Snapped Shot

... get fleas.

And boy, what ugly (yet oddly well-connected) fleas they are!

(Incidentally, the curious alignment of the cartoon terrorist's RPG is quite... Serendipitous. I have no doubts that Ismail Zaydah, propagandist extraordinaire, planned that shot to a "T.")

Soccer Dad sends along the exclusive sneak preview of the movie event of 2020. I don't know about you, but I'm definitely going to be lining up to buy my tickets to this historic event today.

His commentary is definitely worth repeating, as always:

There seem to be a higher concentration of news service photographers relative to the population in Palestinian areas than any place in the world. So there’s a lot of news. Among the most popular images are people waiting for their terrorist friends and relatives to be released, Palestinian policeman undergoing incomprehensible training and “militants” training to attack Israel. (I’m not sure there’s a difference between those last two groups.)

Are there really more photojournalists per-capita in the Palestinian terror-tories than anywhere else on earth? Continue reading »

Did I really just begin two posts in a row with "Bob Owens?"

Bob's a great guy—And what can I say? He's on a roll!—but man, I guess this means that I need to adjust Ye Olde Original-o-meter here once in a while.

Bob Owens is putting Brian Ross' outrage over Sarah Palin's "controversial" firing of her town's police chief into proper context:

The lawsuit filed in 1997 by the police chief, Irl Stambaugh, was dismissed by the judge, as Palin had every right to replace him and other town officials. As a matter of public record, other officials were also oushed out of office on Palin's reform pledge, but Ross inexplicably refuses to mention their firings. Ross seeks to frame resolved history as a current scandal, and then tie it the dismissal of public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, roughly a decade later.

Bob Owens makes a very good point this morning. Rather than quote him, I'd like to summarize his point somewhat differently. Be sure to click on over for his full and detailed analysis.

Here's my take on what the State of the Press is this election cycle.

If You're A Democrat:
A major candidate for President was involved in a "personal" affair. The press was aware of this (admittedly), and ignored it for over a year, leaving the story to be covered by a "disreputable" tabloid.

A month ago, when it was finally admitted that the tabloid's story was correct, the "reputable" national media finally began to cover the story.

The press still hasn't admitted any fault in their refusal to cover the story, though.

Compare that last snippet to:

If You're A Republican:
A major candidate for Vice President has a number of "personal" issues surrounding her and her family, along with a somewhat tenuous "scandal" surrounding some state troopers.

The press rushes to cover all of these "scandals" as page-one news, even going to the depths of attacking her family and children (i.e., her "personal" life)

It's interesting to note, however, that the last news source to cover these "scandals" is none other than the "disreputable" tabloid that had been so previously ignored.

It would seem that some news outlets have a shred of journalistic integrity, after all.

ABCNews really seems to have stepped in it this time:



(h/t Aussie Dave)

I mentioned it briefly yesterday, and drew some private comparisons between this incident and what happened to Michelle Malkin a few years back. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to put it into Photoshop until now.

Thanks to a couple of minutes of spare time, I now present you this handy-dandy guide to identifying Republican women:



Oh noes! Michelle Malkin made this the subject of her column this week. I may be a bit late in putting this together, but hopefully it'll be useful to you nonetheless!