Search Results

DISPATCHES FROM THE DNC-MSM MEMORY HOLE: Recalling Hillary’s seance.

I’m old enough to remember other previous residents of the White House getting plenty of media grief for talking to its past occupants and other forms of mysticism many consider silly — but they each had an (R) after their names. For Hillary, the MSM happily airbrushes her Ouija board right into the ether.

HMM: Chinese military posts warning to North Korea about nukes, then flushes it down the memory hole.

But not before Pyongyang got the message, I’m sure — screencaps of the disappeared story at the linked tweet.

WALTER RUSSELL MEAD HARSHES THE NARRATIVE: Trump Isn’t Sounding Like a Russian Mole: Trump’s core global strategy is intended to destroy any illusions in Moscow that Russia is a peer competitor of Washington’s.

A Trump administration is going to be four years of hell for Russia: a massive American doubling down on shale production along with a major military buildup. Trump is, in other words, a nightmare for Putin and a much, much bigger threat to Putin’s goals than President Obama ever was or wanted to be.

If Trump were the Manchurian candidate that people keep wanting to believe that he is, here are some of the things he’d be doing:

Limiting fracking as much as he possibly could
Blocking oil and gas pipelines
Opening negotiations for major nuclear arms reductions
Cutting U.S. military spending
Trying to tamp down tensions with Russia’s ally Iran

That Trump is planning to do precisely the opposite of these things may or may not be good policy for the United States, but anybody who thinks this is a Russia appeasement policy has been drinking way too much joy juice.

Obama actually did all of these things, and none of the liberal media now up in arms about Trump ever called Obama a Russian puppet; instead, they preferred to see a brave, farsighted and courageous statesman. Trump does none of these things and has embarked on a course that will inexorably weaken Russia’s position in the world, and the media, suddenly flushing eight years of Russia dovishness down the memory hole, now sounds the warning that Trump’s Russia policy is treasonously soft.

This foolishness is best understood as an unreasoning panic attack. The liberal media hate Trump more than they have hated any American politician in a generation, and they do not understand his supporters or the sources of his appeal. They are frantically picking up every available stick to beat him, in the hopes that something, somehow, will Miloize him.

So blind does hatred make them that they cannot understand how their own behavior is driving American public opinion in directions that bode ill for liberals in the future. In the first place, suppose Donald Trump does not in fact turn out to be the second coming of Benedict Arnold. Suppose instead, as is much more likely, that he turns out to be a very hawkish president, one who quite possibly will make George W. Bush look like Jimmy Carter. The media and Democratic Party leaders will have staked huge amounts of credibility on a position that turns out to be laughably untrue. Six months or a year from now, they will have to flip from calling Trump an anti-American traitor and Russian plant to calling him a dangerous, fascistic ultranationalist whose relentless hawkishness is bringing us closer to World War Three.

The press and the Democrats — but I repeat myself — will make that flip without a moment’s hesitation or acknowledgment.

Plus: “The media wants to cast Trump as both Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler; but you can’t give the Sudetenland to yourself.”

OCEANIA HAS NEVER BEEN AT WAR WITH HILLARY CLINTON: “See Hillary Clinton Get A Standing Ovation Before ‘Sunset Boulevard’ On Broadway, the Huffington Post breathlessly reports:

At a showing of Broadway’s “Sunset Boulevard” Wednesday night, the former Democratic presidential candidate prompted applause and cheers from audience members as she took her seat among them.

Several Twitter users and reporters in the theater took note of the enthusiastic response.

She’s finally ready for her close-up. You young citizens of Oceania may not believe me, but honest, I swear, I can remember vague flashbacks to that hazy year called 2008, when the Huffington Post trashed Hillary’s Democrat supporters (concurrent with Obama’s infamous Bitter Clingers slur against them) and Obama-supporting video makers created Hillary as Norma Desmond parodies. Like Norma herself, all down the Memory Hole:

Click to watch.

JAMES LILEKS: “I’M NOT ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO THINK WE ARE LIVING IN 1934, BUT I’LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN I CHANGE MY MIND:”

I’ve been looking at a lot of WW1 American magazines lately, and it makes me realize that the pre-20s period of the American 20th century is almost terra incognita to me. As it is to most, probably. Does it matter? Shouldn’t history really start in 1929, or 1934?

Perhaps, but you can make the case that if there wasn’t a Gavrilo Princip, there wouldn’t have been Hitler. And Princips are much more numerous. Princips in any society are as common as coins.

Funny how “Progressive” historians have memory holed America in the 1910s pretty much right out of history. I wonder why that is?

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: “Newspapers continue to cite the boycott as an unprecedented act….But this isn’t the first time [John] Lewis [D-GA] has boycotted a presidential inauguration. According to a Washington Post article written on January 21, 2001, Lewis and other members of the Black Caucus boycotted George W. Bush’s inauguration because they didn’t ‘believe Bush is the true elected president.’ Lewis spent the day in his Atlanta district.”

UPDATE: “On NBC’s ‘Meet the Press,’ Lewis said the inauguration Friday [of Trump] ’will be the first one that I miss since I’ve been in Congress.’”

JAMES TARANTO: A Crisis of Authority—II: The people have spoken. Obama is speaking back.

It’s true that Obama has not melted down in public the way many on the liberal left have. But Lederman overstates the case. On that foreign trip, as well as in a lengthy series of interviews, both pre- and postelection, with the New Yorker’s David Remnick, Obama has been quite fretful—torn, as at that press conference, between his duty as a lame-duck president to respect the office and the man who will soon hold it, and his anguish at what amounts to a repudiation of authority.

Here we mean not Obama’s authority as president, which he will continue to exercise until Trump is sworn in at noon on Jan. 20. Rather, what the voters repudiated was the authority of what Obama stands for. . . .

Remnick himself described the Obama presidency as “two terms long on dignity and short on scandal.” The IRS? The State Department scandal that arguably sank Mrs. Clinton’s campaign? Again, the memory hole.

In Lima on Sunday the president himself declared: “I am extremely proud of the fact that over eight years we have not had the kinds of scandals that have plagued other administrations.” That’s either delusional or very carefully worded: To our knowledge no other administration has used the IRS to punish ordinary citizens for dissent, nor faced FBI findings that the secretary of state treated classified information in an “extremely careless” fashion. . . .

Meanwhile, the Times’s new public editor, Liz Spayd, faults “the media” for “turning [Trump’s] remarks into a grim caricature that it applied to those who backed him. What struck me is how many liberal voters I spoke with felt so, too. They were Clinton backers, but, they want a news source that fairly covers people across the spectrum.”

If you’d told us in 2013, when we identified the problem of liberal-left authoritarianism, that Donald Trump would be the solution, we’d have laughed along with everyone else. But he was probably a necessary corrective. The left has waged asymmetric political warfare, routinely traducing the same norms it was demanding its opponents respect. Trump beat them at their own game, and that might have been the only way it could be done.

Choose the form of your Destructor!

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE,PART DEUX:

Shot: NPR Show: Trump Ushered in ‘Rebirth’ Of ‘Nation’s Hatred.’

NewsBusters, November 1st.

Chaser: Taxpayer-Funded Immaturity: NPR Teaches Readers ‘To Speak Tea Bag.’

NewsBusters, January 4, 2010.

As Glenn has noted, “I’m increasingly concerned that the neutralization of the Tea Party movement — an effort by both major parties — may have convinced a lot of people that civics-book style polite political participation is for chumps.”

Incidentally, regarding that second NPR link, why are Democrat monopoly institutions such cesspits of rampant ignorance and homophobia?

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE, PART ONE:

Shot:

If you’ve been paying any attention at all to the election coverage in the nation’s largest newspapers and on cable TV, you have likely found yourself a bit exasperated at how events from the campaign trail have been covered. Much of that comes from editorial bias in story selection, but more than a little is caused by the obvious bias inherent in the “explanations” of the stories which do make it into print or on the air. But it seems that the journalists aren’t too happy either. Some of them feel constrained by the musty, dusty old rules of engagement in the news game. Keep in mind that we’re not talking about “opinion journalists” like Hannity or Maddow here, but the reporters who are supposed to be covering the stories for us with all of the who, where, when, what and how details. When it comes to politics such things can be hard to define, as politicians employ greater and greater amounts of spin in their stump speeches and debate performances.

Marc Ambinder feels their pain and brings us an opinion piece at USA Today this week in which he calls for new rules of journalism. Under these revised guidelines, reporters should feel free to correct what they perceive as errors on the part of the candidates on the fly.

—“The Left is ushering in ‘new rules of journalism’ because of Donald Trump,” Jazz Shaw, Hot Air, November 1st.

Chaser:

As I wrote last month in “The Rise of the John Birch Left:”

The original Birchers weren’t bad people, but their Cold War paranoia got the better of them. Similarly, as Charles Krauthammer famously said, “To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil,” which illustrates how a John Birch-style worldview can cause the modern leftists to take an equally cracked view of his fellow countrymen…

…Which brings us today to Marc Ambinder, who according to Wikipedia is a former White House correspondent at the National Journal, contributing editor at GQ and the Atlantic, and editor-at-large at The Week, where he blows the battle trumpet, Col. Kilgore-style: “Why Democrats should treat Republicans like their mortal enemy.”

* * * * * * *

I missed the memo though: When did Democrats stop treating Republicans like their mortal enemy?

“You Went Full Bircher, Man. Never Go Full Bircher,” Ed Driscoll.com, December 3rd, 2014.

Meet the “new” rules of journalism — just the same as the old rules of journalism. Think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

THE ULTIMATE VOX.COM WORKPLACE ACCIDENT? Vox co-founder Matt Ygelsias has deleted several thousand tweets:

matt_yglesias_memory_hole_10-26-16-4

Gone, as Steve noted earlier, was this classic tweet from the summer of 2013:

matt_yglesias_memory_hole_10-26-16-5

Could it all have been an accident? Perhaps — but this tweet from 2010, which also recently vanished down the memory hole, casts a bit of doubt on that theory:

yglesias_sophistry_8-10

Exit quote:

matt_yglesias_memory_hole_10-26-16-3

Heh, indeed. And note the irony of a notorious robophobe approvingly quoting one of the most famous replicants in history. Do androids dream of deleted tweets?

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE:

AS ALWAYS, SOONER OR LATER, REAL LIFE IMITATES THE EARLIER, FUNNIER SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE:

Emily Litella: What’s all this fuss I’ve been hearing about the 1976 presidential erection? Now, I know they erected a monument for Mr. Lincoln and President Washington, but that’s because they’re DEAD! Hopefully, the 1976 President won’t be DEAD! So he won’t NEED an erection! If Americans are going to spend money to erect anything, why don’t we tear down those nasty slums and erect luxury high rises for poor people and senior citizens! Not for presidents who can afford to pay for their OWN erections!

Chevy Chase: Miss Litella —

Emily Litella: I can’t believe the way things are turning out in this country — what?

Chevy Chase: I’m sorry. That’s election. The editorial was about the presidential election, not the presidential erection. Election.

Emily Litella: Oh, that’s very different.

—Weekend Update, from the April 17th, 1976 episode of Saturday Night Live, hosted by President Ford’s press secretary, Ron Nessen. As one of the writers later admitted, the entire staff knew that “The President’s watching. Let’s make him cringe and squirm,” by crafting one of the series’ raunchiest episodes, particularly those segments that Nessen didn’t appear in.

Flash-forward to today: CNN Sitting On ‘Obama ERECTION’ Video … Since 2008? Debra Heine asks at PJM:

A newly emerged video from the 2008 presidential campaign appears to show that the current president of the United States might be even lewder than Donald Trump.

And Trump only talked about being lewd. Looks like Obama actually did it.

Further, liberal media bias is at the center of this controversy, too.

NBC sat on the video of Trump and Billy Bush until such a time that it could aid a Democratic opponent of Trump — NBC refused to release the video when it could have helped Republican Ted Cruz.

Well, this new video — of Senator Obama, running for president in 2008, apparently flaunting his ERECTION in front of a plane full of FEMALE reporters — was shot by a CNN camera.

CNN has kept this video private all these years — a video that might have changed U.S. history to favor Republicans.

Click over for video of the err, whole package.

CNN-created the Orwellian Wright-Free Zone memory hole in service to Obama that year as well. Besides the L.A. Times’ still-buried tape of Obama with the PLO-championing Rashid Khalidi, I wonder what else will eventually surface now that it can no longer do our semi-retired president any harm at the ballot box?

REPORTED H.W. BUSH VOTE FOR HILLARY IS EXACTLY WHY MANY REPUBLICANS SUPPORT TRUMP, Ben Shapiro writes:

The Bush family isn’t put off so much by Trump’s policy proposals – except for immigration and free trade, the Bush family likely agrees with much of Trump’s left-leaning policy. They’re mostly put off by Trump’s attitude – his boorishness, his ignorance, his general sense of know-nothingism. To be fair, Trump clubbed Jeb! like a baby seal and the Bush family specifically during the debates; that had to draw some ire from the family. But for George H.W. Bush, the deciding factor was likely attitudinal: Trump just doesn’t belong. The Clintons, by dint of two decades in the White House spotlight, do.

This is one of the objections to Trump that many Trump supporters have a right to be angry about. It’s one thing to object to Trump based on policy differences and a general belief that he toxifies the conservative message. It’s another thing to do it because he doesn’t belong in the toney company of the blue bloods. The Bush Family feels like American royalty, and they appear to see Trump as a nouveau riche blowhard. That feels elitist rather than principled. Nobody was surprised that the person who reported H.W. Bush’s voting choice was a Kennedy. That’s how the Bushes roll.

And that feeling of Republican elitism helped drive Trump to new heights. Trump wasn’t merely a reaction to the “neocons” or the “Republican establishment.” He was a reaction to the Bush family in particular: their genteel sensibilities, their family heritage, their general chumminess with the Clintons. Republican primary voters reveled in the Trump-Jeb! piledrivers, because they felt that Trump was willing to hit people hard, unlike the Bush family.

If the reports are true, the story seems like Stockholm syndrome. During his 1992 run for the White House, Bill Clinton’s campaign used George H.W. Bush’s breaking of his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge — which the Democrat-majority Congress demanded of Papa Bush in 1990, who was far more interested in foreign policy than budget negations — as a cudgel against him in a viciously partisan advertisement designed to make Bubba appear to be running to Bush’s right. Much the same would happen over a decade later during Dubya’s administration, when many of the same leftists who supported regime change in Iraq during the Clinton years in the mid to late 1990s would adopt a similar “you f***ed up, you trusted us” stance and toss their former support down the memory hole (not least of which, Hillary Clinton).

And now Bush #41 is returning the favor by supporting his wife and once again sticking the shiv into Republicans?

DISPATCHES FROM THE EDUCATION APOCALYPSE: Hey You Guys – You Can’t Say “You Guys” Anymore:

On campus, political correctness has become the Santa Claus who offers no presents. It sees you when you’re sleeping. It knows when you’re awake. It’s definitely making lists and checking them twice, and you’d better be correct for correctness’ sake. Otherwise you won’t even get a lump of coal, just a letter informing you how really sorry everyone is that they had to expel you for your own good.

Yet another sense-demolishing instance of campus lunacy was reported last week in The New York Times, which informed readers that their children off at college are being sternly warned not to say “you guys” (it might make women feel excluded), not to “show surprise” if a feminine-looking woman says she is a lesbian (acting ability now being as essential as learning ability) and to be very very careful about singing along with rap lyrics, even when alone in a car.*

Oh swell – I guess PBS will either have to Memory Hole its old Electric Company series from the 1970s, or put trigger warnings on each episode. Why does the left hate Rita Moreno so?

* “A Party member lives from birth to death under the eye of the Thought Police. Even when he is alone he can never be sure that he is alone. Wherever he may be, asleep or awake, working or resting, in his bath or in bed, he can be inspected without warning and without knowing that he is being inspected. Nothing that he does is indifferent. His friendships, his relaxations, his behaviour towards his wife and children, the expression of his face when he is alone, the words he mutters in sleep, even the characteristic movements of his body, are all jealously scrutinized. Not only any actual misdemeanour, but any eccentricity, however small, any change of habits, any nervous mannerism that could possibly be the symptom of an inner struggle, is certain to be detected. He has no freedom of choice in any direction whatever.”

QUESTIONS ASKED: The Mel Gibson-’Hacksaw Ridge’ debate “parallels that of Nate Parker, the director of ‘Birth of a Nation.’ Parker was acquitted in 1991 of rape, yet the story of that case has now been raised as the well reviewed movie is getting ready for release. The big Oscar debate of 2016 will be how to weigh the actions of these directors vs. their movies. Are we supposed to separate the man from his art? And how does the director’s personal actions color the way we look at the movies?”

Doesn’t Hollywood expect us to separate out from their work Roman Polanski and Woody Allen’s crimes and misdemeanors (to coin an Alvy Singer-approved phrase)? Spike Lee and Samuel L. Jackson’s racialism? Sean Penn and Oliver Stone’s love of totalitarian thugs? Alec Baldwin’s frequent assaults on well, seemingly everyone? Given how low the bar has been set by the industry, I’m not sure why Gibson alone should expect to be tossed down the memory hole.

WINSTON SMITH, CALL YOUR OFFICE: CNN, The Hill attempt to shield Hillary Clinton from her former KKK ‘mentor.’

Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense. CNN in particular can always be counted on dispatching a Democrat’s awkward allegiance with an openly racist longtime mentor into the memory hole during an election year.

APPARENTLY I’M NOT EVEN THE 100TH VOICE CRYING IN THE DESERT: Richard Fernandez examines the impact of our disruptive technological change in ye current weirdness, a favorite theme of mine. The End of the Memory Hole. It’s not so much that the king is now naked, but that the king was always naked, but the mainstream press wouldn’t mention it.  Now everyone can point and laugh.

JOHAN NORBERG: Why can’t we see that we’re living in a golden age? If you look at all the data, it’s clear there’s never been a better time to be alive.

If you think that there has never been a better time to be alive — that humanity has never been safer, healthier, more prosperous or less unequal — then you’re in the minority. But that is what the evidence incontrovertibly shows. Poverty, malnutrition, illiteracy, child labour and infant mortality are falling faster than at any other time in human history. The risk of being caught up in a war, subjected to a dictatorship or of dying in a natural disaster is smaller than ever. The golden age is now.

We’re hardwired not to believe this. We’ve evolved to be suspicious and fretful: fear and worry are tools for survival. The hunters and gatherers who survived sudden storms and predators were the ones who had a tendency to scan the horizon for new threats, rather than sit back and enjoy the view. They passed their stress genes on to us. That is why we find stories about things going wrong far more interesting than stories about things going right. It’s why bad news sells, and newspapers are full of it.

Books that say the world is doomed sell rather well, too. I have just attempted the opposite. I’ve written a book called Progress, about humanity’s triumphs. It is written partly as a warning: when we don’t see the progress we have made, we begin to search for scapegoats for the problems that remain. Sometimes, in the past and perhaps today, we have been too quick to try our luck with demagogues who offer simple solutions to make our nations great again — whether by nationalising the economy, blocking imports or throwing out immigrants. If we think we don’t have anything to lose in doing so, it’s because our memories are faulty.

Look at 1828, when The Spectator was first published. Most people in Britain then lived in what is now regarded as extreme poverty. Life was nasty (people still threw their waste out of the window), brutish (corpses were still displayed on gibbets) and short (30 years on average). But even then things had been improving. The first iteration of The Spectator, in 1711, was published in a Britain whose people subsisted on average on fewer calories than the average child gets today in sub-Saharan Africa.

Karl Marx thought that capitalism inevitably made the rich richer and the poor poorer. By the time Marx died, however, the average Englishman was three times richer than at the time of his birth 65 years earlier — never before had the population experienced anything like it.

Fast forward to 1981. Then, almost nine in ten Chinese lived in extreme poverty; now just one in ten do. Then, just half of the world’s population had access to safe water. Now, 91 per cent do. On average, that means that 285,000 more people have gained access to safe water every day for the past 25 years.

Related: Richard Fernandez:

The question isn’t whether the state is irrelevant but whether it is less important than formerly or whether it is significant in a different way. Certainly Lou Dobbs’ question “why would anyone vote for a FBI certified liar who’s refused to hold a press conference for 258 days?” can only be met by supposing an indifference or resignation over political outcomes. One possible explanation for this comes from a Reason Magazine citing a Pew poll that “millennial support for the Libertarian Party nominee is damn near astonishing.” It’s not hard to see in this a suggestion that government become less important in the 21st century than it was in the 20th.

The idea of the state as the “locomotive of history” is relatively recent. George Orwell’s 1984 saw state resting on the pillars of police power, a command economy and the ability to rewrite the Narrative. The most important of these was the ability to rewrite the factual record. In fact 1984’s protagonist was employed full time to rewrite newspaper articles. In Orwell’s view the mutability of the past was the foundation of tyranny. “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.” To ensure this the Ministry of Truth was honeycombed with Memory Holes into which any inconvenient fact could be dropped and be disappeared.

But just to illustrate how things have changed for the State we now know that Orwell was wrong. The mathematically dominant method for recording transactions, whether they involve the transfer of financial assets, intellectual property, health records or any type of information is probably going to be the blockchain. It has three important properties. First the entire record can be reproduced by anyone from a Genesis cryptographic starting point such that all records will have the same signature if and only if they are the same. Second, no part of the record can be altered without regenerating the entire block chain from the the branch. Third, it is impossible to rewrite the block chain without incurring enormous real costs in electricity and computing power, as guaranteed by the laws of thermodynamics.

The first property means that blockchain by nature is a public ledger. The second ensures the database can only be falsified in its entirety from the point of change. The third makes it prohibitively expensive to do so. Readers of Ray Bradbury’s The Sound of Thunder will recognize these attributes. From his story we learn you can’t change the past without altering everything; that by crushing a butterfly in the Jurassic we alter not one item in the record but create a whole alternate history.

The possibility of a immutable record is revolutionary in itself.

Well, stay tuned. I think that one of the reasons why people are pessimistic is that it is now much harder to escape the realization that all the Top Men (and Women) are really pretty incompetent. So believing that maybe they don’t matter as much is grounds for optimism.

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE: It’s been right at a month since FBI Director Comey sold out.

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: What Happens When Liberal Heroines Crumble?

stalin_airbrush_unperson_5-2-16-1

ACTRESS (?) DEBRA MESSING TAKES SELFIES OF HERSELF DURING UCLA SHOOTING TO, SHE CLAIMS, BRING ATTENTION TO GUN VIOLENCE, AND/OR HERSELF.

Someone should write a book on the dangers of moral narcissism, and how it’s destroying our republic, if it hasn’t already — it seems like a rather timely topic.

And speaking of the UCLA shooting, look for it to be rapidly memory holed by the MSM: “UCLA shooter identified as former Ph.D student Mainak Sarkar; Liberal narrative hardest hit.”

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Liberal Policies Destroy Small Business.

As the late Tony Snow noted in a 1999 column titled “Queen Tut?” written as Hillary was prepping for her tour of duty as New York’s carpetbagging senator, “When told [in 1993 that HillaryCare] could bankrupt small businesses, Mrs. Clinton sighed, ‘I can’t be responsible for every undercapitalized small business in America.’”

And nothing has changed; last year, Joel Gehrke wrote at NRO, “Clinton noted that small business creation has ‘stalled out,’ to her chagrin. ‘I was very surprised to see that when I began to dig into it,’ she said while campaigning in New Hampshire. ‘Because people were telling me this as I traveled around the country the last two years, but I didn’t know what they were saying and it turns out that we are not producing as many small businesses as we use to.’”

Fortunately, Bernie Sanders has gotten to the root cause of the problem:

bernie_blames_millenials_4-28-16-1

As James Taranto, who rescued Bernie’s tweet from the Memory Hole quips, “Millennials are gluttons for punishment. Sanders blames them for the recession; they vote for him anyway.”

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT HAS AN AIRBRUSH, AND SHE’S NOT AFRAID TO USE IT. Albright: ‘War on Terror’ Bad Term for ‘Just Murderers:’

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said she dislikes the use of the phrase “war on terror,” arguing that it makes terrorists look like warriors.

“For me, I’ve had a very hard time with the vocabulary of all of this and I have not liked the words ‘war on terror’ because it makes those that are fighting us warriors when they are actually just murderers and they get a greater kind of reverence in their societies if we make warriors out of them. They are murderers, plain and simple,” Albright said during a discussion about religion, peace and world affairs at Georgetown University.

While she did not mention any presidential candidates by name, Albright criticized Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump’s call for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the U.S. as a way to combat Islamic extremism.

Yes, Allah forbid anyone connect the dots here. Or as Tim Blair wrote a few years ago in a post titled “Message Unheard:”

You can’t help but feel a little bit sorry for your average Muslim terrorist. They go to all the trouble of blowing up children in Boston, killing US Army personnel in Texas, detonating bars in Bali, flying jets into New York skyscrapers and now basically removing a soldier’s head in a London street, all in the holy name of Islam.

But where’s the credit?

Where’s the respect?

It’s underneath the ash heap at the bottom of the Memory Hole deep within the basement of the Ministry of Truth. I’m sure Albright’s former colleague Sandy Berger could have found it — if only to bury those archives even more deeply.

Related: Brendan O’Neill on “Charlie Hebdo, Terrorism, and the Culture of ‘You Can’t Say That.'”

THELMA AND LOUISE: THE NEXT GENERATION!

Shot: Hillary Clinton wears leather, talks trash and blows a stop light.
—The New York Daily News, Friday.

Chaser: ‘Our eyes connected and I thought “Wow”‘: Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin gushes about presidential hopeful and describes the moment they first met
—The London Daily Mail, today.

Hangover: While the tabloid press are running these “granny gets her freak on” headlines, as NewsBusters noted last night, AP and the New York Times have memory holed “Mrs. Clinton’s seven damning words, ‘the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.'” “The best way to tell when a leftist’s gaffe is serious is to see if the Associated Press or the New York Times have recognized its existence. As of 9 p.m. ET this evening, neither has. So it’s serious. Pile-ons are coming from the left and the right.”

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE: Homeland Security Chairman: ‘Bit of a Disgrace’ Terror Attacks Left Out of Obama Speech.

To be fair, Obama and reality have never been on the best of terms with each other.

JUST NBC THAT MEMORY HOLE! “Donald Trump appeared on NBC’s Today where co-host Savannah Guthrie attempted to convince Trump that former President Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs (and specifically what occurred with Monica Lewinsky) were merely ‘alleged’ and thus might not be fair to bring up in a campaign involving Hillary Clinton.”

In contrast, even the Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus can see the obvious: “Trump has smeared women because of their looks. Clinton has preyed on them, and in a workplace setting where he was by far the superior. That is uncomfortable for Clinton supporters but it is unavoidably true.”

But then, truth is the ultimate scarce resource inside NBC and most other DNC-MSM newsrooms.

Related: ‘I will not stop talking about this’! NRO’s Katherine Timpf won’t let Hillary off ‘feminist’ hook.

OBAMA SAYS HE DOESN’T WATCH ENOUGH TV, AND THE NEW YORK TIMES TACITLY ADMITS IT CAN’T GET ENOUGH OF THE MEMORY HOLE. I’m not sure which is more damning, the following passage

In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments. Republicans were telling Americans that he is not doing anything when he is doing a lot, he said.

…Or the fact that at least at the moment, it’s since been expunged from the Times’ article, even though it was quoted last night by blogger Tom Maguire, the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto, and CNN’s Brian Stelter. And it was in the Google cache as of last night as well:

google_cache_obama_cable_tv_nyt_edit_12-17-15-1

Perhaps seeing Obama’s latest Kinsley-esque gaffe in print caused the administration — or worse, the Times, without being prompted — to have a painful flashback to Obama’s callous choice of words that America could “absorb” another terrorist attack, as quoted by Bob Woodward in 2010.

This isn’t the first time that the Gray Lady has airbrushed a damning moment for the administration out of its columns. In 2013, Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard wrote:

Daniel P. Schrag, a White House climate adviser and director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, tells the New York Times “a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.” Later today, President Obama will give a major “climate change” address at Georgetown University.

“Everybody is waiting for action,” Schrag tells the paper. “The one thing the president really needs to do now is to begin the process of shutting down the conventional coal plants. Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they’re having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.

Soon after Halper’s article was Drudge-lanched, the Times airbrushed Schrag’s quote out, despite its being referenced by at least one commenter underneath the Times’ article.

As for Obama not watching enough TV — for better or worse, throughout his tenure in office, our semi-retired president certainly appears to be a voracious consumer of at least the entertainment portion of the medium. And as Taranto notes, just imagine George Bush saying something along the lines of not watching enough cable television to fully appreciate the public’s anxiety after two near concurrent major terrorist attacks during his administration.

On the other hand, it was nice of Obama to live out the lede of Glenn’s latest USA Today article: “Democrats are supposed to be the party of compassion, but lately a lot of Americans are feeling as if the Obama administration doesn’t much care about them. The reason is terrorism and the way Obama and Hillary Clinton have responded to it.”

JOHN KERRY: OH, BY THE WAY, THE U.S. IS NO LONGER ASKING FOR REGIME CHANGE IN SYRIA, Allahpundit writes at Hot Air:

After this story broke this afternoon, conservative Twitter spent an enjoyable half-hour swapping links to some of the many statements Obama’s made over the years insisting on regime change in Syria. How about this classic, from all the way back in 2011? Or how about this one from just three months ago? Better yet, how about this one from a mere four weeks ago? With the possible exception of “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” no Obama lie has been told more often or better captures his failures as president.

Obama wants regime change. Putin doesn’t want regime change. Regime change canceled.

Not to mention, the MSM no longer has to memory hole photos of Kerry and Pelosi happily dining with and chatting up Assad, and this classic Evita-esque profile of Asma al-Assad courtesy of Obama/Hillary groupie Anna Wintour.

THE SELECTIVE ARGUMENT THAT POLITICAL RHETORIC LEADS TO VIOLENCE: Jim Geraghty lists “The On-Again, Off-Again Arguments About ‘Dangerous Rhetoric’ Leading to Violence,” before concluding:

Do I have all that right? And does that make sense to anyone?

Wouldn’t Occam’s Razor suggest that those already driven by a desire or compulsion to kill other people are going to do so, and will merely latch on to whatever “reason”, justification or excuse is at hand or is most convenient? Isn’t it ridiculous to expect sane people to watch what they say and restrict what thoughts they express in order to prevent a rampage by someone with an inherently illogical, literally unreasonable, not-sane thinking process?

Isn’t “don’t say what you think, because it might set off a crazy person” the most insidious form of censorship, because none of us can really know what prompts a crazy person to go on a violent rampage?

Ace of Spades adds:

The Colorado governor says that the Planned Parenthood shooting is due to the rhetoric of “talk radio” and “bloggers.”

Ed Morrissey catches the Washington Post saying the same thing.

He notes an example where the left does not find its own hot rhetoric linked to a murderer’s rampage — the Family Research Council shooter. I can name another one — the Discover Channel Shooter, a shooter the left seized upon initially because they assumed he was rightwing, then discarded quickly when his manifesto indicated that he was so left-wing on climate change he thought the Discovery Channel was too soft in its climate change propaganda.

Gabriel Malor has documented the left’s “incurable” disease of blaming shootings on right-wing speech.

But never, ever on leftwing speech — obviously! Leftwing speech never inspires violence. Except when it does. And there’s an interesting argument to explain why, and that argument is complete media silence.

I find this part of the left’s broader mission of shutting down any thought of which they don’t approve. The left routinely — reflexively — links any sort of political thought they don’t like into a dire real-world consequence or crime.

If you deny the fake 1-in-5 claim, you’re encouraging rape.

If you publicize the fact that baby organs are in fact being harvested at Planned Parenthood, you’re encouraging shooting.

If you call a woman “bossy,” you’re both fostering an anti-woman “atmosphere” and encouraging violent crimes against women.

And so on. As I say, the left’s own hot rhetoric — that we need to reduce the human population to save us from global warming; that anyone who disagrees with this is a “denier” like a Holocaust denier; etc., etc. — is never, apparently, linked to any violence.

Well, that doesn’t help advance the DNC-MSM narrative; when it comes to their coverage of the other side of the aisle, as Andrew Klavan noted in 2009, all of their memes can be boiled down to two words:

Related: “These are some astounding facts about violence this year in Chicago,” Betsy Newmark notes:

As of November 23, there had been 2703 shootings which resulted in 440 deaths year-to date in heavily gun-controlled Chicago.

That is an increase of approximately 400 shootings over the same time last year.

And remember that Chicago has some of the most stringent gun control measures in the nation in a city that has been under totally Democratic control for decades.

Doesn’t fit the narrative; makes Obama and Rahm look bad. Thus memory holed in order to continue “defining deviancy downward,” to coin a phrase.

CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS ARE REAPING WHAT THEY HAVE SOWN, writes Victor Davis Hanson:

Current student anger eerily fits the pattern of most left-wing unrest, from the cycles of the French Revolution to the campus riots of the 1960s.

First, protests gradually grow more extreme. Venom is directed at fellow leftists who are deemed insufficiently radical.

In revolutionary France, wild-eyed Jacobins soon guillotined reformist Girondins, who were considered passé. During the Russian Revolution, extremist Bolsheviks marginalized liberal Mensheviks. In the 1960s, many members of the SDS and Black Panthers hated liberals who disapproved of their violence.

A group called the Black Justice League wants the name of liberal but bigoted President Woodrow Wilson removed from Princeton University. Liberals are aghast that the century-old memory of their progressive hero might vanish from the Princeton campus.

Don’t these wild-eyed “snowflake fascists” know that the memory hole is a weapon to be used only against Republicans?  And as VDH asks, will FDR be tossed down it next?

Read the whole thing.

IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING. AND GET SUED FOR $15 MILLION.

Related: Liberal Media Loses Interest in ‘Clock Kid’ After Islamic Attacks.

As Cindy Sheehan discovered the hard way when she was quietly tossed down the memory hole after November of 2008, in the future, everyone will be a mascot of the anointed for 15 minutes.

FOR WHOM THE MEMORY HOLE TOLLS:

● “Justly revered as our great Constitution is, it could be stripped off and thrown aside like a garment, and the nation would still stand forth in the living vestment of flesh and sinew, warm with the heart-blood of one people, ready to recreate constitutions and laws.”

—Woodrow Wilson, as quoted in 2008 by Robert Curry in “Woodrow Wilson’s Constitution.”

“Student Fascists Win Again: Princeton to Chisel Woodrow Wilson’s Name Off Buildings.”

—Ben Shapiro, November 20th. Ben asks, “What’s the point of the purge? By wiping away history, the left gets to place itself at the top of the moral pantheon, deciding by godlike whim who is a saint and who a sinner. We can’t learn from the past – we have to excise it wholesale to build the new world. History is a foundation of Western civilization; Western civilization is exploitative and evil, and so its history must be erased.”

Oddly enough, Wilson, one the early popularizers of the “living Constitution,” would have likely approved the sentiment driving today’s Princetonians, even if he never thought he’d eventually become one of the left’s unpersons.

Related: “Arushi Garg, left, a law student, said the 1920s made her uncomfortable.”

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: “College Students Say Remembering 9/11 Is Offensive to Muslims.”

From “We must never forget” to “toss it down the memory hole” in less than 15 years — a new Oceania record, beating the last one by decades!

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: On September 9th, James Clapper Testified It Was a “Huge Concern” That Terrorists Could Smuggle Themselves Into the US Amidst Waves of Refugees.

ONE OF THE LONGEST RUNNING CLIMATE PREDICTION BLUNDERS HAS DISAPPEARED FROM THE INTERNET: The London Independent quietly tosses their March 2000 article with the classic headline “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past” down the memory hole, after years of being mocked.

JUST NBC HOW DEEP OUR MEMORY HOLE IS! Shamed: CNBC Allows Just a Minute on GOP Firing NBC.

Related: Aw: “Shell-shocked” CNBC staffers had long flight home.

THIS IS CNN: Is democratic socialism the right path for America?

No need to read beyond the headline for the answer, given that the entire history of the network — down to Eason Jordan, CNN’s disgraced former chief executive praising Fidel Castro as the inspiration for CNN International — is the championing of socialism as the right path throughout the entire world. (CNN can do without the democratic part, needless to say.) Just allow CNN to run the two-way telescreens and the memory hole, and they’ll be exceedingly happy campers in the Bloodlands.

ARTHUR MILLER — COMMUNIST: Paul Kengor does yeoman work sifting through the memory hole at the American Spectator:

Given this newfound fame and influence, by the mid-1950s, Arthur Miller was called to appear before the House Committee on Un-American Activities. His testimony on June 21, 1956 received tremendous attention. It prompted eye-catcher headlines in the New York Times, such as, “Arthur Miller Admits Helping Communist-Front Groups in ‘40s.” Or, as the Times put it in the lead: “Arthur Miller, playwright, disclosed today a past filled with Communist-front associations.”

To Congress, Miller conceded the numerous pro-communist appeals he had signed and the protests he joined by Red-backed groups. He refused to name names of those who were there with him. Likewise, he would not name people who joined him during the mere four or five times that he said he had attended Communist Party writers’ meetings. Miller also denied that he had ever been under “communist discipline” and would not answer the question of whether he had ever joined the Party.

The most dramatic moment of the hearing came when the House Committee’s lead counsel asked Miller if he once signed an application to join the Communist Party. As Miller dissembled, the counsel presented the exact five-digit application number on the Communist Party application form that contained Miller’s name and address at 18 Schermerhorn Street in New York. Congress went so far as to publish a photocopy of the application card.

That exhibit remains a striking form of evidence. A photocopy is published on page 191 of my book, Dupes. Under the banner “Victory in 1943,” the form states, “APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP” and lists an “A. Miller,” with occupation of “writer” at an address that just happened to be Miller’s own Brooklyn address. The number of the application was 23345. Confronted with this rather compelling evidence, and asked if it indeed proved that he had made an “application for membership in the Communist Party,” Miller curiously told Congress, “I would not affirm that. I have no memory of such thing.”

For a man that the left still hails as nothing short of unsurpassable genius—with the word “brilliant” a standard description—this was a notable and lamentable memory crash.

Read the whole thing, which calls to mind Mark Steyn’s take on one of Miller’s contemporaries, novelist and screenwriter Dalton Trumbo. When an off-Broadway play originally starring Nathan Lane a decade ago attempted to whitewash Trumbo’s legacy, Steyn responded, “Although the play won’t tell you the answer to that famous question—‘Are you now or have you ever … ?’—the truth is: yes, he was. The more interesting question is: How do you feel about getting one of the great moral questions of the century wrong?”

RUBIO COUNTERS TRUMP: BLAME BILL CLINTON, NOT GEORGE W. BUSH, FOR FAILING TO PREVENT 9/11.

As CBS’s 60 Minutes noted, President Clinton didn’t kill Bin Laden when he had the chance, a fact that ABC has worked very hard to toss down the memory hole.

THE BIDEN ECLIPSE AND THE TRUMP PLATEAU: Peggy Noonan makes a couple of miscalculations in her latest essay. First on Hillary and Obama in 2008, Noonan writes, “The 2008 Democratic contest was a rush to the center, with both leading Democrats, Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama, trying to show they were moderates at heart.”

But in retrospect, that isn’t quite accurate. In January of 2008, Obama famously told the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle in a chilling monotone that “if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted…Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

But being good Democrat operatives with bylines, they buried the story instead of realizing the front page scoop they were just handed — “LEADING DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE TO BANKRUPT COAL INDUSTRY.” In the fall of 2008, Obama’s future Secretary of Energy Steven Chu mumbled, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” to the yawn of a largely urban elite MSM who entirely agreed with his punitive goals.

Similarly, when news that Obama spent nearly two decades in the church of a radical socialist — and racist — who shouted “God damn America” in his “sermons,” the media built a wall around Obama that CNN dubbed — on the air while “interviewing” Obama — as “The Wright-Free Zone.” Much the same was true of Obama’s elitist bitter clingers speech.

It wouldn’t have taken much from old media to highlight Obama’s inner liberal fascist and egg him on to reveal more of it, but 2008 was the year in which any vestigial claims of “objectivity” were completely discarded and the mask was dropped.

Which brings us to Noonan’s second misfire, in which she writes:

The only thing I feel certain of is how we got here. There are many reasons we’re at this moment, but the essential political one is this: Mr. Obama lowered the bar. He was a literal unknown, an obscure former state legislator who hadn’t completed his single term as U.S. senator, but he was charismatic, canny, compelling. He came from nowhere and won it all twice. All previously prevailing standards, all usual expectations, were thrown out the window.

Anyone can run for president now, and in the future anyone will. In 2020 and 2024 we’ll look back on 2016 as the sober good ol’ days. “At least Trump had business experience. He wasn’t just a rock star! He wasn’t just a cable talk-show host!”

Yes, the road to Idiocracy’s President Camacho is paved with good intentions — not the least of which from pundits who held themselves out as conservatives, yet found themselves writing in the fall of 2008:

The case for Barack Obama, in broad strokes:

He has within him the possibility to change the direction and tone of American foreign policy, which need changing; his rise will serve as a practical rebuke to the past five years, which need rebuking; his victory would provide a fresh start in a nation in which a fresh start would come as a national relief. He climbed steep stairs, born off the continent with no father to guide, a dreamy, abandoning mother, mixed race, no connections. He rose with guts and gifts. He is steady, calm, and, in terms of the execution of his political ascent, still the primary and almost only area in which his executive abilities can be discerned, he shows good judgment in terms of whom to hire and consult, what steps to take and moves to make. We witnessed from him this year something unique in American politics: He took down a political machine without raising his voice.

You don’t need to speak very loudly when all of your enablers and useful idiots have the megaphones (and the Memory Hole.)

THEY BUILD QUITE A MEMORY HOLE AT TIME-WARNER-CNN-HBO: Hillary Clinton calls for a “New New Deal” during Tuesday’s debate, which aired on CNN, a division of the Time-Warner-CNN-HBO conglomerate. It seems like only yesterday though, that another division of that corporation was telling us that a “New New Deal” had just arrived:

time_fdr_2008_10-2-12

Naturally, Time magazine itself can’t bothered in its cheerleading to point out how shopworn the idea is; as Jim Geraghty writes, it’s “in fact an Old Old Idea, considering how FDR called for a Second New Deal in 1935.”

Add to that LBJ’s Great Society, which was sold as a Texas-sized extension of FDR’s New Deal(s), and you begin to wonder how many New, New, New, New Deals America can take before it all implodes, Cloward-Piven style.

Which is why Jim proffers the biggest takeaway of yesterday evening: “America Now Has an Openly Socialist Party.”

Can the feckless Stupid Party stop them next year?

MORE SPELUNKING IN THE MEMORY HOLE: Friday A/V Club: What the Gun Debate Looked Like in 1967: Black Panthers, hunters, and “nuts with guns.”

In some ways, the gun debates of the 1960s looked a lot like the gun debates of today: The people pushing new rules argued that the arms trade was underregulated, stressed that they didn’t want to interfere with hunters, and complained about the National Rifle Association (though the NRA was more amenable to new gun laws in those days than now). In other ways, the debates were rather different: Some of the loudest voices defending the Second Amendment belonged to the Black Panther Party and its supporters on the radical left, and that in turn prompted some conservatives to back certain sorts of gun control.

Both the similarities and the differences are on display in this 1967 footage from the San Francisco TV station KRON, in which a Bay Area official fulminates on all of the above subjects. The immediate context for the interview was the Panthers’ armed march on the California State Assembly in Sacramento. Unable to arraign the marchers on any other charges, the authorites charged them with conspiring to forcibly enter the legislature, a legal maneuver that meets the interviewee’s approval.

Read the whole thing.

SPELUNKING IN THE MEMORY HOLE: Jesse Walker: Why Was There a 12-Year Gap in the Gun Debate? What happened to gun control from 2000 to 2012? Funny you should ask…

When Hillary Clinton unveiled her plans for new gun controls yesterday, she sounded a nostalgic note for her husband’s years in the White House. “There are a lot of ways for us to have constitutional, legal gun restrictions,” she said. “My husband did. He passed the Brady bill, and he eliminated assault weapons for 10 years. So we’re gonna take them on. We took them on in the ’90s. We’re gonna take them on again.”

Some voters, listening to this, might wonder whether anyone was taking “them” on after the ’90s ended. The short answer is: not really. Oh, the anti-gun lobby was still around, and they would occasionally send me lonely-sounding press releases. And some fights still flared up over local laws, with two of those battles making it to the Supreme Court. But as far as national politics were concerned, there was a great gap in the gun debate: a period of more than a decade when Washington did not see a significant push for new restrictions on the right to bear arms.

As with any historical period, we can argue about when exactly this started and stopped. But if precise dating is your thing, you can say it began on November 7, 2000, and ended on December 14, 2012. The first is the day Al Gore failed to carry his home state of Tennessee, a loss many observers blamed—along with his losses in several other swing states—on his support for stricter gun laws. The second is the day of the Sandy Hook massacre.

Well, 2012 is also the year the Democrats basically wrote off the possibility of recapturing the South, and decided instead to focus on minority voters. Plus:

Pleasing as this may sound to some parts of the Democratic coalition, other activists on the left have been wary. Bill Clinton’s gun controls were tightly linked to his tough-on-crime posturing; indeed, by driving Republicans to oppose what was presented as law’n’order legislation, they were a classic case of Clintonian triangulation. His assault weapons ban, a law generally regarded as having no notable impact on crime rates, was embedded in the crime bill of 1994, a law that did so much to amp up incarceration that the former president eventually apologized for its effects. His Gun-Free Schools Act, also passed in 1994, helped launch the era of zero tolerance and the school-to-prison pipeline. Basically, the Clinton-era anti-gun rhetoric that this year’s candidates have been reviving overlapped heavily with the Clinton-era carceral policies that the candidates have made a big deal of rejecting. And the more the party’s leaders flirt with ideas like an Australian-style confiscation of weapons, with all the intrusive policing that would require in a gun-loving culture like America’s, the more that tension will look like a full-fledged contradiction.

Indeed.

A SMALL VICTORY: “Hey, Conservatives, You Won/The College Board’s about-face on U.S. history is a significant political event.”

Last year, the College Board, the nonprofit corporation that controls all the high-school Advanced Placement courses and exams, published new guidelines for the AP U.S. history test. They read like a left-wing dream. Obsession with identity, gender, class, crimes against the American Indian and the sins of capitalism suffused the proposed guidelines for teachers of AP American history….

The earlier guidelines characterized the discovery of America as mostly the story of Europeans bringing pestilence, destructive plants and cultural obliteration to American Indians. The new guidelines put it this way: “Mutual misunderstandings between Europeans and Native Americans often defined the early years of interaction and trade as each group sought to make sense of the other. Over time, Europeans and Native Americans adopted some useful aspects of each other’s culture.”…

The previous, neo-Marxist guidelines said, “Students should be able to explain how various identities, cultures, and values have been preserved or changed in different contexts of U.S. history, with special attention given to the formation of gender, class, racial, and ethnic identities.” That has been removed. The revised guidelines have plenty about “identity” but nothing worth mounting a Super PAC to battle.

Also new: “The effort for American independence was energized by colonial leaders such as Benjamin Franklin, as well as by popular movements that included the political activism of laborers, artisans, and women.” The earlier version never suggested the existence of Franklin—or Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison or anyone resembling a Founding Father. Now they’re back. Even the Federalist Papers were fished out of the memory hole.

Most incredible of all, the private enterprise system is, as they say, reimagined as a force for good: “As the price of many goods decreased, workers’ real wages increased, providing new access to a variety of goods and services.”

A lot of conservatives and libertarians think there’s no point engaging in these fights because you can’t win. But you can.

ISLAMIC STATE AND THE UTOPIA PROBLEM: DESTROYING THE PAST TO COMMAND THE FUTURE: At Fox News, Ralph Peters observes totalitarian zealots hard at work with airbrushes and warm glowing memory holes, at home and abroad:

For all of their profound differences, the Islamic State and the Left have one purpose in common: They want to wipe out history so they can write it anew to support their utopias, the perfected societies of their inhuman fantasies.

The Islamic State destroys wondrous monuments to prevent “pagan worship,” to purify Islam and restore the caliphate to a state of perfection it never possessed. Aiming at a less puritanical, if equally rule-bound utopia, the American Left has all but destroyed the teaching of history in our schools, scorning facts in favor of paternalistic condescension toward minorities.

Thus it’s not enough to take the reasonable step of removing the Confederate Battle Flag from state and local government properties. That flag must be driven from the marketplace, from all public spaces and, at last, from the personal space, since it might be “hurtful,” even if hung in a basement. It’s admirable to celebrate the Black Panthers, but not for a struggling working man to honor a Civil War ancestor. In this case, brothers and sisters, bigotry ain’t a monopoly.

Islamist State sledgehammers smash off the faces of classical-era statues. Our Left wants to remove Founding Fathers and others from our currency to replace them with minor figures that suit their agenda. Both actions are about mastering the past to control the future.

(Might I suggest a compromise on the currency issue? The Left can put anyone it wants on the 20-dollar bill, if our high-school textbooks can teach that the Democratic Party was the party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow and segregation into the 1960s – and remains the party obstructing quality education in inner cities.)

In a classic essay, Tom Wolfe contrasted the left’s universal goal of “Starting From Zero” with “The Great Relearning” that must inevitably follow. But I’m starting to wonder if too much history and knowledge has been wiped out for the great relearning to ever occur.

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE: Apple Removes History Games with Confederate Flags.

MEMORY HOLE: Hillary Clinton Omits Failed Presidential Campaign on LinkedIn Resume. “What else is she hiding?”

Whatever she can.

SOCIALISM ALWAYS STARTS WITH THE SAME PROMISES, AND ENDS WITH THE SAME EXCUSES AND ACCUSATIONS: Kevin Williamson: The Left’s Mess In Venezuela:

Venezuela had a good run of it for about five minutes there, at least in public-relations terms. When petroleum prices were booming, all it took was a few gallons of heating oil from Hugo Chávez to buy the extravagant praise of House members, with Representative Chaka Fattah (D., Philadelphia) issuing statements praising Venezuela’s state-run oil company “and the Venezuelan people for their benevolence.”

Lest anybody feel creeped out by running political errands for a brutal and repressive caudillo, Joseph Kennedy — son of Senator Robert Kennedy — proclaimed that refusing the strongman’s patronage would be “a crime against humanity.” Kennedy was at the time the director of Citizens Energy, which had a contract to help distribute that Venezuelan heating oil — Boss Hugo was a brute, but he understood American politics.

Celebrities came to sit at his feet, with Sean Penn calling him a “champion” of the world’s poor, Oliver Stone celebrating him as “a great hero,” Antonio Banderas citing his seizure of private businesses as a model to be emulated in the rest of the world, Michael Moore praising his use of oil for political purposes, Danny Glover celebrating him as a “champion of democracy.” His successor, Nicolás Maduro, continued in the Chávez vein, and even as basics such as food and toilet paper disappeared the American Left hailed him as a hero, with Jesse Myerson, Rolling Stone’s fashionable uptown communist, calling his economic program “basically terrific.”

Some of the more old-fashioned liberals at The New Republic voiced concern about Venezuela’s sham democracy, its unlimited executive authority, political repression, the hunting down of government critics, the stacking of elections and the government’s perpetrating violence inside polling places — but Myerson insisted that Venezuela’s “electoral system’s integrity puts the U.S.’s to abject shame.” Never mind that opposition leaders there are hauled off to military prison after midnight raids. Vice President Biden, who can always be counted on to cut straight to the heart of any political question, ran into Maduro in Brazil and, noting the potentate’s thick mane, commented: “If I had your hair, I’d be president of the United States.” Tragically for the Sage of Delaware, hair transplants don’t work that way.

That is all going down the memory hole. The Obama administration has announced economic sanctions on Venezuela’s rulers and its intelligence agents, citing the “erosion of human-rights guarantees” – erosion, as though this were something new, as though Hugo Chávez hadn’t been a tyrant back when President Obama’s ally Representative Fattah was carrying his political water all over the eastern seaboard. In the New York Times’ account of Venezuela’s woes and Maduro’s misrule, there is no mention at all of the critical role the American Left played in lending legitimacy to Chavismo, of the so-called liberals and progressives who denounced legitimate protests against Maduro’s brutality as nefarious U.S.-backed coup attempts, who remained — and remain — silent on the regime’s censorship, political repression, torture, and economic incompetence.

Memory holes go with leftism, too.

SO MUCH FOR THE MEMORY HOLE: New media won’t let MSM forget: Hillary fed the ‘Obama’s a Muslim’ rumors in 2008.

EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, THEY FORGET WHAT GOT PUT IN THE MEMORY HOLE: CNN Anchor Shocked To Learn There Are 14 Women Who Claim Bill Clinton Sexually Assaulted Them.

ED DRISCOLL ON THE DAILY NEWS’ OBAMA DISAPPOINTMENT: If only the New York Daily News had taken its own advice in 2008. “The 2008 covers above, just a small example of the daily hagiography pumped out by the MSM back then, reflect a very different, but similarly self-destructive contagion that rapidly enveloped the MSM starting in early 2007. The virus began to subside around mid-2009, when it slowly became obvious that the MSM had sacrificed their credibility to elect a false messiah. But as a dangerous aftereffect to Obama fever, the MSM quickly turned viciously on its readers, in the form of their unceasing racialist attacks on the Tea Party and anyone who dared oppose The One. . . . After November, it will be fascinating to watch the MSM similarly go all-in to aid Hillary, and act as if 2008 never happened, and pretend that they had no role to play whatsoever in electing a president about to go as deep into the memory hole as Woodrow Wilson, and for similar reasons. It isn’t just that the MSM got things so wrong, it’s that they permanently shattered their credibility to make it happen. Don’t let them forget what they’d like the world to forget.”

SOONER OR LATER, THEY’RE GOING TO COME FOR PEOPLE YOU DO LIKE:

This is going to happen: sooner or later, some CEO or sports team owner or similar is going to get ousted because he or she supports a woman’s right to an abortion, or the cause of Palestinian statehood, or opposes the death penalty. It’s inevitable. I can easily see someone suggesting that, say, Israel is an apartheid state, and watching as the media whips itself into a frenzy. And when that happens, the notion that there is no such thing as a violation of free speech that isn’t the government literally sending men with guns to arrest you will be just as powerful, and powerfully destructive, as it is now. So what will these people say? I don’t have the slightest idea how they will be able to defend the right of people to hold controversial, left-wing political ideas when they have come up with a thousand arguments for why the right to free expression doesn’t apply in any actual existing case. How will Isquith write a piece defending a CEO’s right to oppose Israeli apartheid? A sports owner’s right to do the same? I can’t see how he could– unless it really is just all about teams, and not about principle at all.

To follow up on Sarah’s link to this post earlier, the left’s PC round-up of the last few years will quickly be forgotten once there’s a Republican in the White House — and in any case, all attempts at ousting someone for his leftwing views are easily explained away by those 60 year old catch-all words: McCarthyism and Blacklisting.

Or as Canadian journalist and blogger Kathy Shaidle likes to say, what passes for “liberalism” these days boils down to: “it’s different when we do it.”

(See also: How easily history of the 1990s was tossed down the Memory Hole.)

ED DRISCOLL: They Build The Memory Hole Deep At CNN.

FLASHBACK: Video: The “Home Run”, Wright Into CNN’s Memory Hole.

ED DRISCOLL: Racism And The Memory Hole at MSNBC.

TRYING TO SAVE OBAMA FROM HIMSELF: To follow-up on Elizabeth’s post below, PBS flips president the Big Bird, Ed Morrissey writes:

More than a dozen American diplomatic missions have been put to the torch over the last month, one of which resulted in the first US Ambassador killed in the line of duty in 33 years.  The labor force is near its lowest level in more than 30 years. Gas prices have skyrocketed, and we’re at war in Afghanistan.  We are exactly four weeks from the national election.  Today, however, Barack Obama will release a new 30-second spot focusing on the true issue that faces our nation …. Big Bird?

As Ed writes, Sesame Workshop may be doing Obama a big favor by strongly advising him to table Big Bird as an issue:

Sesame Workshop is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization and we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns. We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down.

This is a perfect opportunity to push this one into the memory hole … but really, how sad is it that Team Obama thought this spoke to voter concerns?  And as long as we’re listing the Devils of Wall Street, it’s interesting to note who’s missing from that list.

And here’s one more thought from Jeff Emanuel:

“nothing says “I’ve completely lost control of this narrative” like embracing…a seven-foot-tall yellow-feathered multi-millionaire.”

Ouch.

Heh, indeed.™

Also, man with albatross Big Bird around his neck makes it much harder for him to overcome the forces of gravity.

UPDATE: Speaking of trying to save Obama from himself, “Politico, NBC, ABC, MSNBC Criticize Team Obama’s ‘Absurd’ Big Bird Ad.”

DISPATCHES FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: Yet another video of Obama’s rise to power has surfaced, this one from 2002. Obviously, no goodthinking person would even consider viewing it on his telescreen, lest he repeat the doubleplus ungood thoughtcrime he’s already on file with in the Ministry of Truth for watching last night’s video.

In the 2002 speech, Obama tells his audience, “You know, the principle of empathy gives broader meaning, by the way, to Dr. King’s philosophy of nonviolence. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but rich people are all for nonviolence. Why wouldn’t they be? They’ve got what they want. They want to make sure people don’t take their stuff.” (Plus more comments bashing the suburbs.) Regarding this speech, before being sent to Minitrue for intensive questioning in Room 101, Power Line’s Scott Johnson wrote:

Now this was a speech on the occasion of Martin Luther King Day, and Obama does not directly criticize King. But he limits the applicability of King’s philosophy (or strategy) in a manner that takes it to the vanishing point.

It seems to me that the spirit of Obama’s remarks here is more in keeping with Malcolm X’s vehement critique of King (as can be heard, for example, in this video) than with that of King himself. There is a gulf between Obama and King that opens up over King’s persistent appeal to the principles of the American founding and Obama’s alienation from them.

In a related post, Power Line’s Steve Hayward, likely also on the way to Room 101, quotes from I Am the Change: Barack Obama and the Crisis of Liberalism, by Charles R. Kesler, focusing on “the dog that didn’t bark” during Obama’s speech allegedly tossing Rev. Wright down the Memory Hole:

The dog that didn’t bark on March 18, 2008, was that the crucial words “all men are created equal” do not appear in Obama’s carefully composed speech. And so that “already classic address,” as James Kloppenberg calls it, on a topic that Obama declared he’d been thinking about for twenty years, constitutes a very different kind of argument, with a very different view of America, than one finds in, say, Martin Luther King’s great speech in 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial. Obama invokes neither Jefferson nor Lincoln. He refers to the Constitution briefly, noting its “ideal of equal citizenship” and that it “promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.” But he doesn’t mention the conclusion that he had announced in his book, namely, that the Declaration’s and the Constitution’s “people” did not include blacks, and especially not black slaves.

In short, Obama regards the original intention of both the Declaration and the Constitution to be racist and even pro-slavery. But he refrains from making the point explicit because it would confirm the Reverend Wright’s fundamental charge, that the United States is a racist country. And the point of the speech in Philadelphia, at the National Constitution Center, close by Independence Hall, the scene of the great events of 1776 and 1787, was not merely to repeat his condemnation of Wright’s remarks “in unequivocal terms” but to put the whole controversy behind him, without dwelling on his fundamental agreement with Wright’s interpretation of American principles.

That last item dovetails well with the thoughtcrime that Roger L. Simon committed last night in commenting on the 2007 speech:

Barack Obama is a segregationist.

How else do you explain a statement like “We don’t need to build more highways out in the suburbs. We should be investing in minority-owned business, in our neighborhoods”? [emphasis mine]

That is not what most of us had in mind when we were involved in the civil rights movement. Naïve us. Our intention was that everyone should get to live wherever they wanted, even those suburbs. They were open to all. Forget ghettoes and barrios. Equality, brother, equality. How did that old Babs Gonzales song go — “We got a New Frontier, a man in the moon, but we ain’t got integration”?

Oh well, integration was a nice idea once upon a time, but to Barack Obama in 2007 it was already seriously outdated, if it ever had any value. And why should it? An integrated society is not easily broken off into equally easily manipulated interest groups like African-Americans or Hispanic-Americans.

Segregation pays — at the ballot box.

It is also one of the fastest and most reliable routes to power.

Now I’m not trying to say that Obama is a segregationist like Orville Faubus or even a cheap race hustler like Sharpton. He is something different and obviously more complex and subtle, but in the final analysis he relies on the same reactionary racial estrangement as the other two.

Indeed, our president is the reverse of what he appears to be, pretending to bring the races together when he profits by driving them apart. In that sense, he is similar to Yasser Arafat, talking one way to the West and another to his Palestinian brothers.

Or as John Nolte writes in the “Top Ten Reasons the 2007 Obama Video Matters in 2012:”

Obama’s attacks on the suburbs and the “us vs. them” rhetoric that toxifies the entire speech helps make sense of his divisive presidency and campaign. Moreover, the speech that made Obama a national star was his 2004 address at the Democratic Convention where he was famously unifying and post-racial. That was his “no red states, no blue states” speech.

Now we know the 2004 speech was bullshit.

That’s news.

I’m not sure if that is news at this point, but it’s certainly worth confirming.

But if you’ll excuse me, having committed flagrant Goldsteinisms myself, I’m due to receive the Ludovico Treatment at Minitrue Headquarters to be re-assimilated back into the Borg. Be seeing you!

ON OBAMA OWING NAKOULA AN APOLOGY:

We’re barraged by new distractions, so let’s catch things that are slipping down the memory hole. It’s not just Nakoula. It’s Chris Stevens. Our ambassador was murdered, and he was murdered after he was targeted and he was not given security.

Shame on those who disrespected Nakoula’s freedom of speech. Their faults are apparent and need to be remembered. But what happened to Chris Stevens? I don’t trust that we’ve learned the whole story. Why wasn’t he protected? Was he an inconvenient man? We saw such an effort to create static around his death. Look — riots over here, here, and here! Offensive video on the internet! Man with a “towel” around his face! And hey check out the most important thing that happened all week: Romney said “47%” to some people back in May!

The very fact that we’re thinking about Nakoula — and futzing with Romney rhetoric — makes me feel that Chris Stevens got stuffed down the memory hole.

Who wanted that forgetting and why?

Well, I have a hunch. Plus, from the comments: “Anybody tries to call himself President who hears an American consulate is under attack and just goes back to bed owes said Ambassador a lot more than an apology.”

Plus: “There aren’t that many assassinations of American officials. I have never seen anything like this one, where we as a people are encouraged to dilute the incident with all these other events of a much more mundane variety. An assassination should stand apart — clear and shocking and in need of precise investigation.” I’m pretty sure that investigation will be designed to ensure that no findings are made until after the election.

TOM MAGUIRE: WaPo Media Watchdog Barks Up Wrong Tree, Protects NBC. “It looks as if Mr. Wemple was willing to follow the story until it actually led somewhere.” Media wagons, circled.

UPDATE: Associated Press “forgets” inconvenient part of Zimmerman story. “Funny how a major news organization could miss such a well-documented detail. It’s like they didn’t want to muddy the narrative with facts.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Jonathan Winkler writes:

Interesting in parallel with the circling of wagons on EditGate is that Politico and WaPo are reporting today on John Edwards returning campaign cash. If you read the stories, you get the impression Edwards bailed out of his 2008 campaign because of the sex scandal covered by the press. But they didn’t report on it during the campaign, and he dropped out because he wasn’t winning. But that narrative is awkward and involves the National Enquirer. Another media failure down the Memory Hole.

Keep rockin’!

Also: The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Memory Hole.

WAPO QUESTIONS: Did the White House Pressure Washington Post to Change Fact Checker?

On March 27, Josh Hicks of the Washington Post’s Fact Checker gave White House regulation czar Cass Sunstein one “Pinocchio” for his defense of the Obama administration’s regulatory record. However, the same article, a day earlier, was far more critical of the administration, giving Sunstein a total of three Pinocchios.

Below (as text, and in Word document at the end of the article) is a comparison of the first (3 Pinocchio) and the second (1 Pinocchio) versions of the Fact Checker article, with extensive changes indicated.

But wait, there’s more: Washington Post and the Rush Limbaugh Memory Hole. Now they don’t mention that Limbaugh lost “fewer than five” advertisers.

The Post — and other media folks — need to realize that this sort of change doesn’t go unnoticed. But I wonder if this means that the White House’s pressure on Kaplan, the cash-cow that keeps the Post afloat, is bearing fruit. More on that here. (Bumped).

I’D GO WITH “SLEAZEBALL” MYSELF, BUT WHATEVER: Is John Edwards A Sex Addict? More interesting to me is how the press actively covered up for him for so long. Keep rockin’!

UPDATE: Related: Ed Driscoll: The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Memory Hole.

#OCCUPYFAIL: Occupy Movement Deteriorates, Press Pretends It Never Played Booster. “Funny how the left’s assertion that this was a grand political awakening has now gone down the memory hole. In their frenzy to find a grassroots movement on the left and in their insistence that the public really did support these people, the left-leaning elites tried mightily to ignore the instances of anti-Semitism, violence and fouling of public places. When that became impossible, they simply chose to ignore the whole disgusting mess. Had they been candid from the start about what the Occupy protesters looked like, sounded like and believed, the liberal punditocracy might not be embarrassed (is that possible?), or, at the very least, anxious that someone might call its members out for their immensely dishonest portrayal of the Occupy phenomenon.”

THOUGHTS ON The New York Times, Memory Holes, And Online Journalistic Ethics.

OBAMA: Get Used To High Gas Prices. “Obama needled one questioner who asked about gas prices, now averaging close to $3.70 a gallon nationwide, and suggested that the gentleman consider getting rid of his gas-guzzling vehicle.”

High gas prices aren’t a bug, they’re a feature.

UPDATE: Rapid Reaction: I got an email from Haley Barbour’s office with this reaction: “Instead of changing his policies, President Obama is trying to blame the American people for skyrocketing gas prices by saying they should trade-in their cars.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Michael Broderick writes:

“Obama needled one questioner who asked about gas prices, now averaging close to $3.70 a gallon nationwide, and suggested that the gentleman consider getting rid of his gas-guzzling vehicle.”

I was confused when I clicked the link on your page and couldn’t find this quote. So I googled the quote. It shows up in all the google hits but when I click on those articles, it’s nowhere to be found. Looks like AP scrubbed it from all copies of the article! Nothing like a compliant media, eh? Hope you got a screenshot.

In fact, I did. And a good thing, because the story’s been almost completely rewritten. But the “memory hole” doesn’t work very well any more. Here, for the sake of history, is the story as it used to be. And if anyone from the Associated Press would like to email me to explain this change, I’m all ears.

Maybe he’s just trying to sell some of those Chevy Volts.

MORE: Here’s the video. The real action is right at the end. Think we’ll see this in a campaign commercial?

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: From Baghdad To Benghazi: Everyone Is a Convert to George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda.

Now that revolutions are sweeping the Middle East and everyone is a convert to George W. Bush’s freedom agenda, it’s not just Iraq that has slid into the memory hole. Also forgotten is the once proudly proclaimed “realism” of Years One and Two of President Obama’s foreign policy – the “smart power” antidote to Bush’s alleged misty-eyed idealism.

Read the whole thing. And that whole “smart power” / “smart diplomacy” thing has kept turning up short on the “smart” part.

Plus this: “For Libyans, the effect of the Iraq war is even more concrete. However much bloodshed they face, they have been spared the threat of genocide. Gaddafi was so terrified by what we did to Saddam & Sons that he plea-bargained away his weapons of mass destruction. For a rebel in Benghazi, that is no small matter.” Yes, and even the New York Times noted that.

BREITBART’S USDA RACISM VIDEO gets CBS coverage.

UPDATE: Reader Paul Manner emails: “Of interest, the CBSTV site initially enabled comments, which have now disappeared down the memory hole.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Well, the comments seem to be there now. Here’s the first one: “The difference between the tea party and the naacp is if you are looking for racists at the tea party you look at the fringe and if you are looking for racists at the naacp you look to the stage.” Ouch

BLANCHE LINCOLN hangs on to win in Arkansas.

UPDATE: White House: “Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members’ money down the toilet on a pointless exercise.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Politico: Labor: All Bark, No Bite?

Dan Riehl: Labor Under The Bus? “Oh yeah. Markos has already flushed Halter from his site – down the memory hole. But Rick Wilson screencapped it. Heh! Meanwhile, the WH rubs it in, flushing big labor under the bus. File this under a big finger in the chest in the shower!”

So long as it’s just a finger.

LOOK WHO’S COMING TO THE TEA PARTY: Andrew Cuomo ditches his old man’s rhetoric and legacy, and attempts to impersonate Chris Christie in his bid to become Empire State emperor.

No word yet on when Frank Rich, Maureen Dowd, Charles Blow, Roger Ebert, Janeane Garofalo and Joan Walsh will declare him a racist, though.

UPDATE: The Blog Prof has a reminder of Cuomo’s past that he’d like to keep buried in the Memory Hole: “Will the paper of record remember? Will New Yorkers?”

BUSH LEAGUE ASTROTURF: Regarding my “Coffee Party” / Annabel Park post, reader Jennifer Pace emails:

The LInkedin link for Annabel Park (the one showing her as a Strategy Analyst for the NYT) has gone down the memory hole.

Any chance someone grabbed a screen shot of the page before it vanished?

Why, yes, I did. This came out of my browser cache:

MORE: Reader Bill Sheldon notes that, at the moment, Yahoo! still has her LinkedIn page cached.

NBC SENDS CONAN O’BRIEN down the memory hole.

ED DRISCOLL: Video Saved From The Memory Hole: The Pulled DDB-B/WWF 9/11 YouTube Clip.

ED DRISCOLL: Down the Memory Hole at CNN. With Suzanne Malveaux.

FROM PRESIDENT OBAMA, a new statement on Iran. “The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.”

UPDATE: Andrew Malcolm is unimpressed: “The fact that Obama quotes the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr, not exactly a religious icon in the Muslim world, which will get him all over the U.S. news on an otherwise slow summer Saturday, indicates what audience the chief executive is also trying to reach.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Very concerned about being “very concerned.” “Perhaps after a whole week of cringe-inducing passivity, saner voices prevailed upon the president. Maybe now the White House realizes it is time to get on the right side of history. And those apologists who cheered Obama’s paralysis will of course now celebrate the more robust language. This is what they wanted all along, right? Well, hardly, but the criticism of those conservatives and some brave Democrats who pleaded with the president to get off the fence will go down the memory hole. The president’s spinners now will no longer need to excuse the inexcusable. What a relief that must be.”

Plus, “Deer in the Iranian Headlights.” Well, I’m just happy that he’s finally starting to take the right line on this. Wish it had been sooner, but I’ll take what I can get.

MEMORY HOLE: New York Times wipes journalist’s online corpus.

TEA PARTY CONSPIRACY THEORY: EPIC FAIL. The Playboy blog item that I debunked earlier has been taken down. So has a TPM Muckraker piece making similar claims. And it turns out that the story wasn’t true. This is no surprise to me, but it’s something of an embarrassment for those who fell for it. It also seems as if they should have apologized for the error, not just taken down the posts. Yet as far as I can tell, neither site has acknowledged the error; they’ve just sent the offending matter down the memory hole.

Of course, maybe they were just embarrassed by Andrew Sullivan’s “Koch-tease” joke.

UPDATE: Some background on the viral campaign, here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: They fell for it over at DailyKos. No surprise there . . . .

OBAMA, IRAQ, and the amazing, disappearing SOFA. Somebody needs to be running a track-changes on the White House website, as stuff hits the memory hole fast.

OBAMA runs for the memory hole. Again.

CHRIS DODD’S STRATEGY: “Stall, and hope they forget.”

It’s been over seven months since it was revealed that Senate Banking Committee chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) got a sweetheart deal on his Washington, D.C., townhouse directly from Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of troubled subprime-mortgage lender Countrywide Financial. Participating in the “Friends of Angelo” program saved Dodd about $75,000 on his mortgage, and raised more than a few eyebrows about whether Dodd should be accepting such hefty gifts from entities he’s tasked with overseeing and regulating.

Since the scandal broke last June, no action has been taken by the Senate to formally ascertain if Dodd engaged in any wrongdoing. Nor has Dodd tried to clear his name in any way. What’s troubling about Dodd’s scandal isn’t so much that it remains unresolved but that it’s a textbook example of how scandals in Washington are swept under the rug.

It has now been 189 days since Dodd promised to release his mortgage documents, but he still hasn’t done so.

And don’t forget Kent Conrad: “Senator Conrad’s role in the scandal has gone straight down the memory hole.”

POLITICO: Blagojevich questions censored on Transition site.

President-elect Barack Obama’s Transition today launched “Open for Questions,” a Digg-style feature allowing citizens to submit questions, and to vote on one another’s questions, bringing favored inquiries to the top of the list.

It was suggested when it launched that the tool would bring uncomfortable questions to the fore, but the results so far are the opposite: Obama’s supporters appear to be using — and abusing — a tool allowing them to “flag” questions as “inappropriate” to remove all questions mentioning Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich from the main pages of Obama’s website. . . . So far, Obama’s team does not seem to have stepped in to allow uncomfortable questions to rise to the top, and instead is allowing his supporters to sanitize the site.

Hope and change!

UPDATE: Stories on Obama/Blagojevich go down the memory hole.

Well, he promised the most transparent administration in history — and this stuff is, well, pretty transparent!

ANOTHER UPDATE: Tim Blair: “It’s all an unwelcome distraction.”

Gawker: “The same Obamatards who voted up total blowjob questions on the Digg-like question section of Change.gov have, all too predictably, almost completely obliterated any question mentioning ROD BLAGOJEVICH. In fact, if you mention ROD BLAGOJEVICH in your question, at all, even totally politely in a relevant way, your question will not only be voted down but ‘removed’ (says the site) as ‘inappropriate,’ visible only through a specific search for ROD BLAGOJEVICH.” Hmm, group censorship of uncomfortable subjects. Nothing creepy about that on a political site. Hope and change!

UPDATE: Reader Steve Nelson writes:

Notice the problem with Obama’s websites?

Neither he nor his staff is censoring the comments…. but they’ve set the site up to allow others to do so.

Neither he nor his staff asked for any illegal foreign contributions, or for contributions from obviously false donors….. they just disabled the standard controls and credit card checks to allow it to happen.

They didn’t have any ties to whacky characters with extreme ideas…. but the campaign website allowed anyone to set up a “blog” and put out the propaganda.

In each case, Obama and his staff were careful to leave no directly illegal / unethical fingerprints of their own….. but they sure made it easy for “supporters unknown” to do so through their IT systems.

Deniability — it’s built right in.

An army of grifters.

HMM: Obama’s Assault Weapons Ban plan disappears down the memory hole. So long as it stays there, that’s fine . . . .

SNATCHED FROM THE MEMORY HOLE: There seems to be a lot of this scrubbing going on.

THEY TOLD ME THAT IF GEORGE W. BUSH WERE RE-ELECTED, politically inconvenient videos would vanish down the memory hole. And they were right!

SO NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THE PRESS COVERED FOR EDWARDS — just as, pre-invasion, they covered for Saddam — that raises a question: What else are they not telling us for fear it will hurt the Democrats’ prospects?

UPDATE: Once again, the lefty memory hole is revealed, with email like this:

That’s got to be one of the most insane and stupid things I’ve read in a long time.
“Covered for Saddam”? WTF are you talking about, what kind of drugs are you on? The only thing the media covered regarding Saddam was the administrations efforts to lie us into a war… something you were quite a part of.

Apparently these people have forgotten Eason Jordan and “The News We Kept to Ourselves.” I started to put a link to that in the original post, but I thought I’d see if there were any out there dumb enough to walk into the trap. And there were. Much more on the Eason Jordan story is rounded up here.

HOWARD KURTZ:

Barack Obama is under hostile fire for changing his position on the D.C. gun ban.

Oh, I’m sorry. He didn’t change his position, apparently. He reworded a clumsy statement.

That, at least, is what his campaign is saying. The same campaign that tried to spin his flip-flop in rejecting public financing as embracing the spirit of reform, if not the actual position he had once promised to embrace.

Is this becoming a pattern? Wouldn’t it be better for Obama to say he had thought more about such-and-such an issue and simply changed his mind? Is that verboten in American politics? Is it better to engage in linguistic pretzel-twisting in an effort to prove that you didn’t change your mind?

Regardless of what you think of the merits of yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling overturning the capital’s handgun law, it seems to me we’re entitled to a clear position by the presumed Democratic nominee.

Good luck with that. Kurtz even notes that Big Media is covering for Obama:

But even though the earlier Obama quote and the “inartful” comment have been bouncing around the Net for 24 hours, I’m not seeing any reference to them in the morning papers. Most do what the New York Times did: “Mr. Obama, who like Mr. McCain has been on record as supporting the individual-rights view, said the ruling would ‘provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.’ ”

Supporting the individual-rights view? Not in November. . . .

Even the Tribune–the very paper that the Obama camp told he supported the gun ban–makes no reference to the November interview. Instead: “Democrat Barack Obama offered a guarded response Thursday to the Supreme Court ruling striking down the District of Columbia’s prohibition on handguns and sidestepped providing a view on the 32-year-old local gun ban. Republican rival John McCain’s campaign accused him of an ‘incredible flip-flop’ on gun control.”

So McCain accuses Obama of a flip-flop, and the Trib can’t check the clips to tell readers whether there’s some basis in fact for the charge?

USA Today takes the same tack

The November view is down the memory hole. Apparently you have to go to the blogs to find people who can use Google.

Related: “Obama still doesn’t get YouTube, does he?”

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE? “Kos Disappears Kantor ‘WWN’ Diary.”

DOWN THE MEMORY HOLE, at CNN.

DE-COMMUNIZATION IN POLAND: A Polish court says it’s unconstitutional, leading Perry de Havilland to observe: “But surely justice cannot be served by allowing the communist era and above all, the role of the people who made it all possible, to vanish down the memory hole. If people did despicable things during the communist era, why should they escape punishment? I cannot imagine a German court being allowed to stop the process of de-nazification in Germany, so why tolerate something similar in Poland in the aftermath of communism? Forgiveness can not come before repentance and a lot of people have yet to repent. I wonder if there are any senior judges who might have an embarrassing file on their communist era activities that they would rather not see the light of day? Just wondering.”

LEE SIEGEL, last seen accusing the blogosphere of thuggery, has been suspended by The New Republic for sock-puppetry. There sure seems to be a lot of that going around.

The New Republic also seems to have sent all of his posts to the memory hole, which seems rather extreme.

UPDATE: Reader C.J. Burch writes: “We are approaching an election and the left and the press are in full melt down mode. I’ve seen this movie before.”

Meanwhile, here’s a non-left/right take: “Siegel is perhaps the single most pretentious person in America today, close to unreadable at length no matter the topic on which he is writing and immensely uninteresting as a blogger. It turns out he was conspiring with someone to post comments on his blog — evidently to create the impression that said blog had at least one reader.” Ouch. Upside: Now James Wolcott’s position in the blogosphere is unchallenged!

CLAWING OPEN THE MEMORY HOLE:

Before Democrats had a partisan motive to claim, contrary to all the evidence, that there was no relationship between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and bin Laden’s al Qaeda, their close and dangerous relationship was common knowledge. That common knowledge is reflected in this ABC news report, as it was in the Clinton administration’s indictment of bin Laden in 1998 for, among other things, collaborating with Saddam on weapons of mass destruction.

Yeah, we heard a lot of that stuff before Bush was President, but now it’s all supposed to be something he just made up.

SIGNS OF INTELLIGENT LIFE found at the Democratic Underground!

UPDATE: Intelligent, but short-lived — an update says the posts have been erased. Down the memory hole!

ANOTHER UPDATE: Steve Stirling is administering comment-Fiskings (he’s JoatSimeon). In response to the claim that Saddam was our creature, he observes: “Incidentally, Saddam was consistently aligned with the USSR during the Cold War. Did you wonder where all those T-72 tanks came from? This is the sort of nonsense that gives Democrats a bad name.”

EARLIER I NOTED THIS NASA RELEASE pointing out that many newspapers were showing pictures of the space shuttle Columbia crew’s flag-draped coffins and identifying them as Iraq war dead. Here’s a partial list of outlets that were snookered. Apparently, they just picked these up from an antiwar website and didn’t do any further checking.

Remember this when Old Media guys talk about how untrustworthy the Internet is. . . .

UPDATE: I finally managed to get the Memory Hole site — which has been down from traffic load, I guess — to open. The problem is that he filed a Freedom of Information Act request that’s rather obviously flawed. Here’s the link, which may or may not work for you. But here’s the FOIA language:

All photographs showing caskets (or other devices) containing the remains of US military personnel at Dover AFB. This would include, but not be limited to, caskets arriving, caskets departing, and any funerary rites/rituals being performed. The timeframe for these photos is from 01 February 2003 to the present.

The request should have specified combat deaths. One reader emails that this was an Air Force mousetrap, because astronauts are not military personnel. Er, except that they usually are. I assume that this was an honest mistake on the part of the Memory Hole, but it’s a dreadfully-worded request, and it’s not surprising that the result included non-combat deaths. What’s more, to the extent that newspaper editors were aware of the wording of the request, they should have realized the risk that these photos would not represent Iraq combat deaths or, for that matter, combat deaths at all.

FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS ASSISTED 9/11 HIJACKERS: That’s what Senator Bob Graham reports, in a statement that I had missed. Excerpt:

I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in financing — although that was part of it — by a sovereign foreign government and that we have been derelict in our duty to track that down.

The Memory Hole (link above) has more excerpts. Here’s a link to the full transcript. Funny that the Democrats aren’t all over this issue.

MICHAEL MOORE: Busted again, as Rachel Lucas rescues his “payback Tuesday” letter from the memory hole.

JOANNE JACOBS (whose permalink isn’t working, so you’ll have to scroll down) wants to know where the evidence is on Steven Hatfill. Good question. There’s some circumstantial evidence here and there, but there’s obviously not very much or he’d have been arrested. But there’s a steady flow of news stories that more or less convict him. Is he guilty or innocent? I don’t know. But perhaps he should go have a beer with Richard Jewell and Wen Ho Lee.

UPDATE: A reader writes:

It’s just amazing how it’s gone completely down the memory hole that one of the 9/11 hijackers turned up at a Florida ER with the loathsome pustulence of skin anthrax. Everyone’s so eager to find that the guy behind the bugs is an angry white male from Hollywood central casting that mere facts just go poof.

Indeed. I don’t remember the ER story, but I remember quite a few stories indicating that some of the hijackers, including Mohammed Atta, had signs of anthrax infection.