COULTER SPOTTED FOX IN THE HENHOUSE
The Liberal “Doctrine Of Infallibility”: Redux
October 25, 2006
You have to hand it to Ann Coulter...when she depanties disingenuous liberal hypocrisy; nothing is left to the imagination.
In chapter five of her bestseller, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, Coulter lays out the liberal “Doctrine of Infallibility”. As Coulter explains it, “Finally, the Democrats hit on an ingenious strategy: They would choose only messengers whom we’re (Conservatives) not allowed to reply to”. Coulter continues that, “All the most prominent liberal spokesmen are people with ‘absolute moral authority’—Democrats with a dead husband, a dead child...a terminal illness....”
And so, after the death of famed liberal stem cell research expert Christopher Reeve, Spin City’s Michael J. Fox became the infallible Hollywood twit-turned-academician propagandist to lead the liberals’ embryonic stem cell disinformation campaign. Like Reeve, Fox can lie but Conservatives can’t tell the truth because the liar is an infallible “victim”.
And along came Limbaugh.
Oh, that horrible Rush Limbaugh. In Rush’s own words, he will be accused of prosecuting “a slashing attack by...an incentive, cold-hearted, cruel boob who has no sympathy for people who suffer from ravages of Parkinson's”, because he dared to suggest that Michael J. Fox may have given a fortissimo performance in the political ad that Fox made for Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill.
And Limbaugh is correct. In their rush to judgment, the mainstream media has abandoned fact-checking and truth (as if there is anything new about that).
It doesn’t matter that Fox misrepresented and distorted the facts in his made-for-TV Democratic ads. It doesn’t matter that Fox is a blatant liar. All that matters to the liberals is that Limbaugh dared to suggest that Fox included performance distortion in his repertoire of lies on behalf of the Democrats use of disease as a campaign tool.
When Fox makes the claim that Missouri Senator Jim Talent “...even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope” Fox (and apparently the entire deaf, dumb and blind MSM) failed to note that what Senator Talent is opposed to is Missouri Amendment 2 which would legalize cloning. As Limbaugh’s research points out, “Amendment 2 is misleading in that it appears to put stem cell research in the Constitution and to ban human cloning, but the fine print creates a right to do somatic cell nuclear transfer, cloning, which is the scientific term for cloning, the same method used to clone Dolly the sheep”.
But Fox is a victim, and even if his message is a lie, he can’t possible be called a liar. His message is video pathos and the truth be damned. He is “infallible” because he is a “victim” of Parkinson’s.
Parkinson’s is a disease as is drug addiction. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) makes no bones about it when they categorically state that “The fact is, drug addiction is a brain disease.” And as such, at least in the liberal world, an addict should have the same cloak of infallibility as a person with Parkinson’s.
Yet, while the condemnation of Limbaugh’s review of Fox’s propaganda performance were decisive and swift, much the opposite was true when Limbaugh admitted his disease.
Immediately following Limbaugh’s comments on the Michael J. Fox performance, John Rogers, Fox's political adviser, said "It's a shameless statement". And Don Imus followed with, “"Rush Limbaugh, a fat, draft-dodging, drug addict...jacking his maid up, having her buy dope for him...That fat son of bitch, I mean, enough bad stuff can't happen to him."
The condemnation of Limbaugh from the MSM was swift, inaccurate and universal.
Ironically, when Limbaugh admitted to his disease, the liberals offered him up no cloak of infallibility. Quite to the contrary, they lumped misery upon misery.
Mike Hudson, editor of the Niagara Falls Reporter, showed his compassion towards the diseased by writing that “I hope Rush gets over his addiction. Then I hope he dies from cancer of the balls.”
In this instance, the liberals granted that mercurial cloak of infallibility to Hudson and ginned up their gleeful mocking of Limbaugh’s disease. Here is a brief part of a timeline sampling the MSM’s compassion for Limbaugh’s disease:
Thursday Oct. 2, 2003: Dan Rather, CBS "Evening News": "Rush Limbaugh . . . he's being investigated for possible connections to a powerful drug ring in south Florida."
Thursday Oct. 2, 2003: Peter Jennings, "World News Tonight," ABC: "As for Rush Limbaugh . . . [he is] now being investigated for possible involvement in the sale of black market prescription drugs."
Thursday, Oct. 2, 2003: Tom Brokaw, NBC "Nightly News": ". . . tabloid headlines that he's involved in an illegal prescription drug-selling probe in his home state of Florida."
Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2003: Dan Rather, CBS "Evening News": Dan Rather: "stories abound about Rush Limbaugh and a drug gang . . . ."
Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2003: Dan Rather, CBS "Evening News": ". . . talk radio's Rush Limbaugh and renewed focus on narcotics rings that traffic in the potent painkiller OxyContin."
Friday, Oct. 10, 2003: Dan Rather, CBS "Evening News": "Rush Limbaugh, who refused to talk for days about allegations. . . is hooked on drugs . . . often sold by powerful drug traffickers. "
As Ann Coulter points out in Godless, “Liberals prey on people at a time of extreme emotional vulnerability”. The sad part is if the vulnerable are liberals they are cloaked in the “Doctrine of Infallibility”. If the vulnerable happen to be Conservatives, the liberals “Cry ''havoc!'' and let loose the dogs of war, that this foul deed shall smell above the earth with carrion men, groaning for burial”.