I have been warning for years that the media are the enemy, that the mass of so-called journalists are nothing but leftwing activists who despise the truth as much as they despise the man in the street. The American election confirms this claim and much, much more. The sheer scale of the media's now open political bigotry, its outrageous lying and its smear-mongering tactics have opened the eyes of millions. Not so long ago these ideologically driven hacks would have escaped serious scrutiny. Today, the existence of the alternative media are holding them accountable for their bigotry and mendacity. Without the new media Obama would have been leading by 20 per cent or more instead of a mere 2 per cent.
|
Elliott: an ideologically
motivated liar |
It's not just the American media that is politically corrupt, the world-wide media is every bit as ideologically rancid, and that includes the great mass of Australian journalists. For example, Geoff Elliott* is the Washington correspondent for The Australian, a Rupert Murdoch paper. Elliot has proved himself to be as bigoted, politically corrupt, dishonest and as contemptible as any journalist on the New York Times. This liar is so politically crooked he cannot even lie straight in bed.
I'll begin my little exposé with the Democrats' claims before the mid-terms elections that thanks to the Republican majority a "culture of corruption in Washington" had emerged. Anyone with a reasonable knowledge of the crooked nature of the Democrats would have thought their claim a little more than just rich. But the electorate has little time to study that cesspit called the Democratic Party and so it swallowed the media lie that the GOP had corrupted Washington DC.
I wondered which Australian journalist would be the first one to fall in line behind the Democrats on this issue. And sure enough it was Geoff Elliott who rushed into print with the breathtaking claim — you guessed it — that there existed a "culture of corruption in Washington". (Bush's mid-term meltdown, 14 October 2006). Elliott knew the Republicans were the most corrupt party in America because he couldn't find any evidence of corruption — apart from some peccadilloes — among Democrats even though they were looting Fannie Mae. (Perhaps Elliott thought Fannie Mae was a Mahoney bimbo).
But not only are Republicans corrupt they are also intolerant. Unlike the Democrats' big-tent approach where only peace, tolerance, love and compassion rule the Republicans are a bunch of hate-mongers. As evidence he produced Christopher Buckley who said he was forced to leave the National Review — a conservative magazine his father founded — when hate-filled conservative "swamped" it "with hate mail" because he supported Obama. Oddly enough neither Buckley nor Elliott provided a single shred of evidence to support their allegation. (Obama flap — Buckley quits National Review 15 October 2008). Irrespective of Elliott's nasty insinutions the magazine did not ask Buckley to leave nor did it force him out. It seems Buckley Jr likes to play the martyr.
Naturally the intrepid and ever-so honest Mr Elliott could not find a single hateful message from a Democrat — but only because this cheap propagandist didn't bother to look, especially in the direction of Stanley Kurtz, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a frequent a contributor to National Review. He wrote a detailed article on Obama's career as a leftwing Chicago activist and his political links, including those to Ayers, and corruption.
Kurtz attempts to review a document involving Obama and Ayers was blocked. He was invited on to Milt Rosenberg’s radio program to explain what had happened. Not only did the Obama campaign refuse an invitation to go on the show and refute Kurtz' accusations it sent out an "Obama Action Wire" asking supporters to disrupt Kurtz’s appearance and demand that it be terminated. These thugs also libelled Kurtz as a "smear-merchant" and a "slimy character assassin". While this outrageous campaign of intimidation went on neither the fearless Elliott nor the sanctimonious Chris Buckley uttered a word of protest. After all, we all know that the evil Republicans are the real enemy. Ain't that right, Geoff?
Poor old Elliott is probably a little tired carrying Obama's baggage while licking his boots at the same time, so let us try and do his job for him. We'll start with the case of Mr James T. Harris, a black radio host from Milwaukee. He attended a town hall rally with Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. He stood up saying, "I am begging you, sir. I am begging you. Take it to him [Obama]." If that were not bad enough he and McCain then hugged each other. The next day Mr Harris was overwhelmed by a tidal wave of hate-filled emails, some of it pretty disgusting. Now Elliott knows that there are numerous cases of black republicans being assailed with a torrent of racist taunts and foul smears from Democrats and yet he has never reported a single incident. To do so would expose the Democrats' carefully constructed narrative of tolerance and understanding as being utter humbug, much like Elliott himself.
Lying activists like Elliott are always at the ready to play the race card, and last September he got his chance. He reported with feigned sorrow that there had been "news of sickening racist taunts aimed" at Obama George Fox University. (Elliott Barack Obama ahead despite racist scares, 26 September 2008). We now know that the culprits were four students who were annoyed at race-based preferences. What they did was clearly stupid but was not racially motivated. That's probably why the race-baiting Elliott dropped the issue. It would also explain why he refused to report on the "sickening racist taunts aimed" at Senator McCain.
 |
McCain depicted as a Klansman
with a bat chasing Obama |
A tolerant and understanding Democrat by the name of Havens set up in his front yard a mannequin with McCain's face. It was dressed in a Klansman's gown, was fitted with a baseball bat and made to look as if it was chasing the figure in front, which was a mannequin dressed to look like Obama. The message was clear: McCain is another racist Republican. (What the leftwing media never tell people is that the KKK was set up and run by the Democrats to terrorise their opponents). The vicious Mr Havens is just one among a great many Democrats who are motivated by hate and malice. (Is this why Elliott finds them so attractive?) Then there were the Haven clones led by the bigoted NAACP who nearly created a riot because a business man had put up "Country First. McCain/Palin" message on the marquee at his Colony South Hotel & Conference Center.
But what should we expect from the mindless Havens when it was Obama who played the race card. Several weeks ago this icon of post-racial tolerance accused President Bush and John McCain of planning a race-based assault on his character, even though he was unable to produce a single instance of Bush or McCain using race in their campaign. But Obama needn't worry. He has the slimy likes of Elliott writing inventive pieces about the election's racist undertones. And this phony journalist has the cheek to accuse President Bush of polarising the country. (The rock star politician kicking goals 7 January 2006).
Joe Wurzelbacher is another victim of the Democrat-media hate machine. Obama inadvertently let it slip to "Joe the Plumber" (Mr. Joe Wurzelbacher) that he intended to tax him so that he could "spread the wealth". Since then Joe has been the target of a vicious smear-monger campaign. The same journalists who refused to investigate Obama's intimate ties to Ayers, Dohrn, Wright, Tony Rezko, etc., descended en mass on Joe the Plumber, even going as far to sift through his tax records. While this witch-hunt was going on — and still is — the Obamas were dining at the Waldorf-Astoria with their super rich pals scoffing lobster hors d'oeuvres and caviar washed down with the best champagne. The contrast could not be more striking. (Chris Buckley and Geoff Elliott were not available for comment).
 |
| The Democrats Palin-haters |
Just to make sure Australians learn how vicious Republicans really are David Nason, The Australian's New York correspondent and another political bigot, reported how "McCain was forced to rebuke some of his own supporters for making anti-Obama remarks at campaign rallies". Not racist comments, mind you. If they were racist Nason would have been all over them. ('Hate' claim fires up McCain 13 October 2008). Just how reliable are these reports? David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune reported that during a Sarah Palin rally in Scranton he heard supporters scream "kill him", meaning Obama. The FBI, in a very polite way, called the Singleton a liar. (He and Elliott ought to cooperate, if they are not already doing so).
The possibility that those nasty Republicans might actually be nasty Democrats is not something the highly ethical Elliott and the equally ethical Nason would ever dream of asking themselves. Yet proof that an Obama donor deliberately provoked people at a Palin rally into attacking Obama while he had them videoed has now been released. The sleazy culprit is Tim Russo. He also admitted that he was arrested by the FBI for trying to procure a 13-year-old boy who turned out to be a federal agent.
(What is it about perverts and the Democrats, not to mention so-called journalists. As a teenager Obama's grandfather put him under the care of Frank Davis, a Communist Party ideologue living in Hawaii, even though Davis was an admitted child molester. Never mind, though, he was still a good Marxist and that is all that really mattered to Obama's progressive grandfather. The left really do inhabit a sick world, kiddies).
Last month a small contingent of McCain supporters carrying signs marched through Manhattan where they were met with a hail of vile abuse by those loving and ever-so tolerant Democrats. By a strange concatenation of circumstances the media overlooked this incident, even though the video was on YouTube. Needless to say, Elliott couldn't find it. Maybe he was having another tongue transplant at the time.
Then there was the Republican-hating artist who published a picture of a man's fist knocking a tooth out of the Alaska governor's mouth and the glasses off her face. Now the Seattle streets have been vandalised by a mass of very unpleasant anti-Palin graffiti, and "Abort Sarah Palin" bumper stickers are spreading in Web stores. A Madonna video equating McCain with Hitler has been released while the Castro-loving Oliver Stone has released his hit piece on President Bush. The talentless Sandra Bernhard felt impelled to join the lynch mob by saying that if Palin visited New York she would be “gang raped” by blacks. This vile piece of work also slandered Cindy McCain as a "Barbie doll hooker". And these are the people the mephitic Elliott protects.
And how did the noble Democratic Party responded to this flood of pure hate? Rep. John Lewis (D. Georgia) publicly accused McCain and Palin of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division". Naturally the lying two-faced John Kerry came roaring in to denounce the non-existent "ugliness at the campaign rallies of John McCain and Sarah Palin." (It's possible, however, that he was at a Democratic rally and didn't realise it).
And where were Elliott and Nason while this Nazi-like assault against Republicans was going on? Probably trying to rewrite the talking points the Obama campaign sends them. This is no exaggeration. Kit Seelye of the New York Times accidently let it slip that they were using talking points that the Obama campaign distribute to their media mates.
I know some readers might start thinking that I've been too hard on poor old Elliott. After all, he is not too bright — and neither is Nason. (And that is the truth). However, being dense does not excuse culpable behaviour. He quoted in full Obama's accusation that for 26 years McCain has been part of "the old boys network". (Top three issues for race: economy, economy, economy 18 September 2008).
What the politically deceitful Elliott didn't report is that during those 26 years McCain fought steadily against irresponsible spending and pork. Obama on the other hand is proposing more and more of the big spending programs that the Democrats have been trying to impose on the country for the last 45 years. Moreover, he voted the party line virtually 100 per cent. Yet Elliott has the bloody gall to call Obama a harbinger of 'change'. The only kind of change you'll get from Obama is his underwear. He is still the same nasty little ideologue he has always been.
You might think I'm joking about the Obama press releases. As soon as the Ayers scandal hit the fan Obama's goons made accusations of "guilt by association" and then smeared McCain as being corrupt. Elliott immediately ran with the Obama line, charging McCain with using "guilt by association" tactics and then insinuated that McCain had been bribed in the Keating scandal. (Democrats in guilt-by-association counterpunch, 7 October 2008).
What Elliott left out is that McCain had been completely exonerated. In fact, the lawyer for the Senate Ethics Committee wanted McCain removed from the investigation because he was an innocent party. The slimy Democrats on the panel refused to release him because they wanted to tar him as corrupt Republican. Elliott knows this and that makes him a vicious smear mongering liar.
What hasn't been investigated are Obama's intimate links to Ayers, an unrepentant terrorist. Once again Elliott lied to protect Obama. Elliott defends Obama's relationship with Ayers by asserting that it was just a "lack of judgement" and that McCain is only trying to pull Obama down. (Catch-up eludes McCain, 11 October 2008). As usual, Elliott is lying. William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn are a pair of psychopathic thugs. They participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. In September 2001, the New York Times quoted him as saying: "I don’t regret setting bombs . . . I feel we didn't do enough".
An excellent source on Ayers and Dorhn's murderous actions is John Murtagh, a lawyer and Yonkers' city councilman who is running for the New York state Senate on the Republican ticket. Mr Murtagh was only 9 years old when this pair of psychos tried to murder him and his parents by bombing their house. The pavement outside the house were sprayed in red paint: "FREE THE PANTHER 21; THE VIET CONG HAVE WON; KILL THE PIGS."
Young Murtagh's crime is that his father was the judge presiding over the trial of the Black Panthers, another bunch of political gangsters that Ayers supported. In November 1970 Bernadine Dohrn — Ayers' wife — took credit for their courageous actions by bragging that they were the bombers. This is the same Dorhn who said on hearing of the sadistic way Sharon Tate was murdered :
Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!
In 1970 San Francisco police sergeant Brian McDonnell was murdered by a pipe bomb. Larry Grathwohl, an FBI informant who had successfully penetrated the Ayers-Dorhn terrorists group, testified to a US Senate subcommittee that Ayers' had bragged to him that the lovely Dorhn was the one who had murdered McDonnell. And this pair of narcissistic psychopaths are just as evil as ever. In 1995 Ayers said:
I am a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist ... [Laughs] Maybe I'm the last communist who is willing to admit it. ... The ethics of Communism still appeal to me. I don't like Lenin as much as the early Marx.
Communism killed more than 100 million people — and is still killing people — and this fanatic wants more. (The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, Harvard University Press,1999). No wonder he supports the vicious Hanoi regime, Castro's socialist fiefdom where the population has been reduced to serfdom, and Chavez's attempt to turn Venezuela into a South American Gulag.
These are the people that Obama actively sought out and then closely cooperated with. It was in 1995 that Ayers held a fund raiser in his home for Obama, an event Obama is now denying actually happened even though it has now been proved that Obama, Dorhn and Ayers planned the fundraiser together. Obama also helped to corruptly funnel tens of millions of dollars to Ayers and his fellow America-hating pals through the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The cash was to be used to indoctrinate children with leftwing hatred of America and the glories of socialism.
Having been closely linked to Ayers and Dorhn for years Obama now claims he never new this infamous pair were unrepentant terrorists. Surprisingly Obama's lying was too much even for some at CNN who reported that Obama is a liar. Obama's other claim that he served only briefly on a board with Ayers was thoroughly discredited on Fox.
Max Noel is a retired FBI agent who worked on the Ayers-Dorhn terrorist case. He made his feeling very clear when he said, "It outrages me to think that a person would be seeking the presidency of the United States and was close to an individual like Bill Ayers". The mainstream media saw fit to ignore Mr Noel.
Obama is a shameless liar, a man who on every Sunday for 20 years listened to hate-filled anti-American and anti-Semitic rantings from a ferocious bigot and then calmly claimed that he had no idea what the man was saying. Obama was mentored by vicious leftists and he built his career on their associations and support.
So why do the great majority of journalists cover for Obama? Because they agree with him. It really is that simple. These are political activists masquerading as journalists. They have a deep hatred of "conservatism" and free market thought, and they have focused this hatred on the person of President Bush. Their brazen dissembling, outrageous lying and tortured excuses have at least made a great many people acutely aware of how thoroughly corrupt the great majority of journalists are. Let us turn to Walter Pinsky who in 1976 wrote in the Columbia Journalism Review:
If my research and journalistic instincts tell me one thing, my political instincts another...I won't fudge it, I won't bend it, but I won't write it.
In short, if the facts conflict with my left-wing ideology I'll censor them. And to Pinsky's warped leftist thinking this is honest journalism. But a moment's thought would reveal that this approach is not only corrupt it leads — as we now see — to even more corruption.
One of the great things about growing old — apart from delaying the alternative — is the body of knowledge and experiences that one has accumulated and can readily draw on. This collective 'memory' plays a vital role in putting current events within a historical framework. Strange as it might seem to some, growing old also can give one a long term perspective. The world doesn't stop when one dies.
Over the years I have met a tremendous range of people, some highly talented, some not talented at all and perfectly happy to have it that way. There has been the driven, the idealistic, the cynical, the treacherous, the mean-spirited and the incredibly generous. In fact the whole gamut of virtues and vices. And this, as you probably expected, brings me to journalism. I have met a number of journalists in my time and without a doubt it was the ideologically committed ones, the ones with all the smug assurance of the maleducated, that were the most repulsive
It seems to me indisputable that this sleazy species with its low-life politics dominates the mainstream media to the extent that what is called journalism today now makes prostitution look respectable. Reading the likes of Elliott, Nason, Adams, Ecclestone, Thomas Frank, etc., leads to ineluctable conclusion that the fundamental difference between prostitutes and our ideologically motivated propagandists who present themselves as the guardians of the "public's right to know" is that prostitutes are honest about what they do. This in itself puts them on a moral rung far above these mendacious hacks.
What little honest journalism remains consists of nothing more than isolated outposts besieged on all sides by leftwing barbarians.
*The Australian has provided Elliott with a phony blog that is nothing more than an outlet for Republican-hating leftists political bigotry Elliott feeds. A contact in News Corp tells me that the commentary is heavily edited in favour of leftwing hate pieces that largely parrot the lying garbage that Elliott has written.
When it was announced that Obama had won the Democrats' nomination for the presidency, McCain graciously responded with the following statement:
Senator Obama, this is truly a good day for America. You know, too often, the achievements of our opponents go unnoticed. So I wanted to stop and say, congratulations. How perfect that your nomination would come on this historic day. Tomorrow, we’ll be back at it. But tonight, Senator: a job well done. I’m John McCain and I approved this message.
The Obama campaign responded with ridicule, lies, smears, hate and intimidation. McCain showed what you Americans call class. Obama revealed the political thug he has always been.
Journalist smears President Bush over Mary McCarthy’s treason
Murdoch journalists smear President Bush over NSA spying program
A Rupert Murdoch journalist smears President Bush’s America
How a Murdoch reporter swallowed communist Vietnamese anti-American agitprop
Gerard Jackson is Brookesnews' economics editor
Subscribe to BrookesNews Bulletin
