather’s flawed 60 Minutes report on President Bush&#8217;s National Guard service in 2004.</p>
<p>Lara Logan erred in her reporting, and in her vouching for her discredited source even after doubts began to be raised about him. But does Media Matters honcho David Brock really believe that he is in a position to judge the record of an award-winning journalist who has risked her life reporting from the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan, and who suffered a brutal sexual assault while reporting from the streets of Cairo during the 2011 uprising against Egyptian President Mubarak? “I was dying in that square,” she said. “I never thought I’d see my children again.”</p>
<p>David Brock, by contrast, has no relevant war reporting experience that we know of. His career highlight is turning from being a self-described right-wing hit man commentator to a left-wing hit man and founder of the pro-Democratic Party Media Matters attack machine. Unlike Lara Logan, who has seen death up close in conflict zones and believes that the fallen must not be forgotten, Brock’s narcissism showed through when he said about his conversion from conservatism: “David Brock the Road Warrior of the Right is dead.&#8221; He apparently sees himself as a resurrected liberal on the side of the virtuous against the evil conservatives.</p>
<p>Yes, Logan stumbled badly by being over-zealous in relying on the word of a lying source when her mission was to find out and report the truth to the American people. But she owned up to her mistake, saying on CBS This Morning: &#8220;You know the most important thing to every person at &#8217;60 Minutes&#8217; is the truth. And today the truth is we made a mistake. And that&#8217;s a..that&#8217;s very disappointing for any journalist. That&#8217;s very disappointing for me. Nobody likes to admit they made a mistake. But if you do, you have to stand up and take responsibility &#8211; and you have to say you were wrong. And in this case we were wrong.&#8221;</p>
<p>Brock, by contrast, remains the unthinking hit man with no concern for finding the truth, whatever the truth may turn out to be. He merely switched sides. For Brock to go on MSNBC’s Al Sharpton show and demand that CBS apologize to the Obama administration and the families of the Americans killed in Benghazi, for example, is way over the top. And for Al Sharpton to self-righteously condemn CBS for its mistaken reliance on Davies is a joke, considering his own involvement in perpetrating the Tawana Brawley rape allegations that a grand jury found to be fabricated.</p>
<p>The Obama administration owes the American people, and especially the families of the murdered Americans, the truth about what really happened in Benghazi and why. Media Matters’ dismissal of all criticism of the Obama administration’s gross mishandling of the Benghazi matter as a “hoax” is itself a cruel hoax that is insulting to those families.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Josh Brewster</strong>&#8216;s video interview with <strong>Jamie Glazov</strong> about the Left&#8217;s Romance With Terror and why it engages in Jihad Denial:<br />
</em></p>
<p><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SNJg6w6CB0o" height="300" width="400" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/joseph-klein/media-matters-mission-to-bury-benghazi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters Boss David Brock Calls Benghazi a &#8220;Hoax&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-boss-david-brock-calls-benghazi-a-hoax/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-boss-david-brock-calls-benghazi-a-hoax</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-boss-david-brock-calls-benghazi-a-hoax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2013 16:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benghazi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=208097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["I think every step of the way she did the right thing.”]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/images-14.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-208099" alt="Polaroid" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/images-14-450x337.jpg" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>What exactly is the hoax? The murder of 4 Americans? The lack of security provided by Clinton&#8217;s State Department? The lack of military support provided once the attack was underway?</p>
<p>Or maybe David Brock wants to claim that the whole thing was shot in a movie studio just like the moon landing and that steel doesn&#8217;t melt. <a href="http://www.jammiewf.com/2013/laughable-media-matters-stooge-authors-e-book-the-benghazi-hoax/">It would be right up his crazy alley</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>Media Matters founder and Hillary Clinton ally David Brock has co-authored a 90-page e-book called “The Benghazi Hoax,” a tome intended as a counterweight of sorts to criticisms of the former Secretary of State and President Barack Obama over the 2012 attacks in Libya.</p>
<p>The book, which comes out Tuesday, is as much about pushing back against criticisms by the right that Obama is a weak president who has hurt America in the world, Brock said.</p></blockquote>
<p>A ridiculous claim.</p>
<p>If Obama were a weak president who hurt America in the world&#8230; would Al Qaeda linked groups have carried out a series of attacks against American diplomatic facilities on September 11 and murdered an American ambassador while Obama got ready to party with Jay-Z?</p>
<p>Wait&#8230; that&#8217;s exactly what would have happened.</p>
<blockquote><p>These groups are all relatively new and untested, he said. However, “Rand Paul, who may run for president, said that Benghazi was a disqualifier for Secretary Clinton for higher office, and you know, I mean, that’s baloney.</p>
<p>“And I think we show in the book that Secretary Clinton was involved in forming global anti-terror policies that were tough and successful moreso than I think the last administration’s [were],” Brock said. “She took responsibility for the security lapses even though [it was found] that she didn’t have knowledge of the reductions. That night she was engaged and a steady hand, and then after the fact, I think her focus was on trying to keep diplomats safe in the future. … I think every step of the way she did the right thing.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Let&#8217;s go on a magical journey following David Brock&#8217;s logic here.</p>
<p>1. Hillary Clinton had great security policies</p>
<p>2. She took responsibility for the bad security policies in Benghazi&#8230; even though she didn&#8217;t know about them&#8230; even though she was tasked with running the State Department</p>
<p>3. Hillary Clinton did the right thing every step of the way&#8230; including the steps where she did the wrong things</p>
<p>4. Hillary Clinton is super-qualified to be president because she didn&#8217;t know anything was wrong and then didn&#8217;t do anything to fix it and told Congress that it doesn&#8217;t make a difference anyway</p>
<p>I think Brock needs a few more hits of whatever he was taking when he decided to roll out this argument.</p>
<blockquote><p>The book offers a sweeping criticism of a number of Republicans, including last year’s GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, as well as members of the media. That includes but is not limited to several Fox News anchors, whom Brock describes as “hoaxters” interested in tarnishing Obama and Clinton, and, by extension, former United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice.</p></blockquote>
<p>Don&#8217;t forget Pat Smith, the mother of Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, whose sons died in Benghazi, and who have criticized Obama and Hillary.</p>
<p>I sure hope David Brock found the time to get his best interns together and blast those &#8220;hoaxters&#8221; who won&#8217;t leave Hillary alone for getting their sons killed.</p>
<blockquote><p>“People have missed the fact that Benghazi was not only a tragedy, but it was a night of valor,” said Brock.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, but the valor came from men like Tyrone Woods who disobeyed orders and did what was right without any backup or support.</p>
<blockquote><p>“Politicians of both parties can be expected to be dragged through the mud, but I think there’s an element of the story that’s important, which was there was a dishonoring of men and women who try to keep us safe, for partisan political gain,” he said. “And I think there should be general agreement that politicizing a tragedy that results in American deaths crosses a line.”</p></blockquote>
<p>What&#8217;s that I hear? Fahrenheit 9/11? What&#8217;s that again? Iraq War?</p>
<p>The men who keep us safe are men like Tyrone Woods. Hillary didn&#8217;t try to keep us safe. Hillary tried to prep for a presidential run.</p>
<blockquote><p>“There were 157 attacks on US [displomatic] facilities since 1998 and yet Benghazi is the most investigated event of its type in recent history,” Brock said</p></blockquote>
<p>There were multiple attacks on diplomatic facilities on September 11. Not just Benghazi. And how many of those 157 attacks involved a diplomatic compound being penetrated and a US ambassador&#8217;s body being dragged through the streets.</p>
<blockquote><p>The book also addresses criticism of Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff at State who was accused of trying to muzzle testimony from within her department.</p></blockquote>
<p>She was accused of trying to muzzle people by the people she was muzzling. The accusations came from the whistleblowers she tried to intimidate and silence. Career State Department people.</p>
<blockquote><p>Brock was adamant that people pay too much attention to the portion of Media Matters’ work that deals with the Clintons.</p>
<p>“I think that sometimes there’s inordinate attention to the work we do on the Clintons, because the media is obsessed with [the Clintons], especially lately,” he said.</p></blockquote>
<p>Brock&#8217;s ability to distinguish between his own Clinton obsession and the media has always been very poor. That&#8217;s what got him where he is today.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-boss-david-brock-calls-benghazi-a-hoax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TruthRevolt Draws Fire</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/truthrevolt-draws-fire/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=truthrevolt-draws-fire</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/truthrevolt-draws-fire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Tapson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ben shapiro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freed Center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Truth Revolt]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=206977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Freedom Center’s counter-offensive to Media Matters hits its mark.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/TruthRevoltLogo.png"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-206981" alt="TruthRevoltLogo" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/TruthRevoltLogo-450x337.png" width="315" height="236" /></a><strong>Visit <a href="http://www.truthrevolt.org/">TruthRevolt.org</a>.</strong></p>
<p>This week the David Horowitz Freedom Center <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/truth-revolt-launches-sharpton-advertisers-targeted">launched</a> TruthRevolt (TR), the right’s counter-offensive to the George Soros-funded media attack dog <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150">Media Matters</a>. TR is designed to hold the mainstream media accountable for its leftist bias, so naturally those leftist media outlets, already feeling the heat, are attempting to dismiss and delegitimize it and its founders, David Horowitz and Ben Shapiro.</p>
<p>“This will get personal,” says Shapiro, embracing a tactic that formerly has been the province of the demonizing left, who subscribe to the Alinsky aim of personalizing a target and destroying him or her. “This will get rough. We’re ready for action.” TruthRevolt did in fact take action right out of the gate, its initial target being the patriarch of race-baiting demagoguery himself, MSNBC’s Al Sharpton. Shapiro initiated a <a href="http://www.truthrevolt.org/petition/tell-advertisers-stop-backing-al-sharpton">petition</a> calling on advertisers, specifically Mondelez International, the owner of Ritz Crackers, to stop supporting Sharpton’s show <i>PoliticsNation</i>. The petition has acquired nearly 5,900 signatures since the launch two days ago, the first thousand of them in under fifteen hours.</p>
<p>How did the news media respond to TR’s arrival on the scene? The major news outlets like ABC and CBS, perhaps either underestimating the popular support for such a right-wing media offensive, or hoping it will go away, simply chose not to bring attention to the launch. Not even MSNBC itself deigned to acknowledge TruthRevolt, at least on its website. Conservative sites like <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/10/07/conservative-group-calls-on-ritz-crackers-boycott-over-al-sharpton-sponsorship/">TheBlaze</a> and <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/10/06/Ben-Shapiro-TruthRevolt-Will-Make-MSM-Pay-for-Lies-Change-Nature-of-Media">Breitbart.com</a>, of course, reported it, and a mixture of anticipation and zeal was in strong evidence among the commenters on those sites, who have long been awaiting a weapon like TR to bring the leftist media to their knees. “It’s about time,” was the general attitude.</p>
<p>What other mainstream media reports there were of the launch ranged from the careful neutrality of <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/media-matters-gets-some-right-644390"><i>The Hollywood Reporter</i></a> (<i>THR</i>) to the subtle editorializing of  <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/07/al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott.html">The Daily Beast</a> to the dismissal of <i>Time</i> to the predictable smears from the Huffington Post and Media Matters itself.</p>
<p>To its credit, <i>The Hollywood Reporter</i> kept things professionally objective in its <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/media-matters-gets-some-right-644390">full-length coverage</a>. Time.com, on the other hand, did a very brief <a href="http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/10/08/al-sharptons-infamous-cracker-speech-spurs-conservative-boycott-of-ritz-20-years-later/">write-up</a> that completely ignored the launch and TruthRevolt’s mission, characterizing TR merely as a series of boycotts. Their headline (“Al Sharpton’s Infamous ‘Cracker’ Speech Spurs Conservative Boycott of Ritz 20 Years Later”) and article imply that the boycott against Sharpton’s advertisers is twenty years too late and that the advertisers themselves are largely indifferent to the threat.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/07/boycott-ritz-crackers-al-sharpton_n_4058225.html">Huffington Post</a> whistled the same tune in its coverage of the TruthRevolt launch, dismissing the Sharpton boycott as “drudging [sic] up comments from 20 years ago.” The Daily Beast also slipped in a reference to “dredging up 25-year-old incidents to spur a boycott,” as if Sharpton hasn’t filled those intervening years with a career full of racist mendacity, most recently capitalizing on and exploiting Trayvon Martin’s death. (At least the Daily Beast spelled “dredging” correctly.)</p>
<p>A Daily Caller <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/08/ben-shapiro-conservative-activists-shamefully-boycott-nabisco-over-sharpton-ad/">editorial</a> by Patrick Howley oddly slammed Shapiro for using the left’s own tactics against it, and suggested that somehow Shapiro and TruthRevolt are anti-free speech. Apparently Howley has forgotten that the left has been pushing with all its might to shut down conservative talk radio for many years. He also cited a 1984 electoral map as evidence that the right is not a victimized class, as if conservatives don’t have a right to take action against blatant media bias. Sorry Mr. Howley, but boycotts are not censorship, and if you think that the right should continue to fight the Alinsky-trained left according to Marquess of Queensbury rules, then you don’t comprehend the fight we’re in or the enemy we’re up against. Managing editor Jeremy Boreing <a href="http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/daily-caller-declares-truth-revolt-responsible-2012-republican-presidential-defeat">rebutted</a> Howley on the TR site, pointing out that the old electoral map</p>
<blockquote><p>was before the twenty-four hour news cycle, before the cell phone and the internet, and before the rise of political correctness and multiculturalism actively defined those who ‘subscribe to the political ideology of Ronald Reagan’ as racist, greedy, warmongering, homophobic, bigots fighting a war on the poor and on women in the American pop-culture.</p></blockquote>
<p>In “<a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/10/07/meet-the-right-wing-leaders-of-truthrevolt/196320">Meet The Right-Wing Leaders Of ‘TruthRevolt</a>,’” Media Matters noted the movement’s debut and then commented that “the history of two main TruthRevolt figures, Ben Shapiro and David Horowitz, suggests the site won&#8217;t prioritize accuracy or refrain from smears” – which is rather comical projection on their part, considering that the mission of Media Matters itself is to distort and smear. The article then proceeds to try to paint Horowitz and Shapiro as racist right-wing nut jobs with a list of selective quotations, without addressing the substance or context of those statements – the left’s usual tactic of demonizing rather than debating. Horowitz, for example, is quoted as saying “Blacks are the human shields of the Democratic party,” and as claiming that conservative activists Suhail Khan and Grover Norquist represented a Muslim Brotherhood infiltration at the 2011 CPAC – neither statement of which is refuted by Media Matters but is simply presented as supposed evidence of Horowitz’s paranoia.</p>
<p>According to Shapiro, the traffic on the TR website’s first day was massive: over 100,000 visits, over 90,000 unique visitors, and a quarter of a million page views. As for a social media presence, TR has already amassed over 2,600 Twitter followers and 3,800 Facebook “likes” as of this writing.</p>
<p>Whether the left likes it or not or pretends to ignore it, TruthRevolt has kicked off with a bang, not a whimper, and is poised to give progressives a taste of their own medicine and help “right” our country’s long-standing media imbalance.</p>
<p><i>Mark Tapson, a Hollywood-based writer and screenwriter, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He focuses on the politics of popular culture.</i></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/truthrevolt-draws-fire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>76</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Al Sharpton, ‘PoliticsNation’ Advertisers Targeted in New Boycott</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-freedlander/al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-freedlander/al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2013 04:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Freedlander]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ben shapiro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sharpton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Truth Revolt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unmasking]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=206604</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new group bent on unmasking ‘leftists in the media’ has its first target.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/al1.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-206607" alt="al" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/al1-360x350.jpg" width="252" height="245" /></a><strong>Visit <a href="www.thedailybeast.com">TheDailyBeast</a>.</strong></p>
<p>A group of conservative activists, tired of what they see as a persistent and little remarked liberal bias in the news media, are set to begin a series of boycotts aimed at advertisers who sponsor what they see as left-wing networks, outlets, and journalists.</p>
<div>
<p>On Sunday they announced their first target, the <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/25/al-sharpton-s-controversial-msnbc-gig-blasted-by-critics-black-journalists.html">Rev. Al Sharpton</a>, the civil-rights leader turned MSNBC talk-show host whose <i>PoliticsNation</i> has grown in influence and audience since making its debut two years ago.</p>
<p>“Sharpton is a racial extortionist who has instigated racial animosities, violence, and division in America for the last forty years,” write the boycott’s organizers. “In better times, Sharpton would be stigmatized and condemned for the damage he has done. But today he is a primetime host on MSNBC—the charter cable news network for NBC News, and a favored outlet for the Obama administration’s spin doctors.”</p>
<p>The boycott is part of <a href="http://www.truthrevolt.org/">Truth Revolt</a>, a new project by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a right-wing foundation that has focused on what it calls liberal bias in Hollywood and on college campuses. Truth Revolt, which says its purpose is to “unmask leftists in the media for who they are, destroy their credibility with the American public, and devastate their funding bases,” is led by Ben Shapiro, an editor-at-large for the conservative website Breitbart News and the author, most recently, of <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Bullies-Culture-Intimidation-Silences-Americans/dp/1476709998/ref=as_at?tag=thedailybeast-autotag-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;" target="_blank">Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America</a></i><i>.</i></p>
<p><strong>To continue reading this article, <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/07/al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott.html">click here</a>.</strong></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-freedlander/al-sharpton-politicsnation-advertisers-targeted-in-new-boycott/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters Calls for Gun Control, Carries Illegal Guns to Protect Its Founder</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-calls-for-gun-control-carries-illegal-guns-to-protect-its-founder/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-calls-for-gun-control-carries-illegal-guns-to-protect-its-founder</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-calls-for-gun-control-carries-illegal-guns-to-protect-its-founder/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:33:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=175266</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gun control isn't about banning guns, it's about banning people who aren't well-connected from having guns. If you're a Wal-Mart shopper then you're not supposed to have a gun. If you're David Brock, then that's a whole other story...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-calls-for-gun-control-carries-illegal-guns-to-protect-its-founder/david-brock-300x170/" rel="attachment wp-att-175267"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-175267" title="david-brock-300x170" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/david-brock-300x170.png" alt="" width="300" height="170" /></a></p>
<p>Gun control isn&#8217;t about banning guns, it&#8217;s about banning people who aren&#8217;t well-connected from having guns. If you&#8217;re a Wal-Mart shopper then you&#8217;re not supposed to have a gun. <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/27/illegal-guns-david-brock-media-matters/">If you&#8217;re David Brock, then that&#8217;s a whole other story</a>&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p>A staffer at left-wing Media Matters for America committed numerous felonies in the District of Columbia and around the country by carrying a firearm to defend the organization’s founder, David Brock, The Daily Caller has learned.</p>
<p>According to a knowledgeable source, multiple firearms used to protect the Media Matters founder were purchased with Brock’s blessing — and apparently with the group’s money.</p>
<p>Brock, whose struggles with mental health have seen him hospitalized in the past, became increasingly concerned by late 2010 that he was being targeted by right-wing assassins.</p>
<p>TheDC has learned that by that time, Brock had armed his assistant — who had no permit to carry a concealed firearm — with a Glock handgun.</p>
<p>According to an internal email exchange obtained by TheDC, the gun was purchased with cash in Maryland, likely to diminish the chances such a purchase would appear on the tax-exempt group’s books.</p>
<p>Between Price-Morris’ early 2009 arrival and late 2010 departure from Media Matters, he also acquired a shotgun for Brock’s protection.</p>
<p>Price-Morris was regularly armed when accompanying Brock on trips around the country, according to a source, and his firearm possession in Washington, D.C. constituted multiple felonies.</p></blockquote>
<p>How can this story get any worse? Well&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p>On at least one occasion, Brock — accompanied by his armed aide — visited California to attend a “Democracy Alliance” summit of major Democratic donors and lawmakers.</p>
<p>That gathering included such major figures in Democratic politics as billionaires George Soros, Peter Lewis and Bill Benter, former Service Employees International Union Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger, and the politician behind the federal government’s 1994 “Assault Weapons Ban,” California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, that Dianne Feinstein. But she wouldn&#8217;t have minded. Gun control is for little people. Not big people.</p>
<blockquote><p>Speaking to TheDC, multiple Media Matters staffers described an atmosphere of confusion surrounding why Price-Morris had a gun when so much of the liberal organization’s work was aimed at restricting the public’s access to firearms.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of the December 14 school shooting in Newtown, Conn., Media Matters has been on the gun control warpath, commissioning hundreds of pieces supportive of restrictions on firearms.</p></blockquote>
<p>The confusion is that there&#8217;s one law for the people in power and another for those out of power. It some MM staff a while to grasp that.</p>
<blockquote><p>Brock’s aide was a “gun enthusiast,” according to the source, and often selected a weapon from his personal collection of firearms that would suit a given occasion and his taste. Price-Morris would occasionally carry a separate Glock that he owned personally, one with a high-capacity magazine — 17-rounds — if his outfit was loose enough to conceal the weapon.</p>
<p>Media Matters had reason to be concerned about news of its use of firearms becoming public.</p>
<p>Aside from risking the disapproval or outrage of disenchanted anti-gun donors, it appears Media Matters personnel may have committed several serious crimes.</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m sure the DC AG will investigate that around the same time he arrests David Gregory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/media-matters-calls-for-gun-control-carries-illegal-guns-to-protect-its-founder/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters: Obama Administration Mouthpiece</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/media-matters-obama-administration-mouthpiece/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-obama-administration-mouthpiece</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/media-matters-obama-administration-mouthpiece/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 04:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[department of justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fast and Furious]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[J. Christian Adams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Propaganda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=144567</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department of Justice and media “monitor” coordinate attacks against administration enemies.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/holder_houston_071012.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-144596" title="holder_houston_071012" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/holder_houston_071012.gif" alt="" width="375" height="238" /></a>The Obama administration apparently has yet another burgeoning scandal to add to its already long list. Emails obtained by the Daily Caller <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/emails-reveal-justice-dept-regularly-enlists-media-matters-to-spin-press/">reveal</a> that there has been regular collaboration between Department of Justice staff and the left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America<em>.</em> Dozens of <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/106208610/Daily-Caller-FOIA-DOJ-and-Media-Matters">communications</a> that the Caller obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request demonstrate that DOJ Office of Public Affairs Director Tracy Schmaler was coordinating efforts with Media Matters to attack reporters who covered various DOJ scandals. &#8220;We received a massive amount of these communiques that indicate direct coordination between the Obama Justice Department&#8230;and Media Matters to subvert news stories,&#8221; Daily Caller editor Tucker Carlson <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/18/emails-show-justice-working-with-media-matters-to-target-critics/">said</a> Tuesday. &#8220;This proves coordination.&#8221;</p>
<p>The first attempt at such subversion concerns the New Black Panther voter intimidation case that was dropped by the DOJ, a move subsequently revealed as blatantly political. So much so that a judge <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/06/Court-Rules-DOJ-Politicized-Black-Panther-Case-Awards-JW-Court-Fees">awarded</a> attorney fees to Judicial Watch because the DOJ had stonewalled the release of documents demonstrating that political appointees within the Department squelched the case, and that Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez lied under oath when he denied it during a hearing conducted by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.</p>
<p>The dropping of that case led former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams to <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/30/justice-dept-lawyer-accuses-holder-dropping-new-black-panther-case-political/">tender</a> his resignation in protest of the DOJ&#8217;s &#8220;racially motivated&#8221; reasons for doing so. The DOJ was also heavily criticized by Hans A. von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Federal Election Commission commissioner, who also <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262396/new-black-panther-fix-hans-von-spakovsky">concluded</a> that the &#8220;fix was in at the Justice Department in its internal investigation of the New Black Panther Party case.&#8221;</p>
<p>Emails sent in September and November 2010 show Schmaler working with Media Matters staffer Jeremy Holden, who obliged Schmaler with an article published Sept. 20, 2010 criticizing both men for what he called an attempt “to reignite the phony New Black Panther Party scandal.” Prior to his posting of that article, Holden received several emails from Schmaler detailing ways to attack the men. Holden reiterated his attack against Adams in a subsequent article November 18, 2010. Former DOJ attorney Christopher Coates, who, like Adams, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/24/christopher-coates-testifies-against-justice-department-over-new-black-panther-case/">testified</a> before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that the dismissal of the Black Panther case was racially motivated, was also attacked by Holden. In response, Schmaler sent Holden an email titled “Great piece…”</p>
<p>The next scandal that needed squelching was the Fast and Furious gun-walking fiasco. The DOJ allowed guns to &#8220;walk&#8221; into the hands of Mexican drug cartel members, and Border Agent Brian Terry was killed as a direct result of that malfeasance. The subsequent investigation into who knew what and when remains ongoing, due to the DOJ&#8217;s <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/top-doj-official-refuses-fast-and-furious-subpoena/">refusal</a> to hand over documents subpoenaed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The standoff burgeoned into a full-blown confrontation, when President Obama <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/white-house-invokes-executive-privilege-on-fast-and-furious-documents/">invoked</a> executive privilege to prevent the documents from being released, and Attorney General Eric Holder was subsequently <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/politics/fast-and-furious-holder-contempt-citation-battle.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_moc.semityn.www">held</a> in contempt of Congress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/media-matters-obama-administration-mouthpiece/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Obama Destroys His Enemies</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ben-shapiro/how-obama-destroys-his-enemies/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=how-obama-destroys-his-enemies</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ben-shapiro/how-obama-destroys-his-enemies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 04:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ben Shapiro]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=128178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The latest strategy.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-128195" title="obama" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama.jpg" alt="" width="468" height="558" /></a><br />
President Obama has always disliked free speech as a general matter, particularly for those who oppose him. He frequently suggests that those who disagree with him simply lack the power of reason; he constantly attacks those who do not bow to his opinions. In the last month alone he has directly castigated the Supreme Court (it would be “unprecedented,” he said, for them to strike down Obamacare); Rush Limbaugh (he called up Sandra Fluke to tell her how out of line Limbaugh was); and Congress (if they don’t act on whatever it is he wants, he will go it alone).</p>
<p>But he has one problem: the First Amendment does not allow him, as president, to use the power of government to fight his enemies. Obama&#8217;s solution to this dilemma lies in 501(c)3 charitable organizations working in close tandem with the federal government.</p>
<p>Here’s how it works. First, President Obama forges deep and abiding connections with like-minded charitable organizations. These are theoretically supposed to be non-partisan, but they are typically not – they have a direct line to the White House. So, for example, Media Matters for America coordinates routinely with the White House on important issues of the day. And they are experts at initiating so-called secondary boycotts.</p>
<p>Their expertise was honed in the Don Imus affair, as the Daily Caller reported. When Imus made offensive comments about the Rutgers women’s basketball team, Media Matters sprang into action, coordinating with other allies and pushing for a boycott of advertisers on Imus’ show. Soon, Imus was gone.</p>
<p>They quickly moved on to Lou Dobbs. They attempted to force his advertisers to stop buying time on his radio show; in particular, they looked to put pressure on Ford. And they were successful. By November 2009, Dobbs had moved on from CNN, to Media Matters’ delight.</p>
<p>All this time, Media Matters was working with the Obama Administration. Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, met regularly with Media Matters to plot strategy. Media Matters had weekly calls with the White House.</p>
<p>The stage was set. The actors were in place.</p>
<p>Their first joint target was Glenn Beck. While the White House claimed that Fox News wasn’t a “real” news channel, Media Matters worked the back channels, coordinating with Color of Change to “expose Glenn Beck’s racist rhetoric in an effort to educate advertisers about the practices on his show.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/ben-shapiro/how-obama-destroys-his-enemies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Astro-Turf War: Media Matters After Limbaugh</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/rick-moran/astro-turf-war-media-matters-vs-limbaugh/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=astro-turf-war-media-matters-vs-limbaugh</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/rick-moran/astro-turf-war-media-matters-vs-limbaugh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 04:39:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick Moran]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertisers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandra Fluke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Slut]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=126615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is the campaign targeting Rush's advertisers driven by the leftist group's funding desperation? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/RushLimbaughSpeaking_320x245.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-126617" title="RushLimbaughSpeaking_320x245" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/RushLimbaughSpeaking_320x245.gif" alt="" width="375" height="266" /></a>Stoking the fires of controversy, Media Matters for America has <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-bc-us--rushlimbaugh,0,4293681.story">upped the ante</a> in its war with Rush Limbaugh and will spend $100,000 to buy radio ads in 8 cities calling on citizens to force the talk radio star off the air. The ad buy is part of a <a href="http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/03/media-matters-astroturfed-the-limbaugh-secondary-boycott/">carefully coordinated war</a> that the left is carrying out against Limbaugh as they seek to silence one of the major conservative voices in the nation.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74307.html">Limbaugh has responded </a>by accusing the liberal front group for the Democratic party of seeking to censor his &#8212; and any other views &#8212; with which it disagrees. And there has been a spillover effect <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-kfi-city-20120322,0,5204752.story">into government</a> as the Los Angeles City Council has adopted a symbolic resolution that calls on radio stations to police their on-air talent&#8217;s &#8220;hate speech&#8221; while arguing that stations need to hire more minorities so that there is a &#8220;diversity&#8221; of viewpoints.</p>
<p>The ad campaign by Media Matters is just the latest broadside in their long standing effort to purge the radio host from the airwaves. This time, there appears to be a little more urgency to their work. Could it be that the liberal website has been bleeding so much traffic over the last year that they desperately need to stoke the fires of activism in order to boost outside revenue? According to <a href="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/mediamatters.org/">Site Analytics,</a> in February, 2011 Media Matters welcomed 603,000 unique visitors. A year later in February, 2012, that number had fallen off a cliff, as the website got only 276,000 for the month. That&#8217;s a catastrophic drop of 54%. What better way to increase revenue than gin up outrage and declare war on the biggest target on talk radio?</p>
<p>Writing at <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/21/Media-Matters-Mum">Big Government,</a> Ben Shapiro points out that since the <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/21/media-matters-wants-a-fight-but-cant-take-a-punch/">Daily Caller&#8217;s</a> brutal exposé of Media Matters and its weird, paranoid founder David Brock, that detailed charges &#8220;including funding from left-wing allies, bizarre office hijinks, anti-Semitic employees, backdoor payoffs to former lovers, and connections with the Obama Administration, the organization remains largely silent&#8221; about the substance of the accusations in DC&#8217;s articles. In a way, Limbaugh&#8217;s comments have been a godsend to MMFA as it has deflected attention from the DC series while allowing the organization to implement a plan it has actually had in the works for 3 years.</p>
<p>That plan is detailed by William Jacobson of the blog <a href="http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/03/media-matters-astroturfed-the-limbaugh-secondary-boycott/">Legal Insurrection</a>. The effort to silence Limbaugh goes back at least to 2009 and is headed up by the Media Matters Director for Online Strategy Angelo Carusone. He admitted to the <em>Village Voice</em>:</p>
<blockquote><p>I initially rolled it out in late 2009 and early 2010. At the time, the Beck work was doing well. I thought that in dealing with advertisers, some really appreciated being educated about where their ads were running. The ad market took care of this. The word “boycott,” it’s very rare that I called for a boycott or attacked a company. For the most part, I let advertisers know where there money was being spent, where it was going, and what it was helping. They made the decision themselves.</p></blockquote>
<p>Carusone engineered astro-turfed campaigns on social media, bombarding advertisers for Limbaugh with threats. Limbaugh&#8217;s spokesman <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74307.html">points out:</a></p>
<blockquote><p>These Media Matters mobs bear a simple message: Renounce our enemies or become one of them. They distribute target lists of advertiser phone numbers, email addresses, Facebook links and Twitter handles, and then they come out of nowhere, en masse, against selected advertisers in rotation. They barrage small business with threats until they cancel their advertising.</p></blockquote>
<p>Several dozen advertisers gave in to the pressure, which only made the attacks even more hysterical. There was blood in the water and Media Matters and its sharks were in a feeding frenzy. What is lost in all this social media churning is that only a handful of stations have dropped Limbaugh from their talk radio lineup. He may be losing some advertisers, but the owners of Clear Channel and other networks aren&#8217;t stupid. It would be economic suicide to cancel a show that attracts upwards of 20 million listeners a day. It&#8217;s why MMFA and other liberals like <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2012/0312/Rush-Limbaugh-Jane-Fonda-wants-him-kicked-off-air.-Should-FCC-listen">Jane Fonda</a> who want the FCC to throw Limbaugh off the air, are dreaming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/rick-moran/astro-turf-war-media-matters-vs-limbaugh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>62</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Al Jazeera Joins Forces With Media Matters and ThinkProgress</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/joseph-klein/al-jazeera-joins-forces-with-media-matters-and-thinkprogress/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=al-jazeera-joins-forces-with-media-matters-and-thinkprogress</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/joseph-klein/al-jazeera-joins-forces-with-media-matters-and-thinkprogress/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 04:25:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Klein]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[al jazeera]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Center for American Progress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thinkprogress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=126178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A common hatred of Israel and America brings the propaganda outlets together.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/al-jazeera.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-126207" title="al-jazeera" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/al-jazeera.gif" alt="" width="375" height="255" /></a><a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150">Media Matters</a>, the Soros-funded Obama administration propaganda arm, claims that its prime mission is to correct &#8220;conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.&#8221; Presumably as part of its self-righteous campaign against conservative misinformation, Media Matters decided to team up with the anti-Semitic, anti-American news outlet Al Jazeera, a corrupt media outfit owned and financed by an authoritarian Arab regime that forbids freedom of the press in its own country. Then again, intellectual honesty and truly unbiased journalistic professionalism were never part of Media Matters&#8217; mission statement.</p>
<p>Al Jazeera has descended to such low depths that a <a href="http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/al-jazeera%E2%80%99s-identity-crisis">critic from the Arab media</a> had this to say about it:</p>
<blockquote><p>Al-Jazeera’s problem is not its political stance. It is entitled to that. Its problem is that it has dealt a blow to every genuine attempt to build strong and reasonably independent Arab media. The channel will allow no discussion of what has become of it, and has taken us back to the days of the &#8216;no voice rises above the sound of the battle&#8217; media. It casts aspersions on the motives of anyone one who criticizes it, defends fatal mistakes with feigned naivete, and at the same time refuses to concede that its &#8216;logical justification&#8217; for what is happening today is: &#8220;we are implementing the policy of our funder, period.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Media Matters was founded with the help of another Soros-sponsored enterprise, the <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/30/the-center-for-american-progress’-jihad-against-the-free-world/">Center for American Progress</a>, the radical brain of the Democratic Party. Media Matters itself couldn&#8217;t care less about upholding professional standards in journalism. Its affinity with Al Jazeera has nothing to do with a shared commitment to journalistic integrity. Rather, it shares a common enemy with Al Jazeera: Fox News.</p>
<p>Some of Al Jazeera&#8217;s most severe critics in the U.S. media just happen to be Fox News commentators such as Bill O&#8217;Reilly, who reports periodically on its blatantly biased anti-American, anti-Israel coverage. Media Matters&#8217; founder and head honcho, David Brock, hates Fox News so much for its rejection of left-wing orthodoxy that he decided to use Media Matters&#8217; resources to launch what he called an all-out campaign of <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51949.html">“guerrilla warfare and sabotage”</a> aimed at the Fox News Channel. Thus, it is no wonder that the two organizations, Media Matters and Al Jazeera, have formed a mutual admiration society. After all, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.</p>
<p>Media Matters Action Network senior foreign policy fellow <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/profile/mj-rosenberg.html">MJ Rosenberg has a profile on Al Jazeera&#8217;s website</a>, where his articles attacking Israel and the United States regularly appear. As reported by the <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/media-matters-for-america-linked-with-anti-american-anti-israel-al-jazeera-network/">Daily Caller</a>, Rosenberg represented Media Matters at the first Al Jazeera “Unplugged” forum on social media in Doha, Qatar in May 2010. At the forum, he praised Al Jazeera as a &#8220;mainstream network&#8221; and &#8220;factual&#8221; while attacking Fox News as a “very, very dangerous force in the United States.” For good measure, Rosenberg also charged that Al Jazeera &#8220;was bombed by orders of the United States government.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/joseph-klein/al-jazeera-joins-forces-with-media-matters-and-thinkprogress/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>David Brock: Media Matters Madman</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/david-brock-media-matters-madman-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=david-brock-media-matters-madman-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/david-brock-media-matters-madman-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 04:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soros]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=123394</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The broken mind behind the Soros smear machine.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/David-Brock-courtesy-forbes.com_.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-123397 alignleft" title="David Brock, a former conservative, is the founder of the liberal media watchdog group Media Matters for America." src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/David-Brock-courtesy-forbes.com_.jpg" alt="" width="434" height="304" /></a></p>
<p>David Brock is a member of an exclusive club of fake conservatives like Arianna Huffington who, when the winds turned blustery and the money looked better on the other side, crossed the Iron Curtain going the other way and headed to Moscow.</p>
<p>There is something to be said for the right, which has attracted its defectors from the best of the left. And there is something to be said for the left, which has attracted defectors from the worst of the right. While the right has gotten men like Irving Kristol and David Horowitz, the left has gotten a mentally unstable gay man and a woman who married a gay man for the money.</p>
<p>Since joining up with Team Soros, Brock has not engaged in journalism so much as become the head apparatchik of a propaganda corps, the officially unofficial smear corps for the left. Media Matters’ official mission is to correct misinformation. Its actual operation is to conduct character assassinations on behalf of the left. Its operating principle is a paranoid obsession with a vast right-wing conspiracy which justifies the creation of a vast left-wing conspiracy to counter it.</p>
<p>As <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Lies-Vast-Conspiracies-David-Horowitz/dp/1886442142">David Horowitz has pointed out in his pamphlet, “Sex Lies and Vast Conspiracies,”</a> on his entry to the ranks of the left, Brock’s new mentor was none other than Sidney Blumenthal, the originator of the “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” meme.</p>
<p>Media Matters operates by targeting prominent conservatives. The more prominent the public figure, the more attention Media Matters dedicates to the task of destroying him or her. To visit Media Matters is to enter a parallel universe where the world revolves around FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly. Like a black hole, Media Matters forms a completely negative space that contributes nothing to the national dialogue except a mouth breathing obsession with the conservative media it hates so much, yet cannot stay away from.</p>
<p>An organization is a reflection of its leader, and Media Matters is a reflection of <a href="http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=7186">David Brock</a>. Its paranoia, its dishonesty and its negative energy all emanate from its founder. <a href="../2012/02/15/media-matters-exposed/">A recent Daily Caller expose</a> paints a picture of an organization run by a man with delusions of grandeur who is operating under the belief that he might be assassinated at any moment. A man whose organization not only distributes the most outlandish conspiracy theories about conservatives imaginable, but whose leader actually appears to believe them.</p>
<p>Brock began his career as an attack dog and is ending it as an attack dog, but his attacks are not motivated by principles. Principles are positive things and the only thing that Brock has ever offered is the ability to defame and attack the principles of others. There is no light side to David Brock. Only the darkness of endless paranoia, the fear and hatred of others, which makes him a willing weapon in the arsenal of political vendettas.</p>
<p>It <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2039">was appropriate enough, then, that Media Matters</a> came into being as part of the apparatus of the Soros Shadow Party. As the Shadow Party obscures transparency and good government, so too Media Matters obscures the truth. That is indeed its only function. It traffics in conspiracy theories about the pernicious power of conservative media in order to justify its own abuses of power. It maintains the myth that it is the only thing standing in the way of conservative media dominance to justify the progressive dominance of the press.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/david-brock-media-matters-madman-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>66</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama’s Anti-Semitic Anchors</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/obama%e2%80%99s-anti-semitic-anchors/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama%25e2%2580%2599s-anti-semitic-anchors</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/obama%e2%80%99s-anti-semitic-anchors/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 04:46:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Center for American Progress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dershowitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=123273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Holding the president accountable for his bigoted idea factory.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obama33.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-123276" title="obama33" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/obama33.jpg" alt="" width="392" height="263" /></a></p>
<p>Jews occupy a peculiar position in the Democratic Party: The Jewish vote is part of the Democratic base, but at the same time the party does not represent Jewish interests, either at home or abroad, and of the last three Democratic presidents, two were nakedly hostile to the Jewish state. Now the second of them is running for reelection and is counting on the Jewish vote.</p>
<p>After November 6<sup>th</sup>, 2012, Barack Obama will either be a leader with absolute control over foreign policy and nothing to lose or the first Democratic incumbent since Carter to lose the White House. For Obama everything hinges on securing the next four years and that requires him to play up his pro-Israel credentials while trying to convince Jewish voters that the animosity and ugliness of his present term never happened.</p>
<p>But there are two things dragging him down: The Center for American Progress and Media Matters.</p>
<p>Jewish discomfort with the administration has been growing for some time now. While Obama’s growing loss of Jewish support cannot only be put down to Israel, the Jewish state has become shorthand for the administration’s attitude toward the Jewish community. Vocal condemnations by former New York mayor Ed Koch and now by prominent civil rights attorney Alan Dershowitz make it clear that even mainstream Democrats are aware of the problem and that it is not going away.</p>
<p>While Koch’s remarks have been fairly vague, Dershowitz has been much more direct about identifying and attacking the root of the problem. “Media Matters and Center for American Progress are two extremely left-bigoted groups that are so virulently anti-Israel and anti-supporters of Israel that they’ve gone over the line from anti-Zionism to anti-Semitism,” Dershowitz recently affirmed.</p>
<p>“These two organizations have been found to be anti-Semitic by many of the objective monitoring groups. And now they are closely associated with the Democratic Party and I have said very clearly there is no room in this tent for me on the one hand, and for Media Matters and for this other group on the other hand. We can’t be in the same tent. I will not be in a tent with fascists, with supporters of Ahmadinejad, with supporters of Hamas, with supporters of Hezbollah, with anti-Semitic bigots, whether they’re Jewish or not.”</p>
<p>Unlike Koch who did not set up a specific test that Obama needed to pass, Dershowitz has issued a clear call for accountability, and that creates a specific metric that cannot be avoided with vague promises and assurances. It offers Obama a choice between the radical left and the Jewish community.  But the radical left is no longer radical; it has become the establishment.</p>
<p>The Center for American Progress is not just another think tank; it is the brain, heart and soul of the administration. It is the interface between the proposals of the left and the policies coming out of Washington D.C. and it is also the interface between the policies of the White House and the media coverage of those policies and the opposition to them.</p>
<p>The Center represents the power of the left over the message, shaping the ideas that reach the White House and then shaping the ideas that leave the White House, blending the power of policymaking with the power of spin to form one of the most powerful arms of the shadow government set up by billionaire criminals like George Soros to control the American political process. But the power and radicalism of the Center is also becoming a liability.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/obama%e2%80%99s-anti-semitic-anchors/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media Matters Exposed</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jlaksin/media-matters-exposed/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=media-matters-exposed</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jlaksin/media-matters-exposed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:30:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david brock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=122497</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new report shows how the progressive propaganda machine pulls the strings of the left-wing media. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Picture-22.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-122509" title="Picture-22" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Picture-22.gif" alt="" width="375" height="250" /></a></p>
<p>Media Matters, the left-wing media watchdog, has had a rough time of late. Notwithstanding its mission of “comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media,” it is <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7150">Media Matters</a> that has come under withering media scrutiny.</p>
<p>The group&#8217;s troubles started in December when M.J. Rosenberg, a senior foreign policy fellow at Media Matters Action Network, a sister site, set off a <a href="http://www.foxnews.mobi/sr=1/dd=1/ms=1/jsrv=72/aamsz=banner_top/site=FOXNEWS/area=FN.POLITICS.EXECUTIVEBRANCH.CONTENT/quickPage.html?page=38321&amp;content=62536646&amp;pageNum=-1">media firestorm</a> by calling Israel’s supporters “Israel firsters.&#8221; Media Matters&#8217; use of the term, whose implication of loyalties to Israel first and America second echoes a classic anti-Semitic trope, was widely panned by the Jewish community and by newspapers like the <em>Washington Post</em>. The ensuing backlash cast a harsh light on Media Matters’ extremist politics, all the more so when neither Rosenberg nor Media Matters abandoned the slur.</p>
<p>Now Media Matters is once again in the crosshairs following a damning <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/#ixzz1mN91fjWg">exposé</a> by Tucker Carlson’s <em>Daily Caller.</em> One of the <em>Daily Caller</em>&#8216;s more notable revelations is the extent to which Media Matters has become successful in dictating the content of left-liberal media. As documented by the <em>Caller</em>, newspapers like the <em>Washington Post</em>, the <em>New York Times</em> and the <em>Los Angeles Times</em> all take their editorial cues from Media Matters&#8217; talking points.</p>
<p>Prominent columnists like the <em>Washington Post</em>’s E.J. Dionne have been among the most receptive to Media Matters spin. Indeed, as a follow-up investigation by<em> Front Page</em> shows, it is remarkably easy to trace a direct line from Media Matters to Dionne. In March 2007, Media Matters&#8217; Eric Boehlert charged that Republicans and Fox News were waging “<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/201103170032">a smear campaign against NPR</a>.” Dionne clearly got the message, because just a few months later he was reprising the charge of a Fox News “smear campaign against NPR” during an <a href="http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201010240003">appearance</a> on NBC’s <em>Meet the Press </em>and denouncing Fox as a “Republican propaganda network.” The latter attack echoed Media Matters founder David Brock’s charge that Fox was part of a “Republican noise machine.” If nothing else, Dionne&#8217;s faithful recitation of the Media Matters line on Fox shows that the left-wing pundits most willing to ascribe a political agenda to the network are themselves being directed by partisan interests.</p>
<p>Even as it was denouncing Fox as Republican propaganda, Media Matters was putting its own propaganda on the air via left-wing networks like MSNBC. So minimal was the fact-checking and editorial supervision at MSNBC, apparently, that a Media Matters source boasted to the <em>Daily Caller</em>, “We were pretty much writing their prime time.” Left-wing bloggers were even more willing to serve as mouthpieces for Media Matters, most notably <em>Washington Post</em> blogger Greg Sargent. Embarrassingly for Sargent, Media Matters sources describe him as being so eager to rehash their editorials that the organization considered him a reliable dump for its content. As one source boasted to the<em> Daily Caller</em>, “If you can’t get it anywhere else, Greg Sargent’s always game.”</p>
<p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/jlaksin/media-matters-exposed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Left’s Politics of Paranoia</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/the-left%e2%80%99s-politics-of-paranoia/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-left%25e2%2580%2599s-politics-of-paranoia</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/the-left%e2%80%99s-politics-of-paranoia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 04:01:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rich Trzupek]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Coughlin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eric boehlert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evan Thomas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eve Conant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[honest description]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Huey Long]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[latter term]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Louisiana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Messr. Boehlert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[murdoch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national platform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newsweek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[partiers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remarkable revelation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rupert Murdoch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sacco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steno pool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tea]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thomas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[timothy mcveigh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=58724</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The liberal media and its allies see right-wing extremists everywhere. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/right-wing-extremist.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-58730" title="right-wing-extremist" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/right-wing-extremist-300x219.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="219" /></a></p>
<p>The following <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004140070">remarkable revelation</a> hit the internet on April 14, courtesy of Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert. It succinctly sums up not only the world view of George Soros’ steno pool, but of much of the rest of the left. Says Boehlert:</p>
<blockquote><p>“Fact: Without Fox News and the national platform it gives the haters, there essentially would be no &#8216;anti-government&#8217; movement in this country today.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Fact? Admittedly, I am not blessed with a degree in journalism like Boehlert, but that statement sounds more like something we used to call <em>an</em> <em>opinion</em>. Boehlert and his fellow fellows look at <a href="http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/cable-news">Fox’s ratings</a> and conclude that they must be – just have to be – leading the gullible, unwashed masses who are otherwise incapable of original thought or of getting information anywhere else but via the Murdoch empire. That’s obviously where all this “antigovernment” stuff comes from. Now, we used to have another word for “anti-government” called “anarchism,” but using the latter term would make the writer sound ridiculously inflammatory, so naturally the left avoids associating the right with either Sacco or Vanzetti. The more honest description of the mind-set that drives conservatives and libertarians to protest the policies of the Obama administration would be “limited government,” or “small government,” but those terms sound entirely too reasonable for the left to utilize.</p>
<p>If you’re paranoid and delusional, you naturally to see the rest of the world in those terms. After initially trying to dismiss <a href="http://taxdayteaparty.com/">the tea party movement</a> as an unimportant, small collection of extremists, the left finally woke up to the fact that tea partiers are going to flex a lot of electoral muscle in November 2010. At that point, full-scale paranoia kicked in. The left grudgingly acknowledged the importance and size of the tea party movement, an admission that occurred seemingly overnight, but then, in their world, it naturally followed that the tea partiers’ message had to be far more sinister than they could have ever imagined. The left’s paranoid response to realizing that the tea party movement was something more than an unimportant, isolated fad was predictable: the left decided that the tea partiers were even more paranoid than they are. To them, the tea party movement just has to be about racism, fascism and violent revolution.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/236202/output/print">An April 9 article in Newsweek</a> entitled “Hate, antigovernment extremists are on the rise—and on the march” penned by Evan Thomas and Eve Conant was about as paranoid as any liberal could want. Thomas and Conant paint a frightening picture of simmering right-wing hate, ready to explode in bloody, righteous outrage. They go to great, if dubious, lengths to link today’s disgust with the Obama administration’s neo-socialist policies to extremists like Timothy McVeigh and Father Charles Coughlin. The lesson, according to Thomas and Conant, is clear: America is teetering on the edge of falling into the abyss once more. Here’s a taste:</p>
<p>“Economic distress and social change make for fear, and fear makes for anger, now and always. Night riders terrorized the defenseless after the Civil War. During the Great Depression, two demagogues in particular whipped up conspiracy theories against Jewish bankers and the rich elites to arouse angry mass movements. Huey Long, governor of Louisiana, later a U.S. senator who wanted to soak the rich, and Father Charles Coughlin, an anti-Semitic Catholic priest whose radio show reached 40 million people, seemed a political threat to FDR, until Long was assassinated and Coughlin became increasingly unhinged.”</p>
<p>Of course <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_Long">Long was a Democrat and a populist</a> who pushed the kind of “progressive” policies that would do the Obama administration proud. “Soak the rich” doesn’t cover the half of it. Coughlin may have “reached 40 million people,” but the fact that America united to fight a war that was, in large part, dedicated to defeating the most murderous anti-Semite in history suggests that he was not so nearly as influential as Thomas and Conant imply. But hey, why let a few relevant historical facts get in the way of the narrative?</p>
<p>Still, one would think that an article like that would quickly receive a hearty stamp of approval over at Media Matters. No such luck. While Boehlert expressed grudging gratitude with regard to Newsweek’s  paranoid delusions, he still had a problem: Newsweek just wasn’t paranoid enough:</p>
<blockquote><p>“The bad news? The phrase &#8216;Fox News&#8217; does not appear until the <em>last paragraph</em> of the <em>Newsweek </em>piece.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Of course. According to Media Matters, all attacks on the right are welcome, so long as such attacks are prefaced with the disclaimer: “the following outrages have been perpetrated at the behest of Rupert Murdoch.” For Eric Boehlert and his fellow “senior fellows,” and presumably Media Matters’ “junior fellows” along with their “deputy assistant fellows in training,” nobody would “essentially” be upset by an administration that rammed a health care bill down our throats, spent hundreds of billions of dollars to prop up failing businesses and thumbed its nose at our most important ally in the middle east, but for the nefarious influence of Fox News. We’re in the midst of the Age of Communication, but all of these issues would have somehow escaped our attention, were it not for Murdoch’s minions. What a bunch of dolts we are!</p>
<p>While Fox is a network powerhouse, there are millions of conservatives (me among them) who don’t watch Fox on anything approaching a regular basis. For the most part, I appreciate what Fox does, but <a href="../2010/04/06/smearing-ralph-peters/">I’ve also been critical of Murdoch’s network too</a>. Still, whatever Fox says or does not say, it really doesn’t matter. There are plenty of other sources of information and the American people are savvy enough to know when salient questions aren’t being answered. That’s why we have <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index">Free Republic</a>, <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/">Andrew Breitbart</a>, <a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/">Matt Drudge</a> and, to put a point on it, <a href="../2010/04/06/smearing-ralph-peters/">David Horowitz</a>. People are curious and hungry to learn more. If the mainstream media won’t answer their questions, they’ll find other outlets that will. Fox isn’t directing a conspiracy, they’re filling a vacuum.</p>
<p>The left seems entirely incapable of digesting that possibility. The tea-party movement and all of the other forms of protest against this administration, have been motivated by – more than anything else – the policies of the administration itself. It’s about assuming crippling debt, the tax-hikes any intelligent observer knows are sure to come and the creeping intrusion of more and more government bureaucracies controlling our lives. People don’t need Fox News, or any other media outlet, to understand that. All they have to do is to pay attention to what the Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their supporters have been doing and saying.  <strong> </strong></p>
<p><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/the-left%e2%80%99s-politics-of-paranoia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Smearing Ralph Peters</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/smearing-ralph-peters/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=smearing-ralph-peters</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/smearing-ralph-peters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rich Trzupek]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citizenship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Col]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Soros]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Griffin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal immigrants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Correctness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ralph peters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real american hero]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steno pool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terror]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terry Krepel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ulysses S. Grant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[W.E.B. Griffin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[way]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William T. Sherman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[worthy adversary]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=57354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oppose citizenship for illegals and incur the Left’s wrath.
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/ralph-peters.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-57355" title="ralph-peters" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/ralph-peters.jpg" alt="" width="435" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>If you want to gauge how important an issue is to the Left, the best indicator is to observe how it reacts when the issue is raised. Last Friday, Ralph Peters (Lt. Col., USA, retired) penned a <a href="../2010/04/02/obama%E2%80%99s-greatest-crime-2/">column for Front Page</a> in which he opined that extending voting rights to eleven million illegal immigrants currently residing in this country would be a disaster for America. In response, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/terry-krepel">Terry Krepel</a>,  a member of George Soros’ steno pool Media Matters, penned <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004020046">an outraged response</a> slamming Peters for raising such a ridiculous, inflammatory issue. How dare he!</p>
<p>Ralph Peters doesn’t actually need anyone coming to his defense. He’s a real American hero who spent ten years in military intelligence defending this nation in ways that journalists like Terry Krepel could not imagine. Legendary novelist W.E.B. Griffin has singled Peters out as one of the “new breed” protecting our nation, who – in Griffin’s words – wrote the best analysis of our war on terror that Griffin has ever read. But, whatever Griffin, me or anyone else thinks of Ralph Peters’ service record doesn’t matter much to the Left. They’re not going to treat him as a worthy adversary with whom they might disagree. They’re going to fight back using any means at their disposal, employing the very tactics that they accuse conservatives and libertarians of using: invective, distortion and hyperbole.</p>
<p>To that end, Media Matters tries to make the case that Peters is a racist, extremist, blood-thirsty lunatic. Indeed, Media Matters dedicates <a href="http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/ralph_peters">a fair chunk of space</a> chronicling what Peters has said and written. Peters has been an unapologetic advocate of taking and keeping America’s gloves off while fighting the war on terror. There’s good reason for his position: Peters believes that the war on terror can actually be won, if the West has the courage to pursue victory fearlessly, absent the self-imposed hobbles of political correctness, handicaps that do not constrain our enemies.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the Left believes that America can never defeat the terrorists because, to them, terrorism is the logical, inevitable reaction to American arrogance, imperialism and greed. Unless we reform our ways, the “disadvantaged” classes in the world, who have a legitimate gripe in their view (although, they will admit, a rather poor way of expressing their opinion) will continue to blow innocent people up in suicidal fireballs of righteous indignation. In contrast, Peters views the war on terror in much the same way that Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman viewed the War Between the States: as a conflict that ought to be pursued ruthlessly, because doing so will end a brutal war more quickly and once it is over – to paraphrase Grant’s hopeful, century-old words – the reasonable majorities on both sides could then return to the happy task of becoming friends again.</p>
<p>Supporting or attacking Peters’ stance on the best way to fight the war on terror isn’t germane if we are to consider the validity of his views when it comes to immigration policy. However, criticizing Peters’ stance on the war on terror is useful if somebody wants to marginalize any of his other opinions. The gist of Krepel’s riposte, such as it was, involved constructing a straw man of massive proportions so that the flames generated when he burnt it down would illuminate the supposed folly of Peters’ position on immigration beyond any reasonable doubt. Krepel believes – and if you read Peters’ piece, you’ll have as hard a time reaching this conclusion as I did – that Peters’ thinks illegal aliens are going to be given the right to vote without becoming citizens. In Krepel’s words:</p>
<blockquote><p>“Nobody, let alone Obama, is proposing to allow undocumented immigrants to vote. Peters barely attempts to make the argument that creating a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, who would then be allowed to vote, is a bad thing. But Peters is on a roll: <em>No voting rights for illegals! Mob rule! </em>Never mind that President Reagan&#8217;s granting amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants didn&#8217;t exactly result in ‘mob rule.’”</p></blockquote>
<p>Of course Reagan’s “amnesty” didn’t grant citizenship to illegal undocumented alien immigrants. What the Gipper actually did was to grant some illegal aliens “<a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1065553/posts">temporary resident status</a>,” which did not include citizenship and the right to vote. That’s quite a bit different that president Obama’s plans. As part of his immigration plan, <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/288/provide-a-path-to-citizenship-for-undocumented-imm/">the president said</a> that he would support “…a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.&#8221;</p>
<p>Peters didn’t argue that Obama was going to pass out voter registration cards to illegals. Any discerning, intelligent reader understood that Peters’ concern is about making illegals citizens – as the president has suggested we do – and therefore granting them votes. I’m not sure why those particular dots needs connecting, but apparently they do, at least at Media Matters.</p>
<p>The only part of Peters’ column that I would disagree with is when he discussed the possibility of mob rule in the future. It rather looks like we’re already there. Ramming health care through a reluctant Congress and past a disgusted populace required the kind of arm-twisting, bullying and mind-numbing populist propaganda that are the hallmarks of mob rule. It’s not the sort of mob rule that features vigilantes toting torches, throwing stones and shouting threats, but is instead a genteel mob rule of the political sort. Bullies are bullies, whether they’re riding on horseback carrying a noose they hope to fill with a deserving neck, or whether they’re strolling down the streets of Washington clutching a gavel that appears to have come from the Paul Bunyan collection of legislative essentials.</p>
<p>Immigration reform may be stalled for the time being, but only a fool would think that it’s been forgotten by the administration. The payoff is just too tempting. If even a few million illegal immigrants get citizenship, that’s a few million new voters who are – for the most part – poor, not very well educated and are therefore badly in need of government goodies. Might they therefore be expected to vote for Democrats &#8212; the party of big government &#8212; in overwhelming numbers? They’d be foolish to do anything else. That’s an end game worth the fight. Ralph Peters understands that and, based on the vehemence of their reaction when somebody raises the possibility, so does the Left.</p>
<p><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /> <input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" /> <input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/rich-trzupek/smearing-ralph-peters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Soundbite (on Howard Zinn) Heard Round the World</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/david-horowitz/a-soundbite-on-howard-zinn-heard-round-the-world-3/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-soundbite-on-howard-zinn-heard-round-the-world-3</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/david-horowitz/a-soundbite-on-howard-zinn-heard-round-the-world-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Horowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[airtime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appearance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attack dogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brooklyn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claptrap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[College]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Communist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Horowitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eric Alterman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expertise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harassment campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Howard Zinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[julian bond]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kennedys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leftists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marxoid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mass murderers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Matters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Noam Chomsky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NPR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Collier]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public intellectual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qualification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Radical Son]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[request]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ronald Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[show]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[someone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soundbite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trouble]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfogged]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[witch hunters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=50079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One critical voice unleashes the Left's totalitarian attack dogs. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alterman-300x2251.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-50080" title="alterman-300x225" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/alterman-300x2251.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="338" /></a></p>
<p>I knew when I responded to an NPR request for a comment on the late, unlamented <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=939" target="_blank">Howard Zinn</a> that I was asking for trouble — from the anti-American, Marxoid, neo-Communist left.  But I did it anyway because Howard Zinn’s life was so <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=939" target="_blank">dedicated to evil and specifically to the support of mass murderers and self-declared enemies of his country</a>, that someone with a brain unfogged by leftwing claptrap had to do it. As it turned out, if I had not contributed my soundbite it would have been left to <a title="Noam Chomsky" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232" target="_blank">depraved</a> <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=642" target="_blank">radicals</a> — in this case <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232" target="_blank">Noam Chomsky</a> and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=642" target="_blank">Julian Bond</a> — to promote Zinn’s malevolent work to an NPR audience of millions. I was somewhat surprised that the leftists at NPR turned to me since I have been effectively erased as a public intellectual from their airwaves along with a legion of other non-progressives.</p>
<p>Only one of my books, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Son-Generational-David-Horowitz/dp/0684840057/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1265996107&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank"><em>Radical Son</em></a>, has ever enjoyed five minutes of airtime attention on NPR. Oh — there is an exception. Before I voted for Ronald Reagan — or made the vote public — I was indeed a guest on “Fresh Air” to talk about <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Kennedys-American-Drama-Peter-Collier/dp/0671447939/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1265996150&amp;sr=8-11" target="_blank"><em>The Kennedys</em></a>, which I co-authored with Peter Collier. Although it is a book show and I have written more than a dozen well-received books since, the show has studiously avoided recognizing my existence; that is, for 25 years.</p>
<p>So this 30-second appearance was a rarity and came as a surprise to me. But evidently one 30-second appearance is too much for the totalitarians of the progressive left who have predictably launched an organized harassment campaign against the reporter who interviewed me and her boss. The <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002040038" target="_blank">smear crowds</a> at <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150" target="_blank">Media Matters</a> and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7092" target="_blank">FAIR</a> have been hard at work ginning up the Pavlovian attack dogs to make the lives of NPR employees as miserable as they can.  These witch-hunts by the way are intimidating and effective. We’ll see how soon before NPR asks my opinion again.</p>
<p>Among the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualprofile.asp?indid=1312" target="_blank">witch-hunters</a>, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualprofile.asp?indid=1312" target="_blank">Eric Alterman</a>, as usual, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100301/alterman">provides the most amusement</a>, complaining that I was not “qualified” to make a comment on Zinn:</p>
<blockquote><p>“Horowitz, on the other hand, does not claim to have known Zinn personally, and shares neither his goals nor views. He has no specialized knowledge of Zinn whatsoever. The single qualification that David Horowitz possessed to be included in the piece on Zinn’s obituary was that he could be depended upon to be deeply critical of the deceased.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Actually, I am eminently qualified to comment on Zinn, having written a portrait of him and his writings in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/0895260263/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1265996375&amp;sr=8-2" target="_blank"><em>Unholy Alliance</em></a>, and having devoted hundreds of thousands of words to my area of expertise, which is the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catid=115&amp;type=issue" target="_blank">Communist</a> and neo-Communist left. Alterman, on the other hand, is himself something of an impostor, having secured a sinecure as the “Distinguished Professor of English at Brooklyn College.” If there was to be a single testimony to <a title="One-Party Classroom" href="http://www.amazon.com/One-Party-Classroom-Professors-Indoctrinate-Undermine/dp/0307452557/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1265997816&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank">the debasement of the American university by tenured leftists</a> this could be a candidate, since Alterman has no discernible literary interest, let alone expertise, that would qualify him for such a position. (<a href="http://www.ericalterman.com/" target="_blank">Alterman’s degrees</a> are in government, history, and international relations.) In fact, since <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Shakespeare-existential-view-David-Horowitz/dp/B00005XVOO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1265996488&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank">I have written a book about Shakespeare</a> I am more prepared to teach English than he is. However, I lack the principal qualification for a post in the English Department at Brooklyn College, since I am not a brain-dead, anti-American leftist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/david-horowitz/a-soundbite-on-howard-zinn-heard-round-the-world-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>70</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1554/1769 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 12:02:01 by W3 Total Cache -->