We have always been at peace with Oceania. Emmanuel “the Mitt” Goldstein is the enemy.

The chronology has been simple.  On September 11, 2012, a mob attacked our Cairo embassy, which promptly apologized to the mob.

Also on September 11, 2012, a well armed Al Qaeda group attacked our consulate in Benghazi and murdered four people, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was there as the embodiment of the United States.

Within a short time of the Benghazi attack, both Obama and Hillary said that they were really, really upset — and apologized to the mob.

By Friday, riots were breaking out all over the Muslim world, as well as in Europe’s capitals.  A British news outlet, the Daily Mail, had a great photo essay showing rampaging mobs and burning embassies.

After the second apology, Mitt Romney, who is running for president based upon his claim that he can handle situations better than Obama (who, as Hillary promised during the 2008 Democrat primary, slept through the 3 a.m. emergency), made a statement:

The Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.

Romney’s statement is entirely accurate.  Both Hillary and Obama talked about their feelings, and then said that the United States doesn’t countenance saying mean thinks about Islam.

Faced with this unprecedented crisis, the American media reacted immediately and in the strongest terms:  they condemned Romney.  The attacks themselves?  Meh.  Article after article was filled with scathing indictments of the real horror that occurred that week, and it was riot and murder.  Romney was the problem, something that Joe Scarborough stated most succinctly:

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?


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. So no conservative can say “oh, the mainstream media, blah, blah.” They know how badly they screwed up, and they were having the fight internally before he even went out and did it. 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.

By Saturday morning, the day after Friday’s day of flame, the San Francisco Chronicle decided that the whole thing was too much effort.  Here’s a thumbnail screen shot I grabbed showing its main stories for Saturday, September 15, the day after the riots.

If you click on the thumbnail to see the full text, you’ll notice that there is not a single story dealing with any of the week’s events in the Middle East.  I had expected that a “main page” story would be something along the lines of “U.S. Embassies Threatened Around The Globe.”  The same holds true for today’s — Sunday’s online edition of the paper — which one might expect to have some sort of wrap-up of the week’s events abroad.  But . . . nothing:

In retrospect, it amazes me that I can still be so naive.  The media will do anything for Obama.  They will, cheat, steal, and, if they can’t do any of the above, they’ll just suppress the news entirely.  If you’d been out the reach of any media from Tuesday through Friday, and the first online paper you checked out was Saturday’s Chron, you would have no idea that Obama’s pro-Muslim foreign policy had explosively imploded.

We have always been at peace with Oceania.  Emmanuel “the Mitt” Goldstein is the enemy.  Please prepare yourself for your daily two minutes of hate.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Caped Crusader

    One of the best examples I can think of as a total, complete, absolute, unshakeable, unspeakable, ingrained, unprincipled, political whore with no ingrained beliefs or principles, who will change his political allegiance in a second  to further his own interests, and who is a gutless, spineless piece of trash. Anyone  who listens to him or cares what he thinks is cut from the same cloth.


    S.F. Chronicle cannot possibly be classified as a newspaper anymore than Joe Scaborough a journolist 

    Are you going to Scarborough Fair
    Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme
    Remember me to one who lives there   


    Well, that was a kinda oops on the spelling “journalist” – must have been the journal-obama syndrome taking over.



  • Mike Devx

    Welcome aboard, come one, come all!

    Eight years ago we could have talked about “media bias”.  There is no need to be that mild anymore.  The mainstream media has sold their soul, lock and barrel, and they are now Democrat Operatives.  This is no longer merely about “bias”.  It is naked partisanship.

    The disgrace is that they continue to claim to be objective.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

    I am not sure that the naked partisanship itself is a disgrace.  Before World War II, our media WERE nakedly partisan, and unashamedly so.  They were honest in their partisanship, unlike today.  I believe it was World War II, with Edward R. Murrow and company, who mostly held themselves to an admirable attempt at objectivity.  In a sense this lasted for about thirty years; since then we have been swinging back to the way things always used to be: nakedly partisan media.

    The American People still, to some extent, believe the mainstream media to be objective.  To be “fair”, and not deliberately deceitful.  More and more of them are waking up to the new reality, which really is the “old” pre-World War II reality.

    I’ve got no problem with the likes of Ed Schultz.  He’s partisan, freely admits it, and in that manner he actually has some integrity.  It’s the others that I have learned to detest and loathe with every fiber of my being.  It’s the media hacks I am talking about, the ones I will label the Deliberate Deceivers.

    These media hacks are no longer engaged merely in bias.  They are dedicated Democrat operatives.  Do you remember the “mea culpas” early in 2010, when they admitted, yeah, they have been too partisan in their reporting?  “We’re sorry, we’re sorry,” they mumbled.  Now they are at it again, 100% full throttle ahead.  Don’t accept ONE WORD of any apology for this, ever again.  Their apologies have been shown to be utterly meaningless.

    Every time you see one of these hacks gazing earnestly into the camera, reporting “the news”, just laugh with every ounce of contempt you can muster.  They deserve nothing but contempt.  I am finally to the point where I would freely say to any one them, should I run into them on the street, “I would spit on you, but that would be beneath me.  Though you deserve it.”   I can do this now, looking them right in the face with all calm certainty.  And I would mean every word, and be at peace with myself.

    Again, it’s not the partisanship itself.  Rather, it is the deliberate deceit.  It is the way they are coasting on their reputation of objectivity, and *using* that reputation nefariously and deliberately.

  • gpc31

    It’s depressing, and it ticks me off.
    My wife, an academic who absorbs the NYT op-ed page as if by osmosis, gleefully informed me of Mitt Romney’s “gaffe”.  She blamed the film maker for the riots.  Didn’t seem too concerned about the killing of Chris Stevens, until I asked her how she would feel if her cousin, a foreign service officer, were to be killed, mutilated, and dragged through the streets of some god-forsaken third world hole.  That got through to her.
    As did the picture of those thugs arresting the film maker, when I asked how many artists have been arrested for burning the flag, or for soaking a cross in urine.


    gpc31 – wanna share this with you wife?
    This week:
    Hillary Clinton: Anti-Islam Film is ‘Disgusting, Reprehensible (headline from The Atlantic today)
    NYT: November 25, 1993
    President Clinton met today with Salman Rushdie in a gesture that the White House said was intended to convey America’s abhorrence of Iran’s refusal to lift the death threat against the novelist.
    Mr. Rushdie also conferred at length with Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Anthony Lake, the national security adviser.

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations – Takers And Makers Edition()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations | therightplanet.com()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations | therightplanet.com()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations – Takers And Makers Edition | Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog()

  • Pingback: GayPatriot » Watcher of Weasels — 09.19.12 Nominations()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations – Takers And Makers Edition | askmarion()

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watcher’s Council submissions = good stuff()

  • Pingback: Light, Medium, or Heavy |()

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results()

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results | therightplanet.com()

  • Pingback: GayPatriot » Watcher of Weasels — 09.21.12 Winners()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watchers Council Results – Sep 21 2012 | askmarion()

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » The Council has spoken — September 21, 2012 edition()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Winners! | Independent Sentinel()

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()

  • Pingback: Election Results In! |()