Category Archives: Propaganda

UPDATED: Lincoln Myth Busting

History, Neoconservatism, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Republicans, States' Rights, War

I was one of the folks who contacted Tom DiLorenzo asking him to dispel any developing myths about Bill O’Reilly’s new book, which deals with that killer, Abe Lincoln. After all, who better to dispatch O’Reilly and his Abe-adulating Killing Lincoln, than the Lincoln Myth Buster himself? Writes Tom at LRC.COM:

“Quite a few people have emailed me begging me to critically review Bill O’Reilly’s new book, Killing Lincoln, about the assassination. They do this not because they have read the book, which is a big, boring bag of nothingness, but because they’ve heard O’Reilly spout the neocon party line about ‘Father Abraham’ on his television show and they smell a rat.

I’ve read the book, and it really is a big bunch of nothing. All it is is a narrative of the events leading up to the assassination. Over 100 books are already in print on the subject, and all O’Reilly and his coauthor do is cut and paste what others have written on the subject, but without including a single footnote! The authors also have the annoying habit of writing things like, ‘in his mind, he was thinking that . . . ‘ as though they could know what Lincoln was thinking when he did this or that 150 years ago. This is a standard practice of the ‘Lincoln scholars,’ who also constantly claim to know what was ‘in his heart’ (nothing but love and kindness, of course) in their writings.” …

MORE.

UPDATE: Thanks, Mari, for the Salon link. Of course, liberals would never pan a Lincoln book because it lauds a mass murderer who sundered the Constitutional scheme forever and sicced brother against brother:

“A reviewer for the official National Park Service bookstore at Ford’s Theatre has recommended that Bill O’Reilly’s bestselling new book about the Lincoln assassination not be sold at the historic site “because of the lack of documentation and the factual errors within the publication.”

Rae Emerson, deputy superintendent at Ford’s Theatre, which is a national historic site under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, has penned a scathing appraisal of O’Reilly’s “Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever.” In Emerson’s official review, which I’ve pasted below, she spends four pages correcting passages from O’Reilly’s book before recommending that it not be offered for sale at Ford’s Theatre because it is not up to quality standards.

UPDATED: Slimy Sex Trail Leads to Chicago

Aesthetics, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Morality, Politics, Pop-Culture, Propaganda, Racism, Republicans, Sex

Ann Coulter provides some good shoe-leather reporting, absent from US mainstream media, as she tracks the slimy trail of Herman Cain’s accusers back to … Chicago. And, if you want the exact GPS (Global Positioning System) coordinates, the breadcrumbs lead straight to “David Axelrod’s apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive,” where “Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialekhe” resided.

What does it say about the workplace that someone who looks and sounds as Bialekhe does has held respectable position’s in various industries? And she’s only 50; so ugly and lined despite all the obvious plastic panel beating her face has endured. In answer to the question of how to stay young, I always reply: When you get to your late 40s, what’s inside begins to manifest on the outside. You can’t hide ugly insides.

UPDATE: The Real Rush has it that the media’s extra-hideous attack on Cain is because, “Herman [is] Cain more of a threat than the other GOP contenders: He could win. So, neither the Obama administration, the Democrat National Committee, nor the liberal GOP leadership wants him to secure the Republican nomination. Blacks would vote for him. The guilted white fools who voted for Obama would vote for him. Conservatives would vote for him. Evangelical Christians would vote for him. Is there anyone left?

Sure there is. But you get the picture: With Cain versus Obama, it’s Cain in a landslide.”

MORE.

UPDATE III: Cain Crossed the Character Line (Classic Coulter)

Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Politics, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Reason, Rights

“What’s Herman Cain being accused of?” Brent Bozell asked CNN contributor Roland Martin. Bozell is the publisher of NewsBusters and heads the Media Research Center.

Here’s Herman Cain’s central conceit: He has lived as an individual. He has failed to make racial grievance the center and focus of his life. He seems incapable of picking at those old racial scabs. He has no suppurating racial sores. He does not identify as a black man, he is just an American man (with all the frailties and foibles that entails).

During the Civil Rights Movement, which has usurped all else in the annals of America, the craven Cain was … working.

“I just kept going to school, doing what I was supposed to do, and stayed out of trouble.” OMIGOD. Look where this pragmatic, goal-oriented work ethic has landed him.

Bloody Google spits up all the malign stuff, first. And the HuffPo and MSNBC won’t even do journalism, and tell us what Cain was doing with his “lazyass.”

Cain was, however, being a little too kind when he suggested that “African-Americans in this country had been brainwashed over the years into supporting Democrats.”

The decision to support the Democratic platform of pillage politics and perpetual welfare is also a personal one. Still, Cain has been maligned for daring to even suggest the black community thinks as a collective.

In short, for speaking the truth.

Ann Coulter: “To become a black Republican, you don’t just roll into it. You’re not going with the flow. You have fought against probably your family members, probably your neighbors, you have thought everything out and that’s why we have very impressive blacks in our party.”

“Google Maxine Waters, Cynthia McKinney, John Conyers, and then Google Allen West, Michael Steele or Herman Cain. … Our [blacks] are more impressive. There’s no question about it,” Coulter told retard Joy Behar.

A little crude, but probably correct, if you take away Michael Steele.

UPDATE I: In response to the thread on my Facebook Wall: It has to be obvious that libertarians do not agree with Cain or West on political philosophy. But both these men remain relatively impressive individuals. You should know by now that I’m no tinny ideologue. My comment obtains. Coulter makes a reasonable point. She’s a Republican mouthpiece, but she is not dumb (as CB claims). Gary Johnson may be allied with most of my political views, but, golly, is he weird or what?! Bordering on creepy.

UPDATE II (Nov. 3): CLASSIC COULTER. Sigh. Here’s a newsflash about the commentary at BAB and IlanaMercer.com. Just because I don’t support Cain’s candidacy and rickety political plank; and despite the fact that I’ve written enough about La Coulter’s establishment persona and positions—it does not follow that I will refrain from commenting about the Zeitgeist; the culture, the PC strictures it imposes and the interactions between the components of the media-military-congressional-industrial complex.

If you wanna read bloodless (generally left-libertarian) political analysis (yawn), you know were to go.

Anyhoo: There’s a lot to laugh about in Coulter’s latest column. I dislike the rude “our blacks” crap. But I like speech; the freer the better. (And we already know that most American pundettes are crass and unladylike, so what’s new? At least Coulter is not stupid too):

The surge in conservative support for Herman Cain confuses the Democrats’ story line, which is that Republicans hate Obama because he’s black. … Cain is twice as black as Obama. (Possible Obama campaign slogan: “Too Black!”)
This is why the liberal website Politico ran with a story on Cain that had everything – a powerful black man, a Republican presidential candidate, the hint of sexuality – except facts. … If the details helped liberals, we’d have the details.
To have been accused of sexual harassment in the 1990s is like having been accused of molesting children at preschools in the 1980s or accused of being a witch in Massachusetts in the 1690s.

Coulter nails it!

UPDATE III: Actually, SB, my Gary Johnson aversion has nothing to do with “optics”; GJ can’t stop talking about himself. Ron Paul talks liberty. Steve Jobs was charming and suave. This guy is about his own goofy self.

UPDATE III: On The Political Cesspool: Argument Über Alles (The White Al)

Free Speech, Ilana Mercer, Ilana On Radio & TV, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Old Right, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Reason, South-Africa

I will be talking Pat J. Buchanan, “Into the Cannibal’s Pot,” flash mobs and the Occupy Wall Street “sleepover,” with Keith Alexander and Bill Rolen of The Political Cesspool. Time: 4:00 Pacific. Day: Oct. 29.

The hard left is baying for Mr. Buchanan’s blood for his recent appearance on the controversial show. Buchanan is standing his ground. He’s no Imus. Boy, is Patrick J. Buchanan refreshingly forceful.

In my prior visit with these broadcasters, I found them to be intelligent and courteous. If James Edwards and Bill Rolen were hostile to an individualist’s perspective, they did not let on. Both Bill and James addressed the arguments advanced in my book. That’s the sum-total of a good interviewer.

Ultimately it’s all about the argument. My position is that one cannot properly undermine a claim by undermining the motives, character or associations of its claimant. To undermine my book, the politically correct (left, libertarian, etc) will have to deal with its arguments (which the paleo establishment has so far conveniently skirted). The rest amounts to smear tactics, a variant of the ad hominem fallacy.

UPDATE I: ROUTE TO FREEDOM. Sorry to disappoint, but it was a terrible interview. I was handed over to a gentleman who wanted to emphasize a racial angle in the conversation, in crude terms too. I did not cope well. I think I reflect Western man’s disdain for race as an organizing principle, and for broad generalizations. Good luck with organizing modern westerners around race. I prefer to beat back the state so that individuals regain freedom of association, dominion over property, the absolute right of self-defense; the right to hire, fire, and, generally, associate at will. That’s the route to freedom.

UPDATE II: It’s just not in a civilized person’s nature to speak as though he were a negative image of Al Sharpton. Would you not agree?

UPDATE III (Oct. 31): To the kind comment below: On his MSNBC show, Al Sharpton behaves just like my host conducted himself. The white Al talked over me constantly, went with his own angle, rather than with the book’s tack, and made it virtually impossible for me to defend my perspective or speak to individualism and to the points made in my book—a grisly, gory book which glosses over nothing in terms of the color and cure for crime in SA and beyond. I’ve been re-reading sections such as “Racial Voting Coming to a Polling Station Near You.” The well-sourced, analytical points made in that section deserve to be elicited by an intelligent interviewer. The same holds for other sections.

I’m done with intellectually incurious dim bulbs who want to promote their perspective, rather than explore another. How is that edifying? And how is it civilized to railroad an invited guest? And how like Al that is.