Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Perez Trumps She-who-will-not-be-mentioned

Poor She-who-will-not-be-mentioned. She was supposed to be on the Today show this morning to promote her new bag of lies and insults....Book! I mean book. But according to the losers own website: "Today show and Today show fourth hour: cancelled!"
"I guess this ends the 'they just want to get ratings' argument about liberal media bias," She-who-will-not-be-mentioned also wrote.
Here's the deal, She-who-will-not-be-mentioned. There is no such thing as a liberal media, unless you want to admit there's a rightwing media, and you don't think that's so. Most of the media dislike you because you're a hypocrite and a liar, who tosses verbal firebombs into the air just to watch the reaction. You're an instigator, Annie., You have nothing of interest to say that isn't couched with insults and innuendo, and outright lies.
Apparently MediaMatters has taken her book, Guilty, apart, lie by lie, and even printed an article asking NBC if they're going to help promote Annie's new work of fiction.
Well, She-who-will-not-be-mentioned, it looks like NBC isn't in the mood to help you. An NBC spokesperson said She-who-will-not-be-mentioned was bumped for news coverage out of Washington and the Middle East, and would be welcomed back in the future. Perez Hilton will still be on the show. Perez Hilton would be on. Not Annie.
So, let's see, She-who-will-not-be-mentioned. NBC bumped "Mouth That Snored" for the "Mouth That Roared."
Well, it looks as if gossip trumps bitch.
Here are a few lies that She-who-will-not-be-mentioned tells in her new book, that she won't get to promote on TV because Perez will be telling us all about Lindsay and Britney and.....other bimbos.
from MediaMatters:

She-who-will-not-be-mentioned claims that two black students who engaged in a hoax by hanging a black doll from a noose were "immediately praised" by "liberals," but the sources she cites do not support this claim.

In 1997, at Duke University, a black doll was found hanging by a noose from a tree at the precise spot where the Black Student Alliance planned to hold a rally against racism. Two black students later admitted they were the culprits and were immediately praised for bringing attention to the problem of racism on campus. Which is why I'm thinking about knocking over a liquor store to focus attention on the problem of big-city crime.
Rather than "institutional racism," what we are witnessing is "institutional racial hoaxism" committed by liberals. [Page 10]

She-who-will-not-be-mentioned cites two articles to back up her assertion that the students were "immediately praised," neither of which support such a claim. One of the sources Coulter cites is a January 8, 1999, Chronicle of Higher Education article, which does not report that the students were "praised" but rather that "[s]ome classmates defended the two students"...[i]n a letter to The Chronicle, Duke's student newspaper, Worokya Diomande called the act "tasteless," but said "the idea behind the act ... is being overlooked."
She-who-will-not-be-mentioned's other source for her claim that the students were "immediately praised" is a January 31, 2000, article in The Weekly Standard (accessed from Nexis), which cites the Chronicle article in writing that "some at Duke defended the act, claiming it high-lighted the problem of race relations on campus."

Fox News Channel
On Page 15, She-who-will-not-be-mentioned writes,
"Fox News has never been caught promoting a fraud -- unlike CBS (Bush National Guard story), ABC (tobacco industry report), NBC (exploding GM trucks), CNN (Tailwind), and MSNBC (Keith Olbermann)."
In fact, as Media Matters has documented, on several occasions since 2004, Fox News has issued a retraction and apology for airing a news report that repeated false information, one of which led Fox News' Vice President for News John Moody to reportedly warn staff in January 2007 that "seeing an item on a website does not mean it is right. Nor does it mean it is ready for air on FNC."
On the April 24, 2007, edition of Fox & Friends, co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade repeated as fact an online parody news report of a school prank that included fabricated quotes attributed to the superintendent. Doocy issued an on-air retraction and apology during the May 16, 2007, edition of Fox & Friends First, but the superintendent brought suit against the Fox News Channel, Doocy, and Kilmeade. [A suit later dismissed]...
....Doocy has also retracted his false assertion on the January 19, 2007, Fox & Friends, that Barack Obama "spent the first decade of his life, raised by his Muslim father -- as a Muslim and was educated in a madrassa."...
....Further, on October 1, 2004, Fox News issued a retraction and an apology for a news story written by chief political correspondent Carl Cameron that falsely attributed quotes to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) in an attempt to ridicule him over a purported manicure.

John Kerry and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
She-who-will-not-be-mentioned advances several falsehoods about Kerry in defending the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, an organization which spread numerous falsehoods and smears regarding Kerry's military record in the six months leading up to the 2004 presidential election.

Membership of Swift Boat VeteransShe-who-will-not-be-mentioned writes that "nearly three hundred veterans who served with Kerry said he was lying about his war record [Page 109]" and also states: "Only 14 Swift Boat Veterans sided with Kerry, while 294 sided with O'Neill. Let's see, would it be more difficult to get 14 people to tell the same lie or to get 294 people to tell the same lie? [Page 99]" But contrary to Coulter's assertion, among the roughly 300 she referred to, who signed a letter critical of Kerry, were people who subsequently admitted they had no firsthand knowledge of the claims they made; who contradicted their statements opposing Kerry both before and after they made them; and who reportedly said they joined with the Swift Boat Veterans not because they believed Kerry had "l[ied] about his war record" but because they disapproved of Kerry's subsequent statements opposing the Vietnam War.

Retractions by Swift Boat VeteransShe-who-will-not-be-mentioned falsely claims that "the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth weren't forced to retract any part of their story. [Page 100]" In fact, the organization aleterd its website's account of the December 2, 1968, mission for which the U.S. Navy awarded Kerry his first Purple Heart three days after Media Matters noted that the account was inconsistent with that of the group's star witness -- retired Rear Admiral William L. Schactee Jr., who claims he was the commander on that mission.
According to Schachte, Kerry did not deserve the award because the "skimmer" he supposedly commanded that night did not receive enemy fire, and Kerry's wound was the result of Kerry's own improper use of an M-79 grenade launcher. But in an April 2003 interview with The Boston Globe, "Schachte described the action as a 'firefight' and said of Kerry: 'He got hit,' " the Globe reported on August 28, 2004. According to the Globe, Schachte "did not challenge Kerry's Purple Heart" during that interview.
Media coverage of Swift Boat VeteransShe-who-will-not-be-mentioned also suggests that the media ignored the allegations of the Swift Boat Veterans, writing, "The only way they could have gotten less attention would have been to be interviewed on Air America Radio. [Page 101]" In fact, as Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert wrote in Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush (Free Press, May 2006):

By the time the Swift Boat story had played out, CNN, chasing after ratings leader Fox News, found time to mention the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth --hereafter, Swifties -- in nearly 300 separate news segments, while more than 100 New York Times articles and columns made mention of the Swifties. And during one overheated 12-day span in late August, the Washington Post mentioned the Swifties in page 1 stories on Aug. 19, 20, 21 (two separate articles), 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31. [Page 177]

Boehlert further wrote:

[I]n the month of August, 2004, NBC network news alone covered the Swift Boat story on August 8, 15, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, and 29. CBS covered the story on August 8, 22, 23, 24, 25 26 and 30, while ABC devoted airtime to it on August 6, 8, 9, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, and 26. Some of the networks, using different morning and evening news programs, returned to the topic several times in one day. For instance on August 23, CBS reported on the Swifty controversy four different times, which of course, represented four more times than the CBS News division reported on question surrounding Bush's Guard service during the entire 2000 campaign. [Page 189]
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker's Palin criticism
She-who-will-not-be-mentioned took conservative columnist Kathleen Parker out of context to suggest that Parker made only stylistic criticisms against Gov. Sarah Palin when Parker called for Palin to withdraw as the vice-presidential nominee. In fact, Parker criticized Palin for what Parker said was a lack of substance. She-who-will-not-be-mentioned wrote:

Meteoric rises are available to any Republican who claims to be disgusted with the Republican Party for one or another reason. The heretofore unknown Kathleen Parker was the media's favorite Republican in 2008, after she called on Sarah Palin to withdraw from the campaign on the grounds that: She "filibusters. She repeats words, filling up space with deadwood." This might not have been manifestly insane if Palin's Democratic counterpart had been anyone other than Joe Biden -- who filibusters, repeats words, and achieves a personal coup every time he merely fills space with "deadwood," rather than one of his usual deranged pronouncements. [Page 114]

She-who-will-not-be-mentioned's suggestion that Parker's' criticism of Palin was limited to style rather than substance is false. In fact, in the syndicated column She-who-will-not-be-mentioned cited, Parker wrote, "Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there's not much content there [emphasis added]." Parker further wrote:
If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.
If Palin were a man, we'd all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she's a woman -- and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket -- we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.

Lipstick on a PigShe-who-will-not-be-mentioned devotes four pages of Guilty [173-176] to discussing her false assertion that "Obama himself compared Palin to a pig and then denied doing so." In fact, Obama's September 9, 2008, statement, "you know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig," did not refer to Palin, but rather to how a "list" of Sen. John McCain's policies were, according to Obama, no different from President Bush's. Obama did not mention Palin in at least the 65 words preceding his "lipstick on a pig" comment, as Media Matters noted. Moreover, the expression "lipstick on a pig" is commom political rhetoric -- Obama had reportedly used the expression in the past, and McCain used it in 2007 in reference to Sen. Hillary Clinton's health-care proposal.
Former acting Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift -- a national member of the McCain campaign's "Palin Truth Squad" -- falsely accused Obama of making "disgraceful comments comparing our vice presidential nominee, Gov. Palin, to a pig," but later backtracked on her assertion, saying that she "can't know" if Obama's comment "was aimed at Governor Palin."
And her lies go on and on; how this woman can call herself an author, much less a journalist, is beyond me. Look for the truth, She-who-will-not-be-mentioned, it's out there.
Meanwhile, we'll be listening to Perez tell us who's doing what to whom, and when and how.


Berry Blog said...

I am in awe of your impeccable research, you attention to detail, you reference to sources. Excellent work-just superb. I hope many many people catch on and read your posts.
xoxo Charlie

Bob said...

Thanks Charlie, I appreciate it.

I am a hug advocate of Free Speech, but am disgusted with Coulter. It seems she shoots off her mouth to shock people, using her half truths and outright lies.

Don't like her much.

Joy said...

I cannot stand the Coultergeist - that smug, derisive, lying, bitchy, anorexic excuse for humanity.

To my knowledge, Olbermann and Maddow haven't had to retract any of their reports since they research them and check everything out. Keith has apologized a couple of times and accepted responsibility even though a guest host said something not quite right.

Excellent post!