When you think someone is lying what do you do? You present them with the truth and that should settle the matter. Well when people can't use the truth to defend their position what do they do? They try to change the topic or muddy the argument with hyperbole and excuses. I was struck by an interview with White House Chief of staff Jack Lew. When asked point blank by Chris Wallace (a well respected journalist) whether or not President Obama failed to keep his promise of cutting the budget deficit in half by the end of his first term, Lew gave a series of non answers. What is wrong with admitting that he did not do it? He could have then gone onto make the case why he didn't do it, but if he had admitted the truth, everything else he said may have had more credibility. The fact is that the American people are smart and above all they don't like getting lied to or having someone pull the wool over their eyes. Presented with the honest facts in any debate and the voters will gravitate towards a common ground position that facilitates getting things done. Above all Americans value free speech and the right to disagree, in a civil way. The following article is very disturbing in that it demonstrates not only a willingness, but determination to stifle the free discussion of different points of view. I may not agree with all of the Presidents policy positions, or his ideology in general, but that does not bother me. What does bother me is the blatant attempt on the part of this administration to try to fool the American people. The denial of the facts of what they are trying to do, or have done is so transparent it would be laughable if it weren't so disgraceful. The fact that a tax exempt organization is working in such a coordinated way, with ties to the administration and so many news outlets is very disturbing to say the least. If you haven't read 1984 by George Orwell, and don't remember the cold war, then beware. If information becomes one sided whether to the right or left, then we are in real trouble. Every voter needs to make an informed decision when they pull that lever, voting is not a popularity contest. If the voters become complacent than 1984 may be a reality just 30 or 40 years late. Attached article below Media Matters memo reportedly detailed plan to target Fox News staff Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/14/media-matters-memo-reportedly-detailed-plan-to-target-fox-news-staff/#ixzz1mUeuQtNX Published February 14, 2012 | FoxNews.comLiberal media watchdog group Media Matters once contemplated harassing Fox News employees with yard signs in their neighborhoods, hiring private investigators to dig into their personal lives and retaining a "major law firm" to study legal action against the network, according to a report Tuesday in the Daily Caller. The report cited a September 2009 memo from Media Matters contributor Karl Frisch to Media Matters bosses David Brock and Eric Burns.It's unclear to what extent the organization, a 501(c)3 tax-exempt nonprofit group, followed through on the detailed suggestions, but they would appear to comport with Brock's early 2011 claim that he planned to prosecute a "war on Fox." The tactics floated by Frisch were likened to a "presidential-style campaign," one which he hoped would "discredit and embarrass the network." He suggested hiring "trackers" to "stake out" events with Fox News employees, sending "anti-Fox News literature" to employees' homes and even convincing director Michael Moore to make a documentary about the network. Frisch also suggested establishing a "front group" of shareholders to target parent company News Corporation. At least one of the ideas appears to have come to fruition -- a suggestion that Media Matters publish an anti-Fox News book under Brock's name. "The Fox Effect," co-written by Brock and the Media Matters organization, is due for release next week. The memo is the latest revelation in a Daily Caller series about Media Matters' campaign against Fox News. The online news outlet also reported that when ex-Politico writer Ben Smith wrote about Media Matters' "war" in 2011, he left out certain parts of a 2010 Media Matters planning memo. The memo, according to the Daily Caller, also suggested targeting the libertarian Cato Institute and conservative Heritage Foundation, as well as Republican officials like House GOP Leader Eric Cantor, and websites including Newsmax. Smith, who now works at the website BuzzFeed, has since posted most of the memo online, minus a five-page budget section that Smith said he never received. A former Media Matters employee told the Daily Caller that several mainstream media reporters were known to reliably incorporate Media Matters items in their own reporting. Smith, the source said, would "take stories and write what you want him to write." Politico frequently picked up Media Matters items in its articles, a rough list of which can be seen here. Smith has defended his own work, tweeting that he's both "used ... & rejected tips from MM, just as from conservatives." Politico continues to write about Fox News, as recently as Tuesday offering a top story on its web site about what it deemed a course correction leftward in Fox News' political reporting. The outlet's media blogger, Dylan Byers, who used to work for Smith, also wrote two rebuttals to the DC story on Monday suggesting that the piece and DC founder Tucker Carlson, a principal writer in the Media Matter series, did not back up the criticism of Politico with examples and was not accurately reporting the story.Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/14/media-matters-memo-reportedly-detailed-plan-to-target-fox-news-staff/#ixzz1mUemDIlK
Shown here is Media Matters CEO David Brock.