It’s Tuesday, August 28th, 2012….and here’s The Gouge!

First up, in the Follow-Up segment, courtesy today of Bill Meisen, Jim Treacher and the The DC Trawler, despite having yesterday contrasted Neil Armstrong’s legendary humility to The Obamao’s overweening hubris, we were still taken aback upon learning B. Hussein’s narcissism could still go where no ego had gone before:

Obama pays tribute to Neil Armstrong, the only way he knows how

 

We all know the world revolves around The Greatest President in the History of Everything. So it makes sense that all the other celestial bodies were placed in the sky to shine down upon him. This is not a Photoshop. This was actually posted on Obama’s official Tumblr page:

Sure, Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. But only to tidy it up, so that one day it would be a suitable resting place for Obama’s kingly gaze.

Hat tip to Sooper Mexican, who notes that this is a stock image from last April. That’s how Team Obama thinks: “Hey, we got any pictures of the boss looking at the moon? Any way we can make this all about him?” And that attitude starts at the top. Just ask Queen Elizabeth, as she’s deleting all the Obama videos from the iPod he gave her…

Tom Hanks, playing Jim Lovell, concluded the movie version of Apollo 13 with the question, “I look up at the moon and wonder, when will we be going back, and who will that be?”  Don’t know; can’t tell ya.

But one thing we do know….for certain: it won’t be during the tenure of, as The Bad News Bears termed it, the booger-eatin’ moron who single-handedly….

….terminated America’s space program.

Speaking of termination, as detailed in Patheos.com (rather raggedly at times), the MSM is either ignorant or playing stupid when….

Reporters pretend they’re confused about rape

 

Earlier today, I highlighted a couple of examples of how the media suffer from some serious blind spots when it comes to coverage of the hot-button topic of abortion. I noted that the struggles of pro-life Democrats to have their existence simply acknowledged by their party receive very little, if any, mainstream media coverage. Conversely, the pro-life platform of the Republican Party is big media story.

I also pointed out how reporters love to ask consistent pro-life politicians about rape exceptions to abortion but hardly ever ask consistent pro-choice politicians about sex-selection abortions, late-term abortions or Down syndrome abortions.

For a look at how reporters have had historical trouble covering abortion with even a semblance of balance, you may be interested in this essay by Newsweek contributing editor Kenneth Woodward or the Los Angeles Times media analysis he references therein. Let’s move on to another area where the media have had trouble reporting — as opposed to advocating for a particular social issue goal. That’s the curious attack on the pro-life Paul Ryan as someone who was trying to “redefine rape.”

For anyone who has not been paying attention to newspapers or legal dramas for the past few decades, the justice system distinguishes between forcible rape (which is, well, exactly what is described by the words “forcible rape”) and statutory rape. Statutory rape is where someone who is of legal age to consent to have sex (say, 18 in some jurisdictions) has sex with someone who is not of legal age to consent to have sex (say, 17 in some jurisdictions).

Now, I think most people with a basic comprehension of words understand this distinction. I think most people understand that there is a difference between someone who is violently assaulted and someone whose boyfriend is a couple of years older than they are. They may be strongly opposed to both sexual encounters, but I don’t think that there’s any real question that these are different types of rape and that it’s in no way offensive to distinguish between them.

But for some reason the media have been pretending that they don’t understand the difference and that to distinguish between these two legal definitions of rape is an attempt to “redefine” rape. These are perfectly fine talking points for pro-choice activists, but should journalists be playing along?

Here’s ABC:

Now with Akin making headlines, Democrats will seek to tie Ryan to the Missouri congressman by highlighting social-issues legislation on which they’ve partnered.

Akin and Ryan cosponsored a 2011 bill, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act, that would redefine rape as “forcible rape,” narrowing the scope of what’s considered rape in cases of abortion.

First off, there is absolutely no evidence provided by ABC that this would “redefine” rape, as it claims. There is no evidence provided that it would narrow the scope of what’s considered rape. And there’s no mention of the fact that — since Republicans dropped the wording because they viewed it as redundant or a political liability. They don’t mention that 225 other representatives cosponsored this legislation — including, shhhhhhh, eleven Democrats. Now, maybe it’s totally legitimate to focus this much attention on one word that was never voted on because it was dropped from a bill cosponsored by 225 representatives from both parties. I don’t know. But I smell something a bit lacking in terms of balance or fair reporting. Or, as one reporter noted, Barack Obama holds a position in support of taxpayer funding of abortions that is opposed by 72 percent of Americans, according to a Quinnipac Poll. Have the media been writing breathless reports about that? It’s fantastic to write about abortion. But if you’re writing about Ryan and abortion — and you haven’t found the time to cover sitting President Barack Obama’s abortion record — you may be doing it wrong.

But it looks like journalists are all in for pushing this pro-choice talking point about forcible rape. Do they really not understand the distinction between forcible rape and statutory rape? Really? Really? Come on. But here’s Anderson Cooper of CNN:

Last year Paul Ryan distinguished between “forcible rape” and other kinds. How come today he won’t explain what he meant?

Is anyone else pretending that they don’t understand the distinction? Sadly, hundreds of reporters are pretending they don’t understand the distinction. Even Jake Tapper’s otherwise fine and balanced report for ABC News emphasized that Paul Ryan didn’t explain something we all know — the headline was:

Ryan Refuses to Explain “Forcible” Rape as Dems Attempt More Akin-izing of the GOP Ticket

NBC‘s Kelly O’Donnell also played along with her story “Ryan backed more than one ‘forcible rape’ abortion bill,” that repeated the same talking points and has been “updated” (which is what others call “corrected”) for problems with the reporting. That includes the last paragraph which, after tarring Ryan as having some magical, mystical understanding of rape that is different from everyone else’s, concedes that, well:

For broader context, the term “forcible rape” appears to have roots in the legal community, where it has been used by prosecutors to distinguish that crime from “statutory rape,” which involves a minor unable to legally consent or a person who lacks mental capacity for legal consent.

By Wednesday night, one reporter found that there were already 337 stories about this pro-choice talking point that requires reporters to pretend that they don’t actually understand the difference between statutory and forced rape. As I finish writing this, we see that the New York Times is now also pretending not to understand rape — as this comprehensive take-down of that story’s inaccurate and misleading reporting makes clear.

Either reporters are pushing an agenda supportive of abortion rights or they’re idiots. It’s one thing for pro-choice activists or the Democratic Party to advocate in support of those goals. But reporters playing games in service to that agenda is ridiculous. We’re all better than that, no matter what side of the issue we’re personally on.

Which is where the author’s argument falls totally apart; because the Left ISN’T better than that.  And the longer this election goes, and the further The Anointed One falls behind, the more the MSM will prove our point.  Like The Obamao, they haven’t even begun to approach bottom.

Since we’re on the subject of scraping bottom….

Ron Paul, supporters heap scorn on GOP establishment at convention counter-rally

 

Submitted for your approval, one Joshua Womrath, a Paul acolyte:

Josh Womrath, a 28-year-old college student at the University of South Florida, said he admires Paul for his anti-war beliefs and his refusal to subvert his values to popular opinion — a criticism of both Obama and Romney. A registered Republican, he voted for President Obama in 2008, but is undecided this year.

In addition to his indecisiveness, Mr. Womrath also sports an arrest record, having been pinched a year ago May for obstructing an officer.  With supporters like this, is it any wonder Paul more and more resembles the Left’s….

….crazy uncle in the attic?!?

Moving on to the Muslim Minute, we learn….

‘American Taliban’ Lindh seeks group prayer in Indiana prison

 

An American-born Taliban fighter imprisoned in Indiana will try to convince a federal judge that his religious freedom trumps security concerns in a closely watched trial that will examine how far prisons can go to ensure security in the age of terrorism.

John Walker Lindh was expected to testify Monday in Indianapolis during the first day of the trial over prayer policies in a tightly restricted prison unit where he and other high-risk inmates have severely limited contact with the outside world. Lindh, 31, a Muslim convert who was charged with supporting terrorists after he was captured by U.S. troops in Afghanistan and later pleaded guilty to lesser charges, claims his religious rights are being violated because the federal prison in Terre Haute deprives him of daily group prayer.

Muslims are required to pray five times a day, and the Hanbali school to which Lindh belongs requires group prayer if it is possible. But inmates in the Communications Management Unit are allowed to pray together only once a week except during Ramadan. At other times, they must pray in their individual cells. Lindh says that doesn’t meet the Quran’s requirements and is inappropriate because he is forced to kneel in close proximity to his toilet.

A position we consider only appropriate….particularly for a sheet-head.

Then there’s this from Wink Martindale and WND.com:

Democrats host radical Muslims at Charlotte

Event led by imam who urged overthrow of ‘filthy’ U.S. government

 

Meet Siraj Wahhaj: unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 WTC bombing and soulmate of B. Hussein’s spiritual mentor

The Democratic Party is sanctioning a Muslim prayer event in conjunction with its nominating convention in Charlotte that will feature a radical Islamic leader who has called for the overthrow of the “filthy” U.S. government and establishment of Islamic law.

“Jumah at the DNC” is being presented by the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs, or BIMA, from Aug. 31 to Sept. 1. A brochure for the event says the group has “been authorized by the Democratic National Convention (DNC) to conduct Jumah prayer as well as host festivities and Islamically related functions.”

BIMA claims the event is nonpolitical and nonpartisan. However, the brochure for the event has a section for participants to “support the DNC” and make a contribution in an amount ranging from $500 to $10,000. The Washington Times reported the DNC lists the Muslim event as an “official function” and claims that the Islamic leaders of the program are typical of the DNC community.

The event is expected to draw up to 20,000 Muslims and will include a Friday Jumah prayer ritual and an issues conference. A letter posted on BIMA’s website says its purpose is to “address the concerns and issues that are challenging to the American Muslim Community in the 21st century.” The letter calls on Muslims to stand up and “repel the outright injustices being perpetuated against the American Muslim Community.”

BIMA spokesman Jibril Hough told the Charlotte Observer that among the grievances are the Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and the New York Police Department’s wiretapping program that Hough says was used to spy on Muslims.

Islam expert Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch.org, said it is apparent the group plans to use the event as a platform to claim Muslims are being persecuted in America.

Persecuted?  Absolutely not.  Viewed with suspicion?

You bet your ass!

In a related item courtesy of the Religion of Pieces….

17 partygoers beheaded by insurgents in Afghanistan

 

Insurgents attacked a large party in a Taliban-controlled area of southern Afghanistan and beheaded 17 people, officials said on Monday. The head of the local government initially said the victims were civilians at a celebration late Sunday involving music and dancing in the Musa Qala district of Helmand province. The official, Neyamatullah Khan, said the Taliban killed the party-goers for flouting the extreme brand of Islam embraced by the militants.

So please; tell us again how Israel is the only obstacle to peace in the Middle East?!?

On the Lighter Side….

Then there’s this classic from Bill Magruder:

And as some of you apparently failed to catch this must-see billboard the first time we ran it: back for an encore performance, a Brendan Clark adaptation of a Shannon Wood production:

Next up, in the “Sometimes You Eat The Bear….” segment, we turn north to Alaska, where we learn:

California man dies in first fatal bear attack at Alaska’s Denali National Park

 

A hiker in Alaska’s Denali National Park photographed a grizzly bear for at least eight minutes before the bear mauled and killed him in the first fatal attack in the park’s history, officials said Saturday. Investigators have recovered the camera and looked at the photographs, which show the bear grazing and not acting aggressively before the attack, Denali Park Superintendent Paul Anderson said.

The hiker was identified late Saturday as Richard White, 49, of San Diego. He was backpacking alone along the Toklat River on Friday afternoon when he came within 50 yards of the bear, far closer than the quarter-mile of separation required by park rules, officials said.

Officials learned of the attack after hikers stumbled upon an abandoned backpack along the river about three miles from a rest area on Friday afternoon. The hikers also spotted torn clothing and blood. They immediately hiked back and alerted staff park. Rangers in a helicopter spotted a large male grizzly bear sitting on the hiker’s remains, which they called a “food cache” in the underbrush about 100 to 150 yards from the site of the attack on Friday.

A state trooper shot and killed the male bear on Saturday. Investigators examined the bear’s stomach contents, looked at White’s photos and used other tests Saturday evening to confirm that it was the animal that killed White, park officials said in a statement Saturday night. White’s remains were recovered Saturday evening and were being sent to the medical examiner in Anchorage.

“Over the years, and especially since the 1970s, the park has worked very diligently to minimize the conflict between humans and wildlife in the park,” Anderson said. “We have some of the most stringent human-wildlife conflict regulations in the National Park system, and I think those are largely responsible for the fact that there hasn’t been a fatal attack.”

Prior to receiving a permit to hike in the area, all backpackers in the park receive mandatory bear awareness training that teaches them to stay at least a quarter-mile away from bears, and to slowly back away if they find themselves any closer. Investigators confirmed that the hiker had received that training.

Unfortunately for the naive Mr. White, as this sign forwarded by experienced grizz-hunter Bill Meisen suggests, the bear had some training of his own:

No doubt the the grizz leaned decidedly Left, as he clearly saw Mr. White life’s as a choice….on his menu.  Remember folks, no matter how cuddly cable television makes them seem, they’re wild, unpredictable animals; and they view you….

….simply as another food source.

Turning to the Sports Section, here’s a video demonstrating why, as the announcer says, whenever possible, you should always use two hands catching a baseball….

….particularly when you’ve lost it in the sun.

Finally, consider the following two outcomes; then tell us….

NYPD: 9 shooting bystander victims hit by police gunfire

 

….who YOU gonna call?!?  Yet another reason we’ll always opt to be judged by 12 rather than carried by 6.  Hat tip to Chris “Chink” Wilson for the headline detailing the amazing accuracy of the Boys in Blue.

Magoo