Jim Geraghty scores here on the media's Narrative of good guys and bad guys.

The media hasn't said anything about Afghanistan for about four years. Why? Because troops are getting killed (for no clearly-articulated purpose) but there is no mean Republican to blame it on.

So they just ignore it.

But here's the thing: Obama sent out word to push the idea that Romney hadn't mentioned Afghanistan. The media dutifully reported (and reported, and reported) that Romney hadn't mentioned Afghanistan.

Fair enough.

But the media can talk about Afghanistan, too, if it likes. It prefers not to.

If the media has something to say about an Afghanistan -- an unpopular war currently being lost by a Democrat -- they can note this at any time.

But they don't.

Their interest in Afghanistan is limited to noting Romney didn't mention Afghanistan in his RNC acceptance speech (though he did mention it in his address to veterans earlier in the day).

If Obama has a "plan" for Afghanistan, I'd like to hear it.

If the media has its own recommendations, I'm all ears.

But oddly enough neither of them want to talk about this unpopular war-- except to note that Romney isn't talking much about it, either.

Posted by: Ace at 11:18 AM | Comments (143)
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

I got this from Politico, but no link for them. No quotes. Easy enough to deliver the basics.

The Bannon/Bossie film will start running on local stations as well as small cable stations (like HDNet) through the election. It's touted as powerful; focus groups of undecided voters react well to it, as it shows people like them -- disillusioned Obama voters -- saying it's okay to admit that maybe you were wrong.

Tell a friend. more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:44 AM | Comments (115)
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

At HillBuzz (no link for concern-trolls):

I am now going to officially keep track of every “Doom Report” filed at RedState by Erik Erikson that repeats the corrupt media’s standard propaganda that “Obama’s going to win!”. I’m going to similarly monitor Allahpundit at HotAir and Ace at AceofSpades as well. These three guys repeatedly post articles that depress and demoralize conservatives by largely repeating things the corrupt media purposefully says to help Democrats. I am tired of it and want to build a dossier on these three sites to document the Fifth Column activities over there that breed Eeyores amongst Republicans.

Um, where are these demoralizing posts of mine, exactly? Or of the cobloggers?

I'm actually doing something I'm not sure I should be doing -- cocooning. Not mentioning bad polls. I'm not sure if I should be doing that, but I have been ignoring bad polls for two weeks now.

Should be... not linking them even more aggressively? Not mentioning them even more vigorously? Ignoring them with even more fierceness encoded into my non-existing posts about them?

And I don't even agree that cocooning is a good strategy. This Rocket Scientist is obviously a big fan of it. For me, I'm a less sold on the political value of what is, when it comes down to it, lying to readers.

But I've also noted that in any contest, the other team gets the ball too, and sometimes they score. And this is not a reason for the fans to start screaming "Fire the coach!" or "Put in the second-string quarterback!"

There are going to be dips and peaks.

That said, since I've embargoed most bad polls since they started turning bad, I'm not really sure what this Rocket Scientist wants me to do. Do dozens of posts on "Democratic skews"? Just keep posting the Joe Pesci soundbite, "Everything this guy just said is bullshit"?

One of the things that's truly annoying about political movements is the large number of people who don't really have particularly interesting minds, and don't write particularly interesting things. So they appoint themselves to a position long held by uninteresting people: Morale Officer. And, like Morale Officers throughout time (the US had them in military; the Soviet Union had them for civilians) they don't actually do much to improve Morale; they just insist it should be better, and if you are not Regulation Cheerful, you are a Malcontent and must be Disciplined.

I'm a big fan of happy endings. I don't like drama. I don't like wallowing or depression. I don't like internet shit-fights. I don't like whining.

I don't like Bummers and in fact go out of my way to avoid them -- and actually I think I'm going too far on the side of No Bummers, because I do sometimes worry that I am presenting a cockeyed-optimistic view of the world to readers.

But then, I remind myself they are surrounded by the Make Believe Media, just as I am, and they almost certainly read and hear of these things elsewhere.

So I do, in fact, try to make the site a relatively happy place, and I think I do an okay job of it. A lot of people write to me to say things like, "Your site is one of the few keeping me sane right now."

I'm not sure what the self-appointed Sandals, Jamaica Fun Coordinator at HillBuzz would like me to do. Organize a limbo? Hard to do as we're not in the same room.

But I suppose I shouldn't complain too much. Newsflash: Uninteresting people say uninteresting things; film at 11.

By the Way: In 2010, I spent four of five weekends before the election traveling across the country -- Boston, Las Vegas, NJ, NYC -- to organize/popularize citizen volunteering for Republican campaigns.

I was pretty damn worn out after that-- working during the week, then canvassing and phone banking for candidates on weekends.

What did you do, Sparky?

Some people talk. Other people do.

The Morale Officer may have some use (opinions vary), but he's not out there actually on the field, is he?

No, he's a REMF.

Link For Volunteering: Anyone who actually wants to do something positive should probably stop Mau-Mauing people who are obviously voting for Romney (and whose readers are all voting for Romney) and try talking to some people who aren't necessarily voting for Romney, at least not without some encouragement.

FreedomWorks has a big suite of organizing/voter contact software, too.

Posted by: Ace at 09:59 AM | Comments (489)
Post contains 752 words, total size 5 kb.

A very downbeat article (which begins, in earnest, on page 2; page 1 is just a travelogue).

It should scare people. And wake them up.

But think of what we have lost: I am writing this on Sunday night, September 16, 2012. The Obama administration is still apologizing to the Muslims worldwide, even in Libya even as the President of Libya says the killings there were not spontaneous but were long premeditated and the nutty movie was only a smokescreen. Our government is still saying, "Sorry," to violent mobs because an American citizen exercised his first Amendment rights. Incredibly, Jay Carney, White House spokesman, is spinning a complete fairy tale that the Islamists really like America and Mr. Obama. The murderers are just upset about a movie trailer that came out months ago. How stupid do they think we Americans are? If Mr. Obama really believes, he belongs in a straitjacket. If not, his spokesman is the biggest fantasist of all time.

Look, maybe sweet talk and apologies have a place somewhere. Maybe this should be said in private, between diplomats. But to apologize publicly to killers and arsonists over free speech in AmericaÂ… this isn't doneÂ… and of course the first amendment protects people outside the mainstream. Tom Paine, Samuel Adams, John Adams -- these were considered nuts by the British. The whole idea is to protect all speech.

And in Barack Obama's America, the man who made the movie is brought in for law enforcement questioning. This really happened just yesterday.

And Mr. Barack Obama will be President for four more years and then quite possibly Mrs. Clinton, arch apologist for American values, for years afterwards.

When republics fall, it's not always slow. It can be like slamming a door.

It is later than any dare think.

Posted by: Ace at 09:30 AM | Comments (183)
Post contains 319 words, total size 2 kb.

!!!

!!!

Bonus: Egypt pushes for strengthening of anti-blasphemy clause.

Never forget this is their goal, and they seek this as it is a foundational part of sharia.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 08:32 AM | Comments (361)
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

I assume the sacks have fish in them, or something tasty. The tigers sure want those sacks.

Now you tell me if you have ever seen anything quite as dumb as this.

I get that tigers have an allure. It seems fun to play with them. But... deliberately frustrating them? With food? That you keep just out of reach of their huge claws? more...

Posted by: Ace at 08:01 AM | Comments (134)
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.

By way of today's Transom, there's a very good, if somewhat long, Hoover Institution interview with Victor Davis Hanson that's well worth your time.

The decline in civility—in the idea of being a good citizen—has taken a particularly tough toll on men, who have not adjusted to today’s post-industrial economy as fluidly as women have. “As society has been cut off from the drudgery of nature and the tragic view of things, it has become whiney. This is probably sexist, but it’s had a more direct effect on the males of the species who have had their muscular world radically redefined.”

“All the young men I knew growing up knew how to do these things. But the young kids I see today don’t know how to run a lawn mower or a chain saw. Today’s male lives at home. He kinda’ sorta’ dates a girl, kinda’ sorta’ doesn’t date her. He is becoming superfluous as a bread-winner and family head."

In the ancient world, farming and war instilled a sense of duty and responsibility in men. Today? “Men don’t know much about farming, and few are in the military, but most know a great deal about video games,” says Hanson.

Hanson comes back to the virtue of self-reliance and the toll its absence is taking on society: “Today’s suburban American has a therapeutic view of the world. We think we all die in our sleep at 90 years old without ever being sick. We don’t expect to lose our jobs. When these things happen, we go to counseling, thinking life’s not fair. Or we look to the government for help.”

“The society’s attitude toward the citizen—that we will guarantee you a degree of material and psychological security—is something that we can’t honor.” He adds: “I think that we are emasculating the citizen.”

There's a lot of carping about the Romney campaign going around on the Interwebs this morning, but I fear there's a more substantive reason than the deep details of how his convention speech was prepared that explains why he doesn't have a double-digit lead over TFG.

People like free stuff. Mean guy Romney wants to take it away and put our civilization back on a paying basis. A significant amount of the SCOAMF's support is just this simple to explain.

This election isn't a battle between the haves and have-nots, as the Democrats want to paint it.

It's a battle between the responsible and the irresponsible; the realistic and the unrealistic; the self-reliant and the dependent.

Frankly, it's a battle between an adult's view of the world and a child's. And the adults are precariously close to losing.

Posted by: andy at 06:50 AM | Comments (268)
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

The President Rewards The Murderers Of Our Ambassador

When bad guys kill a US Ambassador, the American response should be tough and decisive. There need to be consequences to abusing the trust we show the host country by having an embassy there.

Not only wasn't the attack in Libya about a movie, but even if it was, the American response to mayhem and murder should be the same. If these fanatics are so removed from civilization that they will rape and murder over an insulting film, that is all the more reason to fight them and deny them any power over us whatsoever.

At the very least, we should withdraw our financial aid to the host country! And we should absolutely not, ever, accede to whatever their demands or wishes are.

Instead, President Obama and his administration officials dithered, apologized, blamed an inflammatory youtube video, went to a fundraiser, and took calls. And had the video maker arrested under sketchy pretext.

This is a test of our leadership. The terrorists are watching this. And so are America's other enemies. President Barack Obama has sent a terrible signal of weakness that puts the safety of ALL Americans- especially those abroad- at risk.

If Americans blame our own right to free speech when foreign fanatics murder us, and we agree to domestically enforce Islamic anti-blasphemy laws to make these killers happy (as if they could ever be satisfied), then what else can they get us to do by killing our citizens?

And we need not write up a list- the enemy is doing that right now. They'll let us know what they want, now that they know how easily their desires can be purchased with our own blood.

The shortsightedness of this President's weak reaction cannot be overstated.

Dear Lord, they don't even have to keep hostages anymore, apparently! The enemy need not waste the food and water. Outright murder, the crudest and easiest course, will do. It is mind-boggling that President Obama thinks that after the hostages are dead is the best time to accede to terrorist demands.

We are so craven and cowardly now, that we tremble in the face of these mighty Islamist warriors. "Please don't kill us! We'll do whatever you say! Am I breathing too loudly! Forgive me!"

Is this what our brave military men and women have been toiling and dying for, all these years? To have our rights summarily pulled away in the end, this way?

This is a travesty. Innocent people are going to be haunted by the actions of this president, for many years to come.

Posted by: LauraW at 03:55 AM | Comments (310)
Post contains 445 words, total size 3 kb.

Happy Monday.

In case you missed it over the weekend, the Taliban attackers on Camp Bastion on Friday wore U.S. Army uniforms. They killed two Marines, injured nine NATO personnel, destroyed six Harrier jets, and put another two Harriers out of action.

The Libyan President says the Benghazi attack was pre-planned by an al-Qaeda-affiliated group. The Obama Administration's Susan Rice says the attack was not premeditated. What do you do when everyone's known to be a liar?

President Obama has filed a WTO trade complaint against China for subsidizing auto exports. The article notes that Obama's newfound spine when it comes to China has appeared just in time for Obama's campaign trip to Ohio this week.

The Chicago teachers union is taking at least another two days off, explaining that they cannot approve the new offer until after Rosh Hashana. Said one parent, apparently without irony, "What's the point of going on strike if you don't get everything you need out of it?"

Headline: "Topless rally in N.C. puts focus on women's equality." More accurate headline: Topless rally in N.C. puts focus on women's boobies.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:51 AM | Comments (152)
Post contains 193 words, total size 2 kb.

Well I always figured October 1979 would come around again but not quite this late in 2012. Luckily our MFM has found the root cause of the problems: a YouTube video and an arrogant Morman...

Media: You Know Who's Responsible for the Media Failing? Mitt Romney That's Who

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Talk about the conservative critique-and I think it's a fair critique, the conservative critique: that all you guys in the media were talking about Mitt Romney, you should have talked about the warnings with the embassy, etc., etc. And yes perhaps we should have.  But you know who didn't allow us to do that?

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Mitt Romney.

SCARBOROUGH: Mitt Romney. If Mitt Romney had kept his mouth shut, if he had not acted like a rank amateur, if he had not embarrassed himself-and by the way internally the campaign understands they screwed up, he's moved on, they know that. But Romney got in the way of the media looking at the president, going, wha-, wha-, what happened here? How did this happen? Now, those questions are going to be asked in the coming weeks. But they weren't asked in the first 24 hours because Romney was holding this horrific, irresponsible, press conference.

Plus Is Romney Genuinely Good Or Is His Altruism Just A Habit Out of Self-Interest?

I've already thought about these questions in general (not specifically about Romney) long and hard. My answer is that no, it doesn't matter. Good is good, and we are human beings whose motives are never pure.

So I don't much care about your secret motives for doing good. I don't much care if you want accolades for your good deeds and even if you receive them. I don't care if you perform good works because you think it will get you into heaven, or that it will make your girlfriend like you better, or if you feel compelled to do good because you feel guilty if you don't.

In the end it's behavior that matters.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:26 PM | Comments (786)
Post contains 1466 words, total size 13 kb.