Hey, that's my classroom! Did he find ghosts there??

What's remarkable about this story is that Obama opponents act as if the State Department and intelligence community are supposed to immediately release every email or tip they get immediately after an attack. The political attackers refuse to take into account that these tips must be confirmed and that the lives of people still in the dangerous spots must be taken in account. The ignorance of the response and politicization of this tragedy is really terrifying.

Should we assume they're going to demand all emails and tips received from every intelligence operations in the last decade or so to make sure all were released as soon as they hit the inbox?

I'll also say it again: I saw on The New York Times site the day after the attack that the administration believed it may be a terrorist act. It shocked me when people started lying and saying they'd never seen it. Americans should be smarter than this, especially when it comes to protecting the lives of our intelligence community. The ignorance is just shocking.

This is [what Rep. Paul Ryan said about Murdock yesterday][1] -- while knowing and agreeing with his extremist positions:

> Republican vice presidential candidate
> Paul Ryan Monday used his first
> campaign stop in Indiana to do some
> fundraising and delivered a ringing
> endorsement of Indiana Republican
> Senate candidate Richard Mourdock.
> “Please, please send us Richard
> Mourdock. We need this man in the
> United States Senate,” Ryan told a
> midday crowd of more than 100 people
> who had paid at least $1,000 per
> ticket to hear him speak at the J.W.
> Marriott in downtown Indianapolis.

Another mash-up with Romney's endorsement of him:

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/onHSC_VQra4?ve…"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/onHSC_VQra4?ve…" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[1]: http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012/s…

I wrote this yesterday, then that fool Mourdock said last night in a debate that God intends pregnancies from rape--thus excusing both the pregnancy and the rape and, supposedly, explaining why he and the national GOP platform and all sorts of other Republicans want to outlaw abortion with no exceptions: the road to personhood.

Here's a video:

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zdnnETAyGmM?ve…"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zdnnETAyGmM?ve…" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Exactly my point, Brian. If you didn't consider it an insult, notmuch, you wouldn't push it so vehemently. THAT makes it a slur, at least an intended one.

It's also a bald-faced lie, and you should be ashamed of stooping to pushing both bigotry against Muslims and against the president all in one sentence. Disgusting.

So, D'Souza has a [sex scandal now threatening his credibility][1] with the very people he's trying to convince. Smh.

[1]: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/2…

Crowley never lost control. She had to fight to keep it, but she did a great job. I just wish she'd factchecked on more points, although I realize there wasn't time to do it on everything.

Both Crowley and Raddatz were super: They managed to get a lot of issues out there *and* allow a back-and-forth discussion to ensue.

Otherwise, journalists should always factcheck every quote and statement. It is horrible that media outlets quote people telling lies. I also believe that candidates should not be able to run lies on the public airwaves -- and get TV stations rich on them at the same time.

This is upside down, and against the public good. The First Amendment isn't about that.

Here's the rest of it in which Ms. Lane argues that our publishing her words verbatim somehow brings *our* integrity into account:

> This only further proves that JFP has
> no commitment to journalistic
> standards, and they only serve to play
> “gotcha” politics for cheap publicity.
> After all, it is obvious that I
> believe women have a place in
> politics, or I wouldn’t be doing what
> I do every day to participate in the
> political process.
>
> It is unfortunate that an opportunity
> for better understanding is
> manipulated by the writers and editors
> of JFP in order to further advance
> their liberal agenda in Mississippi.
> It is because of cheap stunts like
> this that everyday hard working
> Mississippians stay away from the
> political process. We at CMTP are a
> group of hard working and involved
> citizens trying to make a difference
> for our state and country. It is
> shameful that there are people like
> those at JFP that work against people
> who want to be involved in solving the
> problems that we all face.
>
> I am committed to the TEA Party’s
> cause of Limited Government, Fiscal
> Responsibility, and Free Markets. I
> remain committed to lead our Tea Party
> to be active in local issues,
> statewide issues and national issues.
> I hope people will not allow this to
> damper their willingness to
> participate in the political process.
> I hope they will join us to help fight
> against this type of blatant
> manipulation and misinformation.”

Funny. Clearly because this story has gone viral internationally, Janis Lane now -- months later -- is claiming that was secretly recorded in the interview she did with Ryan with our photographer and her camera right there in her face. She claims that we are trying to "smear" her because we quoted her in a Q&A interview and that we're "liberal," coincidentally falling back on using a label that segregationists back in the day loved to fling--along with "communist" and "socialist"--on journalists or anyone in our state supporting the African American right to vote.

Not saying there is a pattern here, though.

Here is her statement, posted on the right-wing Mississippi PEP blog this morning:

> “While I attempt not to respond to
> ridiculous charges, I feel that I must
> address these despicable acts of the
> liberal publication Jackson Free Press
> to smear the Central Mississippi TEA
> Party and our efforts. The editors of
> this publication have stepped beyond
> simple political leanings into the
> realm of “attack dog” journalism. This
> is proof the liberal media in
> Mississippi will stoop to new levels
> of low to ‘create’ news, and to try
> anything to fight the conservative
> landslide that is taking place in
> Mississippi.
>
> We were not told the interview was
> being recorded by video, and the angle
> of the shot clearly shows that it was
> being hidden from us.
>
> The video version of the interview is
> an heavily edited portion that shows
> me making a statement in jest to
> badgering by the reporter about gender
> and whether women should be in
> politics. My response was ‘tongue in
> cheek’ and I gave a ridiculous answer,
> both in words and tone, to what I
> found to be a ridiculous premise.
>
> I attempted to challenge his
> ridiculous line of questioning about
> men controlling women with an equally
> ridiculous statement about a women’s
> right to vote. It was my mistake to
> respond to his attempts to bait me,
> and to try to use sarcasm to prove my
> point of how outrageous his questions
> really were.
>

I'll also add that other stories we did, that were much more important, went big nationally but were ignored in the southeast and in Mississippi -- such as our 2008 reporting that Barbour was pardoning a series of men who had brutally killed wives or girlfriends. Ahem.

I long ago learned that just because it isn't reported in Mississippi doesn't mean it's not news.