California Conservative

Below is an excerpt from the “Executive Summary” for Media Research Center (MRC) Special Report by Tim Graham, Director of Media Analysis, which was released this morning.

Read the full report in HTML format, with pictures.
And for the PDF version of the print edition.

The Executive Summary:

Spurred by a passionate public outcry against the tide of illegal immigration, on December 16, 2005, the House of Representatives passed a bill to curb the flow of illegal aliens and give the federal government more responsibility for detaining and deporting them. On that night, ABC, CBS, and NBC didn’t cover the vote. But when left-wing advocacy groups for illegal aliens organized large protests against the House bill in the spring, as the Senate considered its own immigration bill, the networks suddenly, fervently discovered the issue and gave the advocacy groups not a mere soapbox in the park, but a three-network rollout of free air time. Protest coverage, often one-sided, stood in stark contrast to polling data showing that a stricter approach to illegal immigration was broadly popular in the country.

To determine the tone and balance of network coverage of illegal aliens, MRC analysts evaluated every ABC, CBS, and NBC morning, evening, and magazine show news segment on the immigration debate from the outbreak of protest coverage on March 24, 2006 through May 31, 2006. In 309 stories, analysts found the following trends emerged: (continues)

Flag courtesy of: SaveOurState.org

UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin highlights the key points.

RELATED:
Pat Buchanan: Illegal Alien Overload?
Immigrant Spotlight: 22 Years In U.S.,
10 Kids On Welfare And No Habla Inglés
Only For Profit: “Selling Illegal Immigrants
The American Dream”
Illegal Immigrants Rally For Mexico
Will Illegal Aliens Take America by Force?
SF Mayor Gavin Newsom: Vows to Ignore The Law, Again
Immigration Reform: The Writing Is On The Wall,
And It’s In French
Immigration: “The Revolution Has Come”
Rethinking Our Borders
Education for Illegal Immigration
California Dreamin’ Illegal Immigrants Demand
Tuition Break
Is It ‘Amnesty’ or ‘Earned Citizenship’?
They Pledge Allegiance To The Flag…
Immigration Protest in LA: Photo Essay
Only In America: Illegal Immigrants And Their Allies
Rally To Protest Law Enforcement

Be sure to check out our extensive immigration coverage.

Technorati Tags: California, Media Bias, Liberals, Immigration, Illegal Aliens, Special Interests, Mexico

The real weapons of mass distraction…

(via Say No to P.C.B.S. : Click to enlarge)

Inside the Haditha Dam in Iraq, a member of the Purrfect Angelz dance group entertained American troops. (Article)
(Photo credit: New York Times, link entitled “Morale”)

While it may be easy to overlook, Jenn asks: “Anyone else see where the mic cord goes to?”

If that ain’t Photoshop, those legs aren’t real either.

RELATED:
See Purrfect Angelz’ website. y’think these girls are what the Islamic martyrs are dreaming about for life after death? If only they could enjoy what this life has to offer.

UPDATE:
Allah Pundit goes in deep for a very close look analysis.
Michelle Malkin: “Reuters roof rusted & more fauxto follies”

It is the bottom of the ninth inning in game seven of the World Series. The score: 3-3, with two strikes, and runners positioned on 1st and 3rd. The stadium is quiet. And here we go… the windup…and the pitch; it’s a fast b…he swings, walloping that ball right over the 1st base line. Runners advance and… he scores! A base hit drives home the winning run! Fans are wild! Players run onto the field, hugging and slapping each other on the back! What a match! Fans sure got their money’s worth. Let’s give a quick recap about how the games lined up while our cameramen move onto the field…

Can anyone imagine questioning who won this series on the basis of how many runs were scored by each team during the seven games that were played? Of course, not! There would be no arguing, at least not about that. In the World Series, you don’t count up all the runs. Teams must win over and over again. Then, that being the case, why are there people who dispute that the 2000 election was stolen from Al Gore on the basis of the popular vote? George Bush won each state. And everyone knows that our national elections are not decided on the popular vote, they are decided on the basis of each win counted among the 50 states

Still, some would argue that this method of electing our president should be changed. (See: “Calif. bill would change electoral college“)

I would be the first to counter, never. And there are plenty of reasons that I should win this debate.

First, the Electoral College corrects for defects. It balances out errors and faults in the election process. Mathematicians will explain that votes cannot be counted accurately within a half of a million. In a close election, having the electoral college in place corrects for deficiencies. Indeed, multiple wins in multiple venues produces a stronger candidate. Therefore, our current system compensates for inaccuracies. Any person voted in as chief executive is a product of multiple constituents; 50 elections, as opposed to one. (more…)

Here’s the opening paragraph of Michael Barone’s latest column:

When asked what would affect the future, the British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan famously said: “Events, dear boy. Events.” The event this month that I think has done most to shape opinion was the arrest in London on Aug. 9 of 23 Muslims suspected of plotting to blow up American airliners over the Atlantic.

Michael isn’t yet saying that Republicans are out of the woods yet but he’s noted a change in the atmosphere surrounding this November’s elections. With good reason. The nation’s attention has been riveted since the foiling of the terrorist plot in London and Anna Diggs-Taylor’s ridiculous ruling. In the aftermath of London, we found out that the NSA’s Terrorist Surveillance Program played a major role in foiling that plot.

The contrast couldn’t have been more damning for Democrats. Whether it was Russ Feingold crowing that the filibustering of the Patriot Act renewal was a “great moment for our Constitution and our democracy and a great moment in the fight against terrorism” or Harry Reid crowing about “killing the Patriot Act” to loud applause from fellow Democrats or Anna Diggs-Taylor’s ruling in ACLU vs. NSA, the American people got a clear picture that Democrats aren’t interested in doing everything possible to prevent terrorist attacks.

This shows people that there’s really only one party that’s committed to preventing attacks. It’s just another area where Democrats just aren’t in touch with the majority of people on an issue. Most people concede that another terrorist attack is inevitable. Democrats took that to mean that people didn’t care if another terrorist attack happened. (more…)

As the Iranians are moving closer and closer to developing a viable nuclear weapons program, our Russian friends(?) are telling the world not to worry. A Russian official is being quoted as saying the centrifuges available to Iran are not sufficient to launch industrial uranium enrichment. Another Russian, a nuclear expert concurred.

“Uranium enrichment in Iran is not arousing concerns in Russia.There is nothing unexpected in this. The availability of 164 centrifuges in Iran is a fact that has been known for a long time,” Russian Atomic Energy Agency chief Sergei Kiriyenko told China’s communist party-controlled news agency.

“These centrifuges allow Iran to conduct laboratory uranium enrichment to a low level in insignificant amounts. The acquisition of highly enriched uranium is unfeasible today using this method,” Kiriyenko said.

However, a senior Iranian official and former president Hashemi Rafsanjani told the Kuwait News Agency that Iran had operated the first unit of 164 centrifuges and successfully enriched uranium.

And then there’s Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad bragging that Iran had “joined the world club of nuclear technology.”

However, in order for the Iranian scientists to produce their own fuel at least for the initial loading of a nuclear reactor, “one needs to have not some hundred-and-a-half centrifuges, but thousands of times more,” Viktor Mikhailov, ex-minister of the Russian Ministry for Atomic Energy who leads the ministry’s Institute for Strategic Stability.

But why should the United States and the United Nations believe the Russian government? (more…)

A huge hat tip goes out to Jack Kelly for his brilliant Sunday column on why Democrats can’t be trusted with national security matters. I’ve read alot of Jack’s stuff over the years and I’ve always been impressed but this might be Jack’s best work yet.

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor illustrates why Democrats cannot be trusted with political power in time of war. Judge Taylor, who is the chief judge of the federal district court in Detroit, ruled Aug. 17 that it is unconstitutional for the National Security Agency to listen in, without warrants, on telephone conversations between terror suspects abroad and people in the United States. Her ruling was praised by Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and other prominent Democrats.

I wrote about Taylor’s ruling last week. I thought it was flimsy then and I’ve seen nothing to change my opinion since. In fact, I’m more convinced now than ever. the fact that Pelosi and Reid think that this was a great ruling is telling.

Let’s not forget what Russ Feingold said about the Democrats filibustering the renewal of the Patriot Act:

“Today’s vote is a great moment for our Constitution and our democracy and a great moment in the fight against terrorism.

(more…)

Max Cleland has announced that he’ll lead a vets rally for John Murtha the day before the Boot Murtha rally. Here’s part of his statement:

The Murtha for Congress Committee said that former U.S. Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) announced last night he’s leading a large-scale effort among his veteran brothers to support U.S. Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA), who is coming under attack from “radical right-wing forces in the veterans’ community” aimed at “swift-boating Murtha, like they did former Democratic nominee for president Sen. John Kerry.”

Sen. Cleland, Is it a “radical right wing” thing to demand that John Murtha not betray his oath of office by ignoring the Constitution’s due process and fair trial guarantees? If it is, then I’m guilty as charged. And proudly so. Murtha, on the other hand, is too interested in playing cheap political politics with the military to be concerned with Constitutional guarantees these days.

Sen. Cleland, Is it a “radical right wing” thing to expect our elected officials to not demoralize our troops by saying that we can’t win in Iraq? Rep. Murtha owes our troops an engraved apology for the things he’s said.

(more…)

That’s the question that people are asking about John Murtha in this OSC newsletter. Let’s take a look:

Regardless of opinions on Murtha’s past words and deeds, it is what Murtha is saying and doing now that have folks no longer supporting him.
His playing politics now with our soldiers’ lives was a common reason cited for no longer supporting him. His insensitivity to troops in the field and soldiers’ now, who need to know that the family member’s life and sacrifice had good purpose, was another reason for no longer supporting him.
The backlash is coming this November as the truth sinks in. Message to John Murtha: the past is the past. We don’t like what you are saying and doing NOW!

The legacy part of Murtha’s record is fine, albeit a bit dull. Frankly, I heard of Murtha long before I actually heard Murtha speak. He was always a ’shadows’ representative, meaning he didn’t get much airtime until his immediate redeployment political ploy. Since then, he’s been the military’s worst supporter in terms of what he’s said.

The military voters in PA-12 resent his statements over the past year, whether it was the immediate redeployment proposal, saying that the “military is living hand to mouth”, that they were the main targets in Iraq’s civil war (I still can’t figure that one out, btw.), that Marines killed innocent Iraqi civilians in the terrorist hotbed of Haditha and that they didn’t have the proper equipment, specifically body armor for the soldiers.

The truth is that the soldiers didn’t wear the body armor. (more…)

FNC reporter Steve Centanni was released this morning!!! Here’s some of the details on his release:

Steve Centanni, 60, and Olaf Wiig, 36, left Gaza and have since crossed into Israel after their release. The men left Gaza through the Erez border crossing.
—————
A tearful Centanni embraced a Palestinian journalist briefly as he entered, then rushed upstairs as Wiig followed.
Centanni, in a phone interview shortly after his release, said “I’m fine. I’m just so happy to be free.” He said he was so emotional because he was out and alive. “There were times when I thought ‘I’m dead,’ and I’m not,” Centanni said. “I’m fine. I’m so very happy.”

It’s great to hear that Centanni and Wiig have been freed. I’ve been hoping for this moment but I haven’t been terribly confident that they’d be released or even found alive.
(more…)

I got a kick out of reading this article, titled “Once-parallel paths of Hagel and McCain diverge”. The article is a perfect illustration of what the liberal political press has come to. Here’s an example:

Not long ago, Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and John McCain of Arizona were the Stardust Twins of the GOP, both decorated Vietnam War veterans and fearless conservative mavericks who occupied much the same political ground.

The characterization of Hagel or McCain as conservatives is laughable at best. But to a left wing nut, they’re probably as left as they want in government. Here’s another indication of just how liberals view Hagel and McCain:

Berens begins her book noting that Hagel, a loyal Republican and internationalist in outlook, “time and again has taken shots at his party’s and his president’s engagement, or lack of it, with the rest of the world” and has scolded his conservative colleagues for their unilateralist tendencies. Hagel strongly values international alliances and global institutions such as the United Nations and NATO, a view that he has enunciated from his perch on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and that put him at odds with Bush’s early go-it-alone approach to foreign policy.

Hagel doesn’t get it when it comes to foreign policy. The truth is that he’s to the left of Joe Lieberman on foreign policy. He’s a consistent advocate of getting UN approval for US foreign policy, a disaster if ever there was one. Instead of following ‘The Hagel Model’, I prefer the ‘Bolton Approach’ of standing up for the US at the UN.
(more…)