« August 2007 | Main | October 2007 »
September 27, 2007
The Last Supper, San Francisco Style
The organizers of the Folsom Street Fair, San Francisco’s largest taxpayer-supported outdoor gay orgy added a new twist to this year’s debauchery: blasphemy. While the annual event usually garners little attention outside the Sodom and Gomorrah of the West Coast, the poster advertising the 2007 homosexapalooza raised the ire of Christians and social conservatives.
The poster recreated Leonardo da Vinci’s “Last Supper”, a world-renowned depiction of Jesus Christ and His disciples on the eve of the crucifixion, a moment sacred to Christians around the globe. Half-naked sadomasochists along with the obligatory drag queen replaced Christ and His disciples at the table and an assortment of sex toys, including a clenched fist, took the place of the bread and wine, served according to Scripture to represent the body and blood of Christ.
Several groups, including Concerned Women for America (CWA) and the Catholic League protested the anti-Christian theme of the poster as well as the event it promoted. They called on the Miller Brewing Company, a chief sponsor of the Folsom Street Fair to withdraw its financial support of the sexfest and California politicians including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sens. Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to condemn the outrageous advertisement.
Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues stated, "Scripture says that God is not mocked, yet it doesn't stop people from trying. As evidenced by this latest stunt, open ridicule of Christianity is unfortunately very common within much of the homosexual community.”
Event organizers denied a motivation to offend Christians. Board President Andy Copper said, “There is no intention to be particularly pro-religion or anti-religion with this poster; the image is intended only to be reminiscent of the ‘Last Supper’ painting. It is a distinctive representation of diversity with women and men, people of all colors and sexual orientations.”
Copper revealed his anti-Christian animus at the end of his statement about the controversy saying, “I guess it wouldn’t be Folsom Street Fair without offending some extreme members of the global community, though.”
Herein lies the problem with those who represent themselves as the mainstream of gay “culture”. These radicals believe that their worldview, shared by only a tiny sliver of the population enjoys widespread support in American society. According to Copper, the “extreme members of the global community” are the 80% of Americans who identify themselves as Christians.
Christians cannot view the Folsom Street Fair poster and not be offended and sickened by its blatant mockery of Jesus Christ. The advertisement did not come from a heart that loves God, but one that hates the truth about sin and salvation that Jesus Christ represents. Barber correctly pointed out, "'Gay' activists disingenuously call Christians 'haters' and 'homophobes' for honoring the Bible, but then lash out in this hateful manner toward the very people they accuse.” My own experience with these people led me to conclude that while Christians profess to “love the sinner and hate the sin” the extremists of the Angry Gay Left “love the sin and hate the sinner.” Responsible gay leaders should speak out against the poster, but they will not, fearing the vicious attacks from the hatemongers of their own community.
Gay apologist Wayne Besen accused critics of wanting to “make gays look bad” and characterized those speaking out as “mean-spirited.” One only needs to view a few of the photographs of the event to realize that the participants in the Folsom Street Fair do far greater damage to their image in the eyes of mainstream America than any religious leader or conservative pundit ever could. Most people cannot conceive the depravity that occurs in the streets of San Francisco during this event. The widespread nudity might be the least of the offensive behavior when compared to the lewd sex acts that occur not only in public view, but also in front of an audience.
All of this takes place against the backdrop of the national debate about creating a new protected class of citizens based solely upon their sexual habits. Under the “hate crimes” bill currently moving through Congress along with employment “non-discrimination” legislation, critics of events like the Folsom Street Fair would be silenced. Perhaps religious leaders and social conservatives should be grateful to the creators of the poster for showing America what the gay agenda really means for society.
Posted by jeffgannon at 09:31 AM | TrackBack
September 24, 2007
My Monday With Mahmoud
Jeff Gannon listens to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the National Press Club. Via Drudge Report and Washington Post
Reporters packed the National Press Club ballroom Monday for the first-ever videoconference with a madman. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed journalists and took questions selected from hundreds of queries submitted to the podium. However, the tepid interrogation that followed the Iranian leader’s nonsensical philosophizing in his opening statement left reporters with little to write about.
Considering the flaccid interviews conducted by the Old Media with Ahmadinejad in the past, I held low expectations for anything newsworthy – except for the buzz generated by the appearance itself. Opposing schools of thought exist about such an event, and I find myself firmly between the two camps. It seems hypocritical to give a tyrant the free speech rights he denies to his own people, yet the basic journalistic quest for information and truth compels reporters to consort with the worst of the worst.
Perhaps the deciding factor rested on the very nature of the institutional and genetic proclivities of the journalism elite. Old Media giants and their disciples love two kinds of people: Celebrities and dictators. Totalitarians (and entertainment types) who speak out against George W. Bush receive additional adoration from the fawning liberal media.
The Iranian president snared CBS News’ Scott Pelley in his thrall during a recent “60 Minutes” interview, the reporter later describing Ahmadinejad as "incorruptible, modest and friendly." Other Old Media talking heads will undoubtedly praise Ahmadinejad’s charisma and ability to charmingly deflect difficult questions much like how they marveled at Bill Clinton’s mastery of spin.
Ahmadinejad’s delusional rants about freedom in Iran and claims about the non-existence of homosexuals in his country probably did little to lessen his appeal to the Old Media. The Iranian dictator can deny the Holocaust without being ostracized and shunned by the West, so long as he does not express doubt about global warming.
BOOK PLUG: In my book, The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report I discuss the Old Media’s devotion to Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and cite the writings of those who demonstrated how the American media, especially The New York Times assisted his rise to power.
Posted by jeffgannon at 03:08 PM | TrackBack
September 20, 2007
‘Fake But Accurate’ Rather Goes Round The Bend
Further evidence that discredited former CBS News anchor Dan Rather suffers from a virulent strain of BDS, known among conservatives as Bush Derangement Syndrome emerged this week. Not comforted by the accolades and lifetime achievement awards journalism elites continue to shower upon him, Rather announced Wednesday that he filed a lawsuit against the Tiffany Network.
Rather claimed that CBS made him the scapegoat for the fraudulent story about President Bush’s service record with the Texas National Air Guard based on forged documents. He asserted that the network jettisoned him from the anchor chair “to pacify the White House” and because of “pressure from ‘the right wing.’”
Rather also charged that Richard Thornburgh, an attorney general in the George H. W. Bush administration, one of the two panelists investigating the story, the other being former Associated Press president and CEO Louis Boccardi produced a biased report on the Rathergate affair.
In my book, “The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report”, I detailed my involvement as a White House correspondent in the unraveling of the failed political takedown of President Bush on the eve of his re-election campaign. In the chapter, “Shock and Awe, Shocking and Awful”, I reported that my source inside CBS News pointed me toward Mary Mapes as the key player in what later became one of the biggest media scandals in American history. I broke the story about Mapes on Sean Hannity’s radio show, identifying her as the procurer of the phony documents.
I also wrote about the near-meltdown of CBS’ News Washington Bureau and the split between factions loyal to Rather and insurgents that saw the scandal as an opportunity to topple the tyrannical and narcissistic anchor. The announcement of the “independent” investigation of the story conducted by the network’s own lawyers served as a firebreak to tamp down the fiasco, not an effort get to the bottom of it.
If anything, the Thornburg-Boccardi report whitewashed the events surrounding the “flawed” story. Employees of CBS coordinated with members of the Kerry campaign to damage Bush, but the report dismissed the many incestuous connections between the two groups. It also downplayed the perspective from which individuals at CBS News reported the story. CBS White House correspondent John Roberts told me of his belief that the forged documents came from Karl Rove, that essentially Bush’s political advisor baited the network into launching a political attack against his own candidate in order to discredit the story and the news organization. After confronting White House counselor Dan Bartlett with the TANG documents, Roberts reported back to Washington Bureau chief Janet Leissner that because the White House did not dispute the authenticity of the documents they must have been legitimate.
I welcome Dan Rather’s lawsuit since it might provide the opportunity to take a fresh look at how the Old Media and the Democrats act as one to achieve political power. The coordination between The New York Times and MoveOn.org is not an anomaly – it is standard operating procedure.
The Great Media War is the struggle of the Right to get fair representation in the media and the Left desperately trying to hold on to its once-complete monopoly. It affects every aspect of news events and how they are presented - if at all - to the American people.
Posted by jeffgannon at 08:55 AM | TrackBack
September 18, 2007
Gannon Gets Murtha To Denounce MoveOn.org Ad
Rep. John Murtha's (D-PA) media bubble burst at the National Press Club today when I confronted him during a press conference. Murtha chose the usually friendly venue to discuss the latest iteration of his "cut and run - slow bleed - surrender at all costs" proposal.
First up, a question about the Haditha incident for which Marines are on trial for their lives:
JEFF GANNON: In May 2006, you said that Marines killed innocent Iraqis citizens in cold blood at Hatitha. A year later, some of them have been exonerated. At some point are you going to apologize to these men?
REP. MURTHA: The trial's not over yet.
JEFF GANNON: You've spoken out before. You went on national television and called these men "cold blooded killers."
REP. MURTHA: The trial's not over yet.
After waiting for some other reporter to ask about the MoveOn.org ad that accused Gen. David Petraeus of treason, I decided to give it a shot:
JEFF GANNON: Did you think the MoveOn.org ad was inappropriate and would you distance yourself from those remarks?
REP. MURTHA: Yes.
Don't look for this Q & A to find its way into the liberal media. Only The Hill reported the MoveOn.org comment as an aside in the last paragraph its story, but wouldn't touch Murtha's stonewall on the U.S. Marines who were cleared of charges in the deaths of Iraqis in the much publicized incident at Haditha.
C-SPAN has a clip: Rep. Murtha on the Petraeus Report
Hadita comments at 39:25, MoveOn.org at 47:40
After the program, fawning reporters gathered around the bloviating Murtha. We had an exchange that went something like this:
JEFF GANNON: Is the war lost?
REP. MURTHA: It's not lost, but it's a complicated...
JEFF GANNON: Harry Reid said the war is lost. Is he wrong?
REP. MURTHA: I don't know what Senator Reid said...
JEFF GANNON: He said "The war is lost", do you agree?
At this point Murtha is all red-faced and leaning forward until he is about a foot from my face and to begin angrily bellowing:
REP. MURTHA: I quit college to go to Korea, I volunteered to go to Vietnam...
Our exchange ended when another reporter chimed in with a peacenik question about Democrats' strategy to betray our troops in the field.
The Hill's coverage of the press conference:
Conservative writer Jeff Gannon, who was in the audience, challenged Murtha on another statement he had made, that Marines in Haditha had killed Iraqi civilians “in cold blood.” Charges have been dropped against several Marines, though others remain charged with murder. Gannon asked Murtha if he would apologize, and Murtha refused.
“The trials are not over yet,” Murtha said, reddening slightly in the face.
Also in response to Gannon, Murtha tersely deemed inappropriate the newspaper advertisement taken out by the liberal group MoveOn.org criticizing commanding Gen. David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.” Without elaborating, Murtha said “Yes” when asked if he would distance himself from the ad.
Note to Mr. Murtha: I thank you for your military service to our country. You were a Marine too, how can you accuse other Marines of murder and refuse to apologize for wrongly accusing them or even acknowledge that they've been vindicated?
Posted by jeffgannon at 06:21 AM | TrackBack
September 17, 2007
Rush Limbaugh Caller Plugs 'The Great Media War'
A reader of this website wrote me that a caller to the Rush Limbaugh radio program mentioned my book, "The Great Media War, A Battlefield Report" on the air last Friday. Rush said that he was unfamiliar with my book (since it just came out on September 4 and Rush didn't get his autographed copy yet.)
I mentioned Rush Limbaugh in my acknowledgements because he got this whole thing started by praising my "divorced from reality" question to President Bush on his show. Before that day's program ended, Media Matters for America had already put a hit out on me. The liberal smear machine at DailyKos with some help from the Angry Gay Left did the rest. Two lunatics in Congress, Democrats John Conyers and Louise Slaughter launched an unprecedented investigation of a journalist in direct contradiction of the First Amendment.
Liberals owned the mainstream media for decades and used it to advance their political agendas - often to the detriment of the United States. America lost Vietnam in the press - not on the battlefield. The treasonous behavior of John Kerry would not be possible today because of the New Media.
I call the struggle between the right to get fair representation in the media and the left to hang on to its dominance The Great Media War. In my book, I give a behind the scenes look at the DNC outpost in the White House briefing room and the operatives that plot their attacks against the Bush administration there.
Get an personalized and autographed hardcover, like the one Rush Limbaugh will be receiving HERE
Posted by jeffgannon at 08:12 AM | TrackBack
September 13, 2007
Pelosi Attacks CBS Reporter's Objectivity
If you've ever watched the White House Press Corps in action, you would see that it is largely a mob of liberal activists armed with DNC talking points. For six years of the Bush presidency, no question has been too harsh, accustory or slanderous. As recent events have shown, only friendly questions are considered out of line.
The DC Examiner reports that yesterday, CBS White House correspondent Jim Axelrod (from the MoveOn.org wing of the Tiffany network) asked Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
“How do you view your stewardship of Congress as anything other than a failure to make the president change course?”
Pelosi's response:
“What a lovely objective question on the part of the press!”
After decades of reporters fawning over Democrats, one tough question prompts that kind of response from Speaker Pelosi. More shocking is what happened later:
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly later told Yeas & Nays that the tone of Axelrod’s question was what took the speaker by surprise. “I don’t think she’s ever accused a journalist of bias before,” Daly said. “The tone of it and the way he asked it was, how shall we say, unusual.” Daly added that, following the conference, Pelosi was eager to find out the identity and affiliation of Axelrod, and why he would have asked such a question.
There you go, Democrats taking names of reporters who ask them tough questions. To borrow a tactic of the left, doesn't that smack of McCarthyism? That's how Democrats deal with the press.
Look for Media Matters to 'Gannonize' Jim Axelrod.
BOOK PLUG: I deal with Democrats incestuous relationship with the Democratic Party in my book, "The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report." The back cover carries an endorsement from Nancy Pelosi, who said that Jeff Gannon "must be stopped."
Posted by jeffgannon at 09:44 AM | TrackBack
September 12, 2007
***MEDIA ADVISORY***
Young Turks/Air America 8:00 EST TODAY
I'm going to the belly of the beast today with an appearance on Air America's Young Turks. CLICK TO LISTEN LIVE
Posted by jeffgannon at 07:46 AM | TrackBack
September 10, 2007
Journalism Celebrity Competes In Press Club Race
That would be me at the National Press Club 5K Walk/Run. MediaBistro/FishbowlDC has the details:
Jeff Gannon Gets His Run On
Posted by jeffgannon at 06:49 PM | TrackBack
September 09, 2007
Lunatics Prove Me Right On Alan Colmes' Show
Last week, I appeared on Alan Colmes' Fox News Radio show to discuss my book, "The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report".
I've known Alan Colmes for a long time, almost as long as I've been in Washington. He's a genuinely nice guy but had a difficult job in the interview, that is, repeating the liberal talking points and conspiracy theories about Jeff Gannon without bursting into laughter at their absurdity. He dutifully rehashed the accusations of the Angry Gay Left from the rantings of the follically-challenged John Arvosis to the whispered lispings on serial "outer" Mike Rogers.
There are some fun moments, especially the Angry Gay Man that calls in and proves my point about the irrationality of the Angry Gay Left and the former Boston Globe reporter so steeped in leftist ideology that he sputters to finish a sentence attacking me professionally. I wonder why he is no longer with the Boston Globe...
Unfortunately, the link to the program is no longer available, so you'll have to take my word for it.
Posted by jeffgannon at 05:40 PM | TrackBack
September 06, 2007
Mike Rogers: Violent Femme
Conducts Homosexual Jihad Against Republicans;
Refuses To Condemn Gay Toilet Culture
Radical gay activist and serial “outer” Mike Rogers has been doing his sanctimonious victory dance all over the national media ever since Sen. Larry Craig’s arrest in a bathroom sex sting became public. The Washington Post did a puff piece on him and radio and television talking heads blithely accepted his claims of reluctantly being forced to expose “hypocrisy.”
However, it is Rogers who is the hypocrite. He is a crass political operative who works with leaders of the Democratic Party to wage a homosexual jihad against Republicans. Rogers coordinated the election year hit on Rep. Mark Foley and the GOP House leadership (BOOK PLUG: I connect the dots in the Foleygate affair to show the extent of the operation) and recently met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to share his plans for more attacks based on rumor and innuendo. His methods involve stalking and threats that border on blackmail and extortion.
My own experience with Rogers came in April 2005 following an appearance at the National Press Club. I participated in a panel discussion that dealt with the issue of “Who is a journalist?” Gay activists protested my inclusion in the event since one of their representatives would not be on the panel to further their smear campaign against me. At the conclusion of the event, Rogers rushed the speakers’ table screaming slanderous accusations. Security, already alerted to specific threats of violence whisked me out a side door. However, Rogers skulked in the lobby and aggressively lunged at me again, jumping onto the elevator with me. Security pulled me out as the doors closed and I left the building through another exit. Meanwhile, Rogers reached the first floor of the building and scuffled with security guards who would not allow him to return to the club floor. Subsequently, Mike Rogers was banned FOR LIFE from the National Press Club premises.
Such is the behavior of the Angry Gay Left. For them to achieve their radical goals, no tactic is off the table. Perhaps that is why Rogers is so paranoid about anyone finding out where he lives, fearing he may someday have to take what he dishes out to others. As I wrote in The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report, the Angry Gay Left is a “vicious and conflicted” group. Their zeal comes from a blinding hatred for anyone who opposes them. Gay activists cloak themselves in victimhood, yet strike out against perceived enemies with a shrill ferocity that is hysterical – in every sense of the word.
Knowing that gays make up only about 6% of the population – a percentage that is a statistical constant – activists realize they can only achieve political power by aligning themselves with one political party and using the courts to impose what a vast majority of Americans reject.
Larry Craig voted the values of his constituents even though he may not have conducted his personal affairs consistent with those principles. For this, gay activists hope to drive Craig from Congress and wreak havoc among Republicans. Closeted Democrats on Capitol Hill are safe from Rogers because they vote for the gay agenda. I can tell you there are quite a few Democrats in Congress whose personal lives would come as a shock and a surprise to the voters of their districts. These are men (and women) who have sexual relations with members of the same sex in Washington, then return home to pose for photo-ops with their all-American families.
Rogers and his ilk are the epitome of hypocrisy. Christians love the sinner and hate the sin; the ungodly liberals of the Democratic Party love the sin and hate the sinner. Larry Craig did not invent the toilet culture for which he has been accused. Gays did. Not only did gays invent anonymous rendezvous – the practice is a significant part of the homosexual subculture.
In 2000, gay activists took law enforcement officials of several major California cities to task over for conducting the types of undercover operations that ensnared Larry Craig. In 1998, singer George Michael was arrested for lewd behavior in a Beverly Hills park bathroom. Lawsuits filed by gay organizations like Lambda Legal and the Coalition for Civil Rights have waged a decade-long battle against enforcement of laws targeting sex in public bathrooms and parks.
Gay activists in Ft. Lauderdale are currently staging a campaign to oust Mayor Jim Naugle because he wants gays to stop having sex in the public bathrooms of his city. Naugle says it spreads disease (it does) and drives away family tourism (it does). The activists call Naugle a bigot and a homophobe – because he opposes illegal sexual activity in public bathrooms!
Gay activists making a federal case out of Larry Craig’s alleged misconduct are making a big mistake. Do they really want mainstream America to know about the pervasive and perverted toilet culture gays espouse, promote, enable, encourage, facilitate and celebrate? Do they want the public to know how many bathrooms in the U.S. Capitol and the congressional office buildings are listed in gay guides as places for men to have sex with each other?
None of the gays activists bleating about Larry Craig say that what he did was wrong – only that he was a Republican. That’s hypocrisy!
Posted by jeffgannon at 09:27 AM | TrackBack
September 04, 2007
'The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report'
Jeff Gannon’s Book Takes Aim At Liberal Media Bias
‘The Great Media War’ Exposes Politically-Connected Reporters
WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 /Standard Newswire/ -- Former White House correspondent Jeff Gannon ‘names names’ in his behind the scenes look at the White House Press Corps and the Bush administration. For two years Gannon reported on some of the most important news events from ‘behind enemy lines’. He provides never before published details of stories from the invasion of Iraq through the 2004 election and the beginning of the second term of President George W. Bush.
Valerie Plame Affair: “I was the only White House reporter to get the CIA ‘leak’ story right and the first journalist to directly confront Joe Wilson with evidence of his lies about his mission to Niger.”
Sen. Tom Daschle’s historic loss: “My exposé on Daschle’s ‘Sopranos-style’ political machine that used the local media to destroy opponents and stifle unfavorable news stories about the Democratic leader affected the outcome of the most watched race of 2004.”
Rathergate: “I was the first journalist to report that Mary Mapes was behind the forged documents Dan Rather used to try to defeat President Bush and the near-meltdown of CBS News’ Washington bureau.”
Gannon made headlines in January 2005, asking President Bush a question that liberal activists thought unfairly criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Harry Reid. When efforts to professionally discredit Gannon failed, liberal activists waged an unprecedented campaign that brought threats of violence against him and his family and invasions of his privacy to create a scandal that had Washington abuzz for months.
Gannon hits back at his critics:
DailyKos – “stalkers and hatemongers”
Media Matters for America – “smear artists and character assassins”
Angry Gay Left – “vicious and conflicted hypocrites”
Democrats – “With the investigation of a journalist and a pledge to revive the so-called Fairness Doctrine, Rep. John Conyers and Rep. Louise Slaughter pose the greatest threat to the free press in America since Congress passed the Sedition Act over 200 years ago.”
Gannon says that The Great Media War results from the right’s battle to make inroads in the traditional media that for decades has been genetically and institutionally liberal and from the left’s fighting back to hold onto its once exclusive franchise. Gannon connects the dots between political figures and the media and shows how they collaborated to help Democrats take over Congress in 2006.
DC Examiner: Gannon: "I'm here...Deal with me'