White House boasts: We 'control' news media (on camera, see the videos)

Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government

By Aaron Klein

President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference.

"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn.

"One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters," said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama's chief campaign manager.

"We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it," Dunn said.

Continued Dunn: "Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying."

Video of Dunn's remarks at the conference can be seen below:

Dunn was speaking at a Jan. 12, 2009, event focusing on Obama's media tactics and hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development, which seeks to promote collaboration between the U.S. and the Dominican Republic. The event was held in Santo Domingo and was attended by the country's president.

Dunn has been facing some criticism since she led a White House campaign last week against Fox News, slamming the top-rated network as an "arm of the Republican Party" and "opinion journalism masquerading as news."

Fox hit back this past Friday, releasing a video of Dunn speaking to high school students last June in which she lists her two "favorite political philosophers," including Communist Chinese leader Mao Tse-tung, whose draconian policies are blamed for the deaths of tens of millions of people.

Video of Dunn's speech, broadcast during a segment of Glenn Beck's evening show on the Fox News Channel, can be seen below:

Read more >>

Barack Obama versus the Law of Sooner or Later

By Michael Bresciani

Everyone knows that in America we cannot honestly convict a person for a crime as long as there is a ‘reasonable doubt’ that they are innocent. It is a facet of our system of jurisprudence that is unique to America and was born out of repulsion for past tyrannies.

In spite of living in a land that thinks positive thinking is the only kind of thought that is PC legal, doubt can be and always will be a good thing. It is not only what can free the innocent but it can also keep us from falling headlong to our own demise.

Unfortunately today we live in a fast paced world where sometimes we are willing to accept applause as the proof that something is true or worthy.

‘Everybody’s doing it’ or ‘all that is hot’ become substitutes for the truth. A crowd chanting ‘string em up’ can hardly be expected to pause and wait for a court of law to decide a person’s guilt or innocence. Certainly no one in a lynch mob would dare ask the mob to pause and listen to this verse from the Bible. “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment.” (Ex 23:2)

Reasonable doubt works fairly well in the courtroom and it is a pretty good tool when applied to practical politics.

The reasonable doubt about a candidate is one of the reasons we accept the vetting or investigation of a candidates past before we allow them a position of authority. Policemen, firemen, officials on any level even home owners are vetted to assure us that we are dealing with someone who is on the level.

It is this common practice that serves to protect us and provide at least some small measure of assurance that people who want to be in positions of authority are who they say they are. Having said that can we continue to mock the ‘birthers’ as they are called who want to see both Barack Obama’s birth certificate and another fifteen or so documents about his past that remain locked up like the gold in Fort Knox?

Is chanting Obama’s name in a crowd the new kind of vetting in America?

It isn’t a childish thing on the level of ‘show and tell’ it is rather a serious thing on the level of ‘what have you got to hide.”  It is an insulting thing on the level of ‘what’s good for the goose (John Q. Public) is not good for the gander. (Barack Obama)

It is Obama’s unwillingness to reveal the documents that is fueling the fire and producing an even greater sense of urgency. It is what is producing more lawsuits daily and more doubters exponentially. If it keeps up like this even the main stream media will not be able to suppress the emerging backlash.

It is not a mere lack of courtesy or ignoring strict adherence to protocol that cause some to liken the meteoric rise of a virtual unknown (Obama) to that of say Hitler, Mao or Mussolini, it is doubt based on civilizations past mistakes. This healthy doubt could have saved countless lives in our past history had more people been willing to act upon it. Kudos to the birthers for being willing to endure the insults the rest of us don’t want any part of.

Is it mean spirited to say that justices have been spineless, media has been dishonest and attorneys general have been lax in Obama’s vetting? Take a careful look at the names and descriptions that are being laid on the birthers before you answer because you will see that you have no answer.

Only recently another great doubt has been put on the American people from Kenya. An article in the Sunday Standard newspaper in Kenya dated June 27, 2004 is titled “Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate.” The archived copy of the article was apparently pulled from the paper’s files but a cached copy can still be found through the website called Way Back Machine.  More doubt!

This President may have been able to circumvent Constitutional law as it pertains to the ‘natural born citizen’ clause but he will find it harder to circumvent the common law of the people known as the law of sooner or later. The American people will eventually know the whole truth of the matter, sooner or later.

http://www.americanprophet.org is the place for news, articles, movie and book reviews and other insights for life. Rev Bresciani is a columnist for online and print publications and has over three million readers and counting.

Keywords:

Obama,Kenyan,US Senate,Way Back Machine,Sunday Standard,Fort Knox,birthers,attorneys general,justice,doubt,common law,Kenyan-born,vetting,home owner,policemen,firemen,authority

Read more >>

Starting Off Right

By: J.J. Jackson

Last week my wife and I, along with our daughter, welcomed into the world the newest edition to our family.  Our son was born!  Hallelujah!  And while we were celebrating, members of the left were dismayed that another child had been born to a staunch, liberty loving American and that he would no doubt be taught the truth to combat their lies.

But like good bureaucrats do, they tried to interject themselves into our lives at any oportunity.  Yes, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania presented us with a nice long list of questions that they wanted us to answer, most of which were really none of their damn business and, to be honest, would violate constitutional protections on privacy of our papers and effects if they were required to be answered.

Oh, I understand the need for some of the information such as the name of our child, Magnus Wayne Jackson (a fitting name considering he was 9lb 9 oz at birth) and information about myself and my wife that would help identify us as the parents of this husky baby boy.  But, as government is apt to do, it began asking way too many questions that were frankly none of its damn business.

I know why these questions were being asked.  They were being asked to see if government hacks could justify throwing us on some welfare program or another for which they are fleecing tax payers year in and year out to fund.  Questions asked ranged from the level of education of both myself and my wife to our household income – things which are none of the state’s beeswax at this point in time and really just duplicate information that is already, I am sure, on file with them somewhere or that is provided yearly when I bang my head off the wall trying to figure out my income tax.

I pondered how to not answer these questions.  Everything from boldly writing, “None of your damn business,” across the form to quoting the founding fathers on liberty and limited government in response to each.  But eventually I just did the simple thing and did not select any of the answers provided.

What annoyed me even more than being asked all of these questions however was that the Pennsylvania was trying to be really sneaky and coerce people into answering these questions by asking them in such a way that it sounded like the questions must be answered.  Which, of course, they do not have to be.  Nowhere in the provided answers for each question was there a block that was akin to, “decline to answer” proving basically that the state was trying really, really hard to get those given these questions when their children are born to think that somehow they had no choice but to answer.  The withholding of an obvious response that would allow one to know plainly that they may opt of answering these questions was deliberately designed to make it seem as though you do not have that option!

It is sinister and plays on the ignorance of many Americans who think that because someone in the government asks you a question that you must answer and divulge the most intimate details of your life.  Thank God for not being ignorant, I repeatedly thought to myself while declining to answer the State’s questions and once again, I am sure, getting myself put on a watch list for daring to think for myself and not roll over.  But I am sure though that as soon as the arrangements are made and the proper people get into power while Americans sleep and go about their lives that there will be a cell waiting for me.

Well, at least I got my son started off on the right foot as an enemy of the nanny state.  If I have to ever spend a minute in the gulag for that I will gladly accept that punishment.

=====================================

J.J. Jackson is a libertarian conservative author from Pittsburgh, PA who has been writing and promoting individual liberty since 1993 and is President of Land of the Free Studios, Inc. He is the lead editor contributor to American Conservative Daily.  He is the owner of The Right Things - Conservative T-shirts & Gifts http://www.cafepress.com/rightthings. His weekly commentary along with exclusives not available anywhere else can be found at http://www.libertyreborn.com

Read more >>

The Seduction Of Lindsey Graham

By Nancy Morgan

This article was first published by American Thinker

According to most conservatives in South Carolina, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has officially gone over to the dark side. Under the guise of 'bipartisanship,' Graham has signed on to one of the left's most ambitious plans to impose a socialist agenda in America - government control of the formerly free market through implementation of cap-and trade, the 1,400 plus page Waxman-Markey bill approved earlier this year by the House.

The main (scientifically unproven) premise of cap and trade is that the earth is melting and government must step in to save the world. Of course, it will be expensive, but hey, this is Mother Earth we're talking about. And its urgent and essential that the government immediately establish a $700 billion "market" for business to buy and sell "steadily declining number of permits for creating carbon emissions."

In a New York Times Op-Ed Graham co-authored with Sen. John Kerry cutely entitled 'Yes We Can' (get it?) Sen Graham states "..we agree that climate change is real and threatens our economy and national security." Huh?

Conservatives disagree. Conservatives, real conservatives, believe the fact based studies based on science that stand in direct opposition to the dire reports issued by bureaucrats at the United Nations and embraced as fact by the left.

Conservative think tank, Heritage Foundation, outlines the additional costs that will be imposed on every American family if cap and trade is enacted. Residential electricity costs will zoom up by 90%, nearly 1.9 million jobs will be lost by 2012 overall, and the economy will lose nearly $10 trillion in gross domestic product by 2035. Just what the economy needs, right?

Lindsey Graham was elected to serve as United States Senator in 2002. He was easily re-elected in 2008, largely due to the support of conservatives. Conservatives like founder and past president of the low country's South Strand Republicans, John Bonsignor. John and his wife campaigned hard for Graham, based on their belief that Graham would govern as a conservative. Meaning, lower taxes and less government.

"Graham is disappointing," states Bonsignor, "He campaigned as a conservative but his record is moderate left." When asked if he would vote for Graham now, Bonsignor stated emphatically, "No," citing Lindsey's support for Sotomayor, his support for TARP funds, and the final straw, his support for cap and trade.

Sen. Graham's own website states, "Graham is known as a leader who never abandons his independence or strays from the conservative reform agenda." This is no longer true.

Graham has been seduced by the left. He has adopted one of their most successful tactics, promising one thing while delivering quite the opposite. Though its impossible to know what is in another man's heart, actions always speak louder than words. And Graham's actions clearly show that he has signed on to the leftist agenda. Possibly hoping to earn the coveted 'maverick' label and media kudos formerly enjoyed by his good buddy John McCain. But he is doing his own party no good.

Graham has come to exemplify the growing disconnect between conservatives and the Republican party. He believes he knows best, and if the people that elected him disagree, he tells them to just "chill out," as he did at a recent townhall meeting in Greenville. The same townhall meeting where one of his constituents called him a traitor.

That townhall received little media attention. What did receive national media coverage was Graham's recent interview where he attacked Glenn Beck, the left's favorite target. "Glenn Beck does not represent the thinking of the Republican Party," Graham stated. How he knows this is a mystery, as he went on to say he never watches the Glenn Beck Show. Go figure.

Graham may be right about one thing: Glenn Beck clearly represents the thinking of conservatives, not the GOP. And Sen. Lindsey Graham is now willingly spouting the talking points of the left and abandoning the conservative principles that got him elected. He has been seduced by the left and his reward is ever more national face time and political influence.

Enjoy the ride, Lindsey. More and more South Carolinians, this author included, are comparing you with our real conservative Senator, Jim DeMint, and you're coming up way short. Keep in mind that we have long memories while the fawning media currently singing your praises have short ones. Your love affair with the left, whether it be seduction or statutory rape, betrays the conservative principles that you claimed to hold. And we don't like it one bit.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com She lives in South Carolina. Article may be reprinted, with attribution Author Bio

Read more >>