-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Democratic PR flack extraordinaire Hilary Rosen told a pathetic, idiotic lie last night on CNN. “First, can we just get rid of this word ‘war on women?’ The Obama campaign does not use it. President Obama does not use it. This is something that the Republicans are accusing people of using, but they’re actually the ones spreading it.”
Republicans are spreading it? Really, Ms. Rosen?? Well then, how does this disinformation specialist explain the following fundraising pitch sent out by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, signed by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi? To quote it: “ “The national media and our opponents will use our grassroots fundraising totals to measure the strength of our opposition to the Republicans’ War on Women.” Last I checked, the congressional committee of the president’s party does just about nothing without the imprimatur of the White House or of the White House’s minions at the Democratic National Committee. Perhaps something gets by once, but if it reappears again and again, it is clear the White House doesn’t object. You see, this was not the first DCCC/Pelosi letter that used the same phrase. Several weeks earlier, there was this one, this time adding the word “unrelenting” to the charge. The DCCC even bragged about how much money the letter raised. Or how about when Pelosi called the GOP budget a “war on women”?
As Erick Erickson of Red State noted this morning, DNC Chair and demagogic congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is also fond of the expression. Too many other Democrats to mention have used the phrase or words like it. And the White House clearly has orchestrated the overall theme even when not using the words.
Methinks Rosen is waging a war on truth. Then again, that’s what the left does. That is the left’s stock in trade. A war on truth, and a war on decency.
View all comments (15) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/04/12/hilary-rosen-is-a-lying-so-and
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Dai Alanye | 4.12.12 @ 11:53AM
A Democrat lying? I'm not sure I find that credible.
ncatty| 4.12.12 @ 1:00PM
Obama gives a speech saying he and Michelle didin't have the luxury of not working, and Hilary Rosen says Ann Romney never worked a day in her life. Obama advisors then deplore Rosen's statement. Didn't Obama and Rosen say the same thing?
Bill| 4.12.12 @ 1:16PM
Hillary Rosen does that just for $20.
Clint| 4.12.12 @ 1:23PM
We Don't Allow Democrat Lib Dykes To Define The Issues.
Janet Michaels| 4.13.12 @ 11:08PM
You don't decide WHO gets to define anything. YOU don't decide that "dykes" are disqualified. YOU are a pathetic homophobe. YOU are to be feared more than those who YOU seek to demean : )
And I bet you think lesbians shouldn't be mothers too don't you? And then at the same you're one of those "awesome" fathers who teaches his hate and intolerance to his children.
You're a punk. You're a loser : )
Ramon| 4.12.12 @ 2:10PM
She's absolutely right...Republicans are spreading this, not Democrats...oops.
http://www.mydemocraticstore.c.....OW-MG58063
From the DNC Official Merchandise website
Oldefarte| 4.12.12 @ 3:35PM
Do your research, tell the truth [and if that's impossible listern to Rush and to Ann C.]. This lesbian POS critisizing Romney's wife is a political operative working for the 1600 domestic terrorists. She and her ''''''PARTNER'''''' previously adopted twins and now have split. TYPICAL DEMOCRAT POS.....................IT'S THE DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS..........WAKE UP!!:
'.....Fighting the last warby Ann Coulter (more by this author)Posted 04/11/2012 ETUpdated 04/11/2012 ETIn a fast-changing world, a common mistake is to keep fighting the last war. For example, why would Republicans support sending more troops to Afghanistan, when that war was long over, or helping topple Moammar Gadhafi, who had become an ally in the war on terrorism? Some Republicans seem to support all military deployments just out of habit.
For years after the 9/11 terrorist attack on America, Democrats hysterically bemoaned any military action, especially in Iraq. They claimed to have many precious objections, but the truth was, they thought we deserved the attack -- or at best, both sides were at fault. So when it came to Obama's pointlessly sending more troops to Afghanistan or foolishly intervening in Libya, some Republicans' first instinct was to demand muscular American military action, forgetting that we are the party that cares about American national security and does not fling troops around the globe just to look tough, as the Democrats do. Republicans who supported sending more troops to Afghanistan and taking out Gadhafi were fighting the last war. Similarly, sometimes it seems as if Republicans' only move on the economy is to cut taxes. With the highest corporate tax rate in the world, there's much to be said for cutting taxes. But, unlike when Reagan ran for president, it's going to take a lot more than tax cuts to rescue this country from its $16 trillion debt. When Reagan took office, the top marginal tax rate in this country was a staggering 70 percent. Lowering that to 28 percent was an enormous shot in the arm to the economy. Cutting the top tax rate today from 35 percent to 30 percent -- or even 20 percent -- cannot possibly have the same dramatic effect. Republicans, as the only responsible party, are going to have to do something that's never been tried before in Washington: Cut government spending. To keep prattling about cutting taxes, rather than cutting our behemoth, useless government is fighting the last war.Finally, some Republicans have been fighting the last war in our primaries. For at least the last half-century -- probably since Abraham Lincoln ran -- there has always been liberal Republican pain in the ass in the GOP primary race. (You can tell who the liberal is by whom The New York Times calls a "pragmatic" or "moderate" Republican.)In 1968, there were two liberals -- Richard Nixon and Nelson Rockefeller -- and one conservative, Ronald Reagan, who nearly won the nomination.
In 1976, it was Reagan again, vs. Gerald Ford ("moderate"). In 1980, it was Reagan a third time, vs. pro-choice, "voodoo economics" George H.W. Bush. In 1992, it was Pat Buchanan, the conservative, against "Read My Lips" betrayer Bush. In 1996, it was, again, Buchanan against moderate Bob Dole ("tax collector for the welfare state" in the immortal words of Newt Gingrich). In 2000, we had conservative George W. Bush against liberal John McCain. In 2008, it was liberal McCain vs. Mitt Romney, the conservative. You will note that liberal Republicans have always stayed liberal Republicans and conservative Republicans have always stayed conservative Republicans. Only their match-ups change. Until this year. For the first time, the last cycle's conservative has been rebranded a "liberal" by right-wingers eager to resume their battle against liberal Republicans. This year's actual liberal Republican, much admired by the Non-Fox Media, was Jon Huntsman. But he dropped out after the New Hampshire primary.
Mitt Romney isn't a liberal. He isn't even a moderate. And he certainly isn't liked by the Times. Liberals so loathe Romney that in 2008, their most Christian-phobic columnist, Frank Rich, was forced to write admiringly about pro-life Christian conservative Mike Huckabee. He may have been a Christian, but at least he wasn't Mitt Romney! Conservatives know perfectly well Romney isn't a "moderate" -- he was our conservative hero just four years ago! Indeed, when Romney withdrew from the 2008 primary at CPAC that year, gallantly throwing his support to the front-runner, McCain, a college-age Christian standing next to a friend of mine expressed the general sentiment of the 10,000 assembled right-wingers by saying, "This f-ing blows." But the need to revert to comfortable old roles has forced some right-wingers to designate our 2008 hero as the Rockefeller Republican this time around. It has nothing to do with the facts. Conservatives who attack Romney as the "establishment Republican" are behaving like Democrats, giving us epithets in lieu of facts. Perhaps it is because they were asleep at the wheel four years ago when Republicans actually did run a liberal for president that these conservatives feel the need to create an imaginary liberal Republican to oppose ferociously this time. John McCain was worshipped by the liberal media, was the author of the unconstitutional campaign finance law and a global warming bill, adamantly supported amnesty for illegal aliens, opposed the Bush tax cuts as "tax cuts for the rich," wanted to shut down Guantanamo, called waterboarding "torture" and viciously attacked Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson as "agents of intolerance" (and then immediately faxed that speech to The New York Times). And he was from a conservative state! Where were you people four years ago when we were running him? By contrast, when he was governor, every single budget Romney submitted to the 85 percent Democratic legislature in Massachusetts included tax cuts. He became a pro-lifer when it mattered -- while he was governor -- and vetoed a stem cell research bill. He slashed government spending in one of the most liberal states of the union. He is the rare elected Republican who is tough on illegal immigration. He has forcefully denounced Obama's dangerous foreign policy.
But the facts are irrelevant to people busy fighting the last war. It's not about Romney at all, but their own posing. Romney is the Emmanuel Goldstein of GOP primary voters looking for a moderate to hate because they fell down on the job last time. Liberal Republicans always lose. Because he is not a liberal, Romney stands a good chance of beating Obama this fall. But if the fantasist posers keep turning this presidential race into their personal "Dungeons and Dragons" battle against "moderates," Romney's victory will go into the "Liberal Wins" column, when it is anything but.........'
Oldefarte| 4.12.12 @ 4:33PM
'......On January 22, 2003, Rosen announced that she would resign as head of the RIAA at the end of 2003, in order to spend more time with her partner, Elizabeth Birch, and the couple's twins (a boy and a girl). She began a television commentator career first with CNBC and then with MSNBC. She signed with CNN in early 2008. Rosen and Birch separated in 2006.
On November 30, 2004, Rosen became the interim director for the Human Rights Campaign, a leading GLBT lobbyist organization, following the ouster of Cheryl Jacques. Hilary's partner, Elizabeth, was the executive director of HRC for eight years prior to Jacques' assumption of the post. In December 2006 Rosen founded a consulting firm specializing in digital media and the entertainment industry with Jason Berman, former Chairman of the International Recording Industry Association (IFPI) called Berman Rosen Global Strategies. That firm closed when Rosen joined Brunswick. In January 2007, she launched OurChart.com with business partner Ilene Chaiken, creator of the L Word. OurChart.com was a social networking and entertainment site targeted to lesbians and their friends based on the Showtime series, The L Word. Showtime Networks was a financial partner in the website and now controls its content through the L Word TV show website. Her activities with Showtime, coincided with her career in political communications.She is a partner in the political communications firm, SKDKnickerbocker. Prior to joining SKDK, she was the managing partner of the DC office of the Brunswick Group, a London based PR and communications strategy firm. She joined Brunswick in December 2008. She was formerly Washington Editor at Large for The Huffington Post and was the online site's political director during the 2008 election and was President of a start up website, OurChart.com from 2006 to 2008.On April 11, 2012, speaking on CNN with regard to the difficulties of women in a continued difficult economy, Rosen stated: "Guess what, (Romney’s) wife has actually never worked a day in her life." This comment received bipartisan criticism as well as criticism from the Obama campaign staff and top Democratic strategists; shortly thereafter, she apologized for her comment.[2]....'
Oldefarte| 4.12.12 @ 4:44PM
'....The PJ Tatler« Jay Carney: The Hilary Rosen Who Visited the WH May be Any One of Three Hilary Rosens I KnowWho Is Hilary Rosen?
This post is to get you up to speed on this fast-breaking story with many moving parts.
Hilary Rosen is now a household name after saying on CNN about Ann Romney, that “She Has Never Worked A Day In Her Life”.
If you had never heard of Hilary Rosen before today, here are some facts about her that will put this huge national dust-up in context.
She has visited the Obama White House 35 times according to official visitor logs. Unless you believe Jay Carney.According to Wikipedia, “Hilary Beth Rosen is a partner in the political communications firm, SKDKnickerbocker with offices in DC and New York; she also is a LGBT activist.”It is important to note here that SKDKnickerbocker is the un-official public relations arm of the Obama White House and reelection campaign.Anita Dunn, who was Obama’s White House Communications Director, is a managing partner. Dunn left the White House after publicly praising Chairman Mao Zedong, whose policies killed millions of Chinese under his rule. Hers is the firm (what a surprise) that represented Sandra Fluke in all that Rush Limbaugh “slut” controversy.Hilary Rosen has been a Washington power player for decades and a well known figure in Democrat fundraising, social and media circles.Wiki states: “She was with the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) from 1987 to 2003 and served first as President and then chairman and chief executive from 1994 to 2003. And she was President of a start up website, OurChart.com from 2006 to 2008.” Rosen led the RIAA’s disastrous effort to curb online piracy by pursuing children via major lawsuits.Rosen is also a mother of twins adopted when she was with her former partner.Ms. Rosen’s current partner is Randi Weingarten, who happens to be a powerful union boss as President of the American Federation of Teachers.Together they are known as a “lesbian power couple”. Both were invited to the White House State Dinner in March honoring British Prime Minister David Cameron in which numerous guests were openly gay.What is interesting is this entire morning with all the massive media coverage, the press never mentioned that Rosen was a lesbian. Now it’s widely reported, but in the context of a new battleground, the “war on gay parents who adopt.” According to the Democrats, conservatives are now launching this war against Hilary Rosen because she is a gay parent who adopted.The plain ole “War on Women” was just so this morning.Truly I am thankful that there are no major issues or real wars confronting our nation, so the press can wage these fun little wars.....'
Dai Alanye | 4.13.12 @ 11:53AM
http://www.paragraphpunch.com/
Oldefoole is getting more tiresome than Cli... more tiresome than certain other cut-and-paste fanatics.
Oldefarte| 4.13.12 @ 2:27PM
Well DA [dumbars], at least my C&P's are informative and education, not STUPIDLY repeatative garbage. If you're too lazy & stupid to become informed from same [typical here], simply only read your fellow dumbarses' posts instead, okay?????????
WillyP | 4.13.12 @ 10:27PM
Thank you. You know, the more I learn about Romney the more I realize I won't have to hold my nose when I vote for him. Romney has, for example, been accused of flip-flopping on the abortion issue. In fact Romney did not change his personal view, but he felt the majority of the people of the extremely liberal state of Mass. wanted abortions legalized, so he vowed not to overturn pro-choice laws. He kept his word. However he did veto some laws seeking to expand pro choice. Another criticism frequently leveled against him is that as president he would be likely to support Obamacare, after all, he did bring Romneycare to Massachusetts. But the constitution allows for states to do these sorts of things. And Massachusetts, generally, wanted this. And it works reasonably well, for Massachusetts. He did this while bringing about lower taxes, and fiscal responsibility to a state entrenched in liberalism.
Janet Michaels| 4.13.12 @ 11:12PM
Poor hate filled ranting old man : ) I read a couple of snippets ... t'was all that was needed. Now go look out your window and make sure the neighborhood kids don't step on your grass. Pathetic : )
cali| 4.13.12 @ 9:33AM
Now Mr. Hillyer,
tell me how you really feel?
Let me finish your title with my words - Hilary Rosen is a lying sack of sh*t! How does it sound?
It's the truth; well the pathetic left does what they do best - tell pathetic lies. They are void of any reason; all they know is bitterness, anger, jealousy and, outright hatred. This is the reason they come across as bi-polar, and so angry. Waking up in the morning must be a drag for these people, while we get up happy that God gave us another day, promising to do our best, put a smile on somebody's face, and be the best we can be.
That is the difference between them and us!
Janet Michaels| 4.13.12 @ 11:20PM
Hilary Rosen is one of the classiest pundits on the scene and has been for years. She always tells it like it is without going for the cheap shots -- unlike those same cheap shots she's getting now. If another respected pundit (as she has been) was being unfairly characterized as she is now, she would have stuck up for them unlike the many Democrats who completely threw her under the bus in the name of "today's soundbite". It's tremendously sad that only Lawrence O'Donnell and a couple of others stood up for her as not only a great person but putting what she said in context.
She was obviously saying that Ann Romney had not worked outside the home or in a career like a lawyer or nurse. But she wasn't saying that "stay at home mothers" aren't valuable.
In fact, she was saying the opposite -- that 95% of mothers don't have the choice (even if they want to) to stay home b/c of financial reasons. And GOP policies obviously make those financial problems worse.
The gist of comments on this site consist of the Hilary is a "dyke" and Hilary is a "POS" : ) An indication of the "quality" of the site ... and it's unsubstantive users. Pfttt ... : )