Kirsten Powers: Media May Be Complicit in Another Terrorist Attack on America

The media's certainly helping to perpetuate a cover up, and if it turns out that information on planning was known prior to the attack, then that would be complicity in terrorism.

See Kirsten Powers on Fox News yesterday, via Right Scoop, "Kirsten Powers: The media may be complicit in another terrorist attack on America."

Red States' Income Growing Faster Than Blue States'

Some of the income gains were due to an increase in transfer payments in Republican states, but the key is that in a number of red states the rise in income is driven by energy-friendly economic development, and the differences between the Democrat states are dramatic.

At USA Today:

Income is growing much faster in Republican-leaning "red states" than in Democratic-tilting "blue states" or the pivotal swing states that will decide the 2012 presidential election, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Personal income in 23 red states has risen 4.6% since the recession began in December 2007, after adjusting for inflation. Income is up just 0.5% in 15 blue states and Washington, D.C., during that time. In the dozen swing states identified by USA TODAY that could vote either way Nov. 6, income has inched ahead 1.4% in 4 ½ years. The big drivers of red state income growth: energy and government benefit payments such as food stamps.

By contrast, Democratic blue states are more affluent but were hit harder by the downturn. Connecticut, dependent on the financial industry, suffered the largest income drop except swing-state Nevada. Yet Connecticut residents still make $10,000 a year more on average than people in fast-growing North Dakota.

When averaged nationally, the robust gains in red states and meager gains in blue states produced a national growth rate remarkably similar to that in the swing states.

USA TODAY analyzed income data released this week by the Bureau of Economic Analysis to compare how red, blue and swing states have fared through June 30. The difference in income gains is partly because blue states are richer and more populated than red states — 42% of the nation's income vs. 30% in red states. Also, the economic recovery since the recession officially ended in June 2009 has been distributed unequally around the country.

North Dakota, a red state, tops the nation in income growth thanks to an oil boom. Other major energy states — Alaska, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas — are solidly Republican, polls show. Poor, southern red states depend heavily on government transfers for income and benefited from increases in Medicaid and other federal programs.

There's more at the link, including a very cool graphic.

Netanyahu Demands 'Red Line' on Iran

At the Wall Street Journal, "Israeli Leader Calls for Plan on Iran."

Plus, see Alana Goodman, at Commentary, "AP, Reuters Reportedly Post Bibi “Heil” Photos."

Johnny Lewis, 'Sons of Anarchy' Star, Allegedly Kills Landlady Then Dies in Fall

A frankly bizarre story, at the Los Angeles Times, "'Sons of Anarchy' actor was unraveling."

And at London's Daily Mail, "Revealed: Scientology past of Katy Perry's ex-lover and star of The O.C. who 'killed his 81-year-old landlady' and died in roof fall six DAYS after leaving jail."

Free Obama Phones

Update on the 47 percent, via Marooned in Marin:

'Wake the F—k Up'

At the New York Post, "Samuel L. Jackson debuts profanity-laced pro-Obama ad."

Robert Spencer: 'Any Moral Person Would Support Our Campaign'

Well, radical leftists like Mona Eltahawy aren't moral persons, but listen to Robert explain things at the clip:

And at Jihad Watch, "NYC MTA refuses to buckle to Leftist/Islamic supremacist intimidation, rules political ads will continue to run."

Security Fears Hobble Libya Attack Investigation

The story is becoming way too big for the big media outlets to sweep under the rug. The New York Times is now doing the kind of critical reporting that we should have seen from the first day of this debacle. See, "Security Fears Hobble Inquiry of Libya Attack":

BENGHAZI, Libya — Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

Investigators are so worried about the tenuous security, people involved in the investigation say, that they have been unwilling to risk taking some potential Libyan witnesses into the American Embassy in Tripoli. Instead, the investigators have resorted to the awkward solution of questioning some witnesses in cars outside the embassy, which is operating under emergency staffing and was evacuated of even more diplomats on Thursday because of a heightened security alert.

“It’s a cavalcade of obstacles right now,” said a senior American law enforcement official who is receiving regular updates on the Benghazi investigation and who described the crime scene, which has been trampled on, looted and burned, as so badly “degraded” that even once F.B.I. agents do eventually gain access “it’ll be very difficult to see what evidence can be attributed to the bad guys.”

Piecing together exactly how Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died here would be difficult even under the best of conditions. But the volatile security situation in post-Qaddafi Libya has added to the challenge of determining whether it was purely a local group of extremists who initiated the fatal assault or whether the attackers had ties to international terrorist groups, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested Wednesday may be the case.

The Libyan government has advised the F.B.I. that it cannot assure the safety of the American investigators in Benghazi. So agents have been conducting interviews from afar, relying on local Libyan authorities to help identify and arrange meetings with witnesses to the attack and working closely with the Libyans to gauge the veracity of any of those accounts.

“There’s a chance we never make it in there,” said a senior law enforcement official.

Continue reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "Benghazi-Gate."

Benghazi-Gate

The Blaze reports, "'Benghazi-Gate': Lawmakers Demand Answers as Obama Administration's Inconsistent Libya Story Falls Apart."

And see the editorial at the Wall Street Journal, "The Libya Debacle":

In his United Nations speech on Tuesday, President Obama talked about the September 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya and declared that "there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice." What he didn't say is how relentless he'll be in tracking down the security lapses and intelligence failures that contributed to the murders. Let's say there's some doubt about that.

None of the initial explanations offered by the White House and State Department since the assault on the Benghazi consulate has held up. First the Administration blamed protests provoked by an amateurish anti-Islam clip posted on YouTube. Cue Susan Rice, the U.N. Ambassador and leading candidate for Secretary of State in a second Obama term: "What happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction . . . as a consequence of the video, that people gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent."

Administration officials also maintained that the diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt, the site of the first attacks this September 11, were properly defended and that the U.S. had no reason to prepare for any attack. "The office of the director of National Intelligence has said we have no actionable intelligence that an attack on our post in Benghazi was planned or imminent," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week, calling the security measures in place there "robust."

Cell phone video footage and witness testimony from Benghazi soon undercut the Administration trope of an angry march "hijacked" by a few bad people. As it turned out, the assault was well-coordinated, with fighters armed with guns, RPGs and diesel canisters, which were used to set the buildings on fire. Ambassador Chris Stevens died of smoke inhalation. Briefing Congress, the Administration changed its story and said the attacks were pre-planned and linked to al Qaeda.

You'd think this admission would focus attention on why the compound was so vulnerable to begin with. But the Administration wants to avoid this conversation. The removal of all staff from Benghazi, including a large component of intelligence officers, would also seem to hinder their ability to investigate the attacks and bring the killers to justice.

Journalists have stayed on the case, however, and their reporting is filling in the Administration's holes. On Friday, our WSJ colleagues showed that starting in spring, U.S. intelligence had been worried about radical militias in eastern Libya...

Imagine the uproar if, barely a month before Election Day, the Bush Administration had responded to a terrorist strike—on Sept. 11 no less—in this fashion. Obfuscating about what happened. Refusing to acknowledge that clear security warnings were apparently ignored. Then trying to shoot the messengers who bring these inconvenient truths to light in order to talk about anything but a stunning and deadly attack on U.S. sovereign territory.

Four Americans lost their lives in Benghazi in a terrorist attack that evidence suggests should have been anticipated and might have been stopped. Rather than accept responsibility, the Administration has tried to stonewall and blame others. Congress should call hearings to hold someone accountable for this debacle.

Well, a good chunk of the media are complicit in helping to cover up the story. As I've argued, this is shaping up to be a massive scandal and I'm glad GOP members of Congress are starting to make a stink. At the clip Senator Bob Corker calls the administration's stonewalling a disgrace, it's "Benghazi-Gate." That's got quite a ring to it. Indeed, this morning Da Tech Guy tweeted that had such events taken place during the Nixon administration, "Tricky Dick" would have been able to serve out his 8 years in office uninterrupted. It's simply unreal what's happening during this administration and the American people need a full hearing.

Check back for developments...

Israel Must Be 'Eliminated'

At the Wall Street Journal:

'To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."

—George Orwell

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks at the United Nations today, which also happens to be Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. The timing is apt because when it comes to Iran and Israel, the hardest thing for some people to see or hear is what Iranian leaders say in front of the world's nose.

"Iran has been around for the last seven, 10 thousand years. They [the Israelis] have been occupying those territories for the last 60 to 70 years, with the support and force of the Westerners. They have no roots there in history," Mr. Ahmadinejad told reporters and editors in New York on Monday.

"We do believe that they have found themselves at a dead end and they are seeking new adventures in order to escape this dead end. Iran will not be damaged with foreign bombs. We don't even count them as any part of any equation for Iran. During a historical phase, they [the Israelis] represent minimal disturbances that come into the picture and are then eliminated."

Note that word—"eliminated." When Iranians talk about Israel, this intention of a final solution keeps coming up. In October 2005, Mr. Ahmadinejad, quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini, said Israel "must be wiped off the map." Lest anyone miss the point, the Iranian President said in June 2008 that Israel "has reached the end of its function and will soon disappear off the geographical domain."

He has company among Iranian leaders. In a televised speech in February, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei called Israel a "cancerous tumor that should be cut and will be cut," adding that "from now on, in any place, if any nation or any group that confronts the Zionist regime, we will endorse and we will help. We have no fear of expressing this."

Major General Hassan Firouzabadi, chief of staff of the armed forces, added in May that "the Iranian nation is standing for its cause that is the full annihilation of Israel."

Continue reading.

In Spain, Austerity and Hunger — and Riots

The New York Times had this report on Tuesday, "Spain Recoils as Its Hungry Forage Trash Bins for a Next Meal."

And then that night, intense rioting broke out:

Der Spiegel has more, "Autumn of Discontent: Turmoil over Austerity Hits Spain and Greece."

FBI Agents Still Not in Benghazi, Libya; Consulate Still Not Secure

Yet more f-ked up news on the administration's Muslim world clusterf-k, from CNN, amazingly:

'It's the closest thing to real freedom I've ever known...'

This is a great story, at the Los Angeles Times, "A Utah man and his ghost town: a love story":

WOODSIDE, Utah — Roy Pogue has loved a lot of things in his 63 years — like his wife, Chris, and her little Daffy Duck tattoo, not to mention the couple's six children.

Yet few things have made his heart go flip-flop more than a dry-gulch piece of land out in the middle of Utah's nowhere.

Sometimes, love truly is blind. A lot of words describe Pogue's backside-of-beyond parcel, where rust rules and the thermometers have all surrendered to the cold and the heat. One of those words is Godforsaken.

More than 700 dusty, rocky acres in all, the spread sits along the trickling Price River, under the boxy shadow of the Book Cliffs. Like Pogue himself, a man in bib overalls, handlebar mustache and well-oiled cowboy hat, the property exudes a bit of Wild West panache: At its core is a creaky old ghost town complete with an abandoned gold mine, cold-water geyser and a supposed onetime hide-out for the outlaw Butch Cassidy when he wasn't riding with the Sundance Kid.

But now, in a move that breaks Pogue's heart, he's put it all up for sale. Despite its scruffy "as is" condition, he's asking a pretty price: $3.9 million.

Potential buyers might see only isolation and neglect: a jumble of abandoned trailers, water tanks, squat-looking shacks and the shell of an old service station, all surrounded by a fence to keep out vandals.

If most towns rise up out of the desert, this one just lies there. But for Pogue, the place has been a refuge.

The little hamlet of Woodside, located along a lonely rural highway three hours southeast of Salt Lake City, was already long abandoned when Pogue settled here, but that suited him just fine. A disabled veteran from the nearby town of Moab who had a hard time finding steady carpentry work, Pogue says that in his 20 years here, he's ruled his own fate: He's been a one-man sheriff, judge, jury and good Samaritan.

Over the years, he made ends meet by ranching, farming (yes, farming) and running his gas station. And for a long time he made it work. For 70 miles along isolated U.S. Route 6, between the towns of Price and Green River, it's been just Pogue and a herd of free-range llamas. But maybe not for much longer.

After decades of sweat, labor, battles with the federal government over cattle and water rights, fights with his wife, who prefers people to llamas — and, finally, declining health — Pogue performed the toughest chore of his life: pounding in the for-sale sign.

"This place has meant so much to me," he said, sweating under a relentless midday sun. "It's the closest thing to real freedom I've ever known in my life. At this price, it might be a cold day in hell before someone buys it. And maybe that's good."

RTWT.

Obama's Pitbull Media

I think "lapdog media" is too mild. Obama's press flacks are pitbulls, and they're lethal.

See Mona Charen, "The Obama Press Votes Early":

“Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring.”  — Ann Romney

Mrs. Romney’s exasperation with conservative critics is understandable. The mainstream press has been like a school of piranhas swarming around her husband. To receive fire from her own side as well — even constructive advice — may seem too much to bear.

Mitt Romney is facing perhaps the most corrupt and tendentious coverage in presidential history as members of the fourth estate eschew any semblance of integrity in their attempt to skew interpretations in favor of their pinup, Mr. Obama.

The examples would fill volumes....

In the first hours of the violence that engulfed U.S. embassies on September 11, Romney was lambasted by the press for criticizing a sitting president and for issuing a statement prematurely. Of course, when Obama criticized Bush in 2007 for an attack on a base in Afghanistan, he received no such condemnation.

We are now witnessing the slow-motion implosion of the Obama-administration narrative about what happened in Benghazi. Not only did the Obama administration insist, from the beginning and before ascertaining the facts, that the attack on our ambassador and three other Americans was a case of a protest gone wild over an Internet movie, they maintained this obvious deception for nearly two weeks.

As early as September 12, Rep. Mike Rogers (R., Mich.) and officials at the Defense and State departments were questioning the White House version. “This was a coordinated attack, more of a commando-style event. It had both coordinated fire, direct fire, indirect fire,” Rogers commented the day after the attack.

Yet four days later, Obama sent U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to the Sunday-morning political shows to insist that the attack on Americans was basically a negative movie review. Some news organizations are reporting that there was no protest over the Internet film in Benghazi at all, just a coordinated terror attack featuring a former Guantanamo detainee. Do not expect days or weeks of coverage about what a scandal this represents, about the administration’s failure to provide adequate security to American diplomats, about the administration’s persistence in a lie long after it was obvious that the attack in Libya was a terrorist strike.

There's more at that top link. I'm almost in shock thinking of how reprehensible the Libya debacle is, and that's without even factoring in the administration's cover up and the media's enabling. Team Romney should not let this story fall by the wayside. It's a story of perhaps the most corrupt and incompetent foreign policy in American history, made worse by the fawning Obama-media.

What Do Radical Islamists and Progressives Have in Common?

From Donald Thornton, at ThyBlackMan, "Radical Islamists and Radical Leftists: The eerie similarities" (via Instapundit):

These events [across the Mulsim world] have shed light on a disturbing parallel that I believe must be examined. The eerie similarities between radical Islamist all over the world and radical Leftist that reside right here in America. Because their ultimate goals are synonymic. A nation; dare I say a world, under submission to their will.

I believe these two ideologies are clear and present dangers to America and the world at large. Because both; at their core seek to suppress any speech or expression that is contrary to their worldview. Free speech has to be the first and most protected foundational pillar of any new nation.  And it must be re-enforced perpetually in any existing nation that has adopted it.

The ideology of radical Islam has no place for dissent, compromise, freedom of expression or speech. It seeks to rule by the sheer force of fear, intimidation, criminalization and tyranny. Terrorism is its dominant mode of operations. It will not tolerate any opposing views or critiques. To say or do anything that it deems insulting of its worldview is worthy of imprisonment or even death. Its influence is so strong that it persuades the emotionally unstable to commit horrific acts terrorism. Its desire is total submission to its will.

Likewise in the same way contemporary liberalism/progressivism uses the same M.O. The ideology of the radical Left has no place for dissent or freedoms that do not comport to their worldview. It seeks to intimidate via boycotts, petitions, protests’ and lawsuits.

Dare to speak ill about or challenge any of its holy doctrines, which include: Abortion on demand, Gay Rights/Marriage, Evolution, Unions/Collective Bargaining Rights, Open-ended Civil Rights, Global Warming, Reducing Social Programs, just to name a few…

And the campaign of policing, isolating and ideologically terror begin with a vengeance, a type of jihad against those who oppose its failed worldview.

Lock up that thought criminal.

Karl Rove Breaks Down the Obama-Enabling Public Opinion Polls

From O'Reilly's show last night:

That New York Times poll is a disastrous outlier. I wrote about it here: "Skewed and Unskewed Polls." The race is going to tighten, but again, I'm looking for a Mitt Romney lead in some of these surveys. Once you throw out the bad samples, Obama's still leading. The Republican ticket needs a game changer. And that's got to be the debates or it's simply over.

But check back for more...

Obama Administration Knew It Was al-Qaeda Within 24 Hours

This story is not new to me, since the word's been out for awhile, but the coverage is getting wider and more critical.

From Eli Lake, at the Daily Beast, "U.S. Officials Knew Libya Attacks Were Work of Al Qaeda Affiliates."

At the video is Rep. Buck McKeon, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. He's outraged at the incompetence and fraud this administration's foisting on the American people:

That clip's from last Friday, but Ed Morrissey has an update from yesterday, "House Armed Services chair: Obama admin hiding truth on Libya until after election."

This is the scandal of the Obama administration's tenure in office. The administration lied to the American people, and top officials told reporters to "f*ck off" when questions starting getting too hot. The press is behind the curve, but can't let it go forever. The New York Times has this out in today's paper, for example, "Clinton Suggests Link to Qaeda Offshoot in Deadly Libya Attack."

I'll have more...

In Any War Between the Civilized Man and the Savage, Support the Civilized Man

I'd post every single entry at Atlas Shrugs if I could. Pamela's blog is off the charts with moral clarity. Head over there for an historic tutorial on freedom of speech and moral backbone in the face of totalitarianism.

These Are Not 'Bumps in the Road'

An excellent ad.

Also at the Los Angeles Times, "Romney hits Obama for calling Middle East troubles 'bumps in road'."

President Obama Speech to U.N. General Assembly, September 25, 2012

The full speech is here.

And Jennifer Rubin just rips into Obama, rightly --- and righteously --- so, "Obama’s speech at the United Nations":

President Obama is so soaked in the State Department/Western European/ leftist intellectual goo of moral relativism and disdain for core American values that I doubt he understood how offensive were his remarks at the United Nations today.

After fessing up that our embassy people were killed by terrorists (he doesn’t say what kind, however) and reciting that violence is never justified he then once again denounced the anti-Islam video. And he delivers this:

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.

Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims and Shia pilgrims. It’s time to heed the words of Gandhi, “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.”

Together, we must work towards a work where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies. That’s the vision we will support.

Where to begin?

Continue reading.