Jenn Taylor: Olbermann Defends Convicted Rapist’s Right to Occupy 14-Year-Old Girl

In October, reports surfaced of a sexual assault in a tent at the Occupy Dallas camp. The victim was a 14-year-old runaway and the alleged assailant, a 23-year-old man.

This case is one of 17 on a list of Occupy-related sexual crimes compiled by Lee Stranahan at Andrew Breitbart’s Big Journalism — a list that Current TV’s Keith Olbermann gleefully “debunked” last week in his ongoing crusade to promote a fictitious “No Occupy Rapes, No Cover-Up” narrative.

Stranahan swiftly countered with a point-by-point refutation of Olbermann’s attempt to deny, mock, and minimize the well-documented occurrence of sexual assaults at Occupy protests. But Olbermann’s denial of the Occupy Dallas assault is so vile and morally bankrupt it merits an even closer look (video here).

Despite the Breitbart headline: “Police Investigating Possible Sexual Assault Of Teen At Occupy Dallas,” the alleged assault victim told police the sex in question was consensual. She would not press charges nor cooperate with authorities. The claim that there was an assault originates with one local tv station’s anonymous source in the Dallas police department.

Olbermann reiterates this rape denial later in his Daily Kos post:

One story turns out to have been about consensual sex.

Good thing he told us twice, ’cause now I get it. This was just another gentle Occupier with a heart of gold enjoying some hot, consensual man-on-teen action. He totally tapped that 14-year-old ass. High fives all around! Age is just a number, amirite Keith?


Fakegate: Can’t Hide This Decline

The warmists were atwitter last week because they imagined they had their own equivalent of Climaquiddick [1] — someone fraudulently managed to get confidential documents from the Heartland Institute by portraying himself as a board member. Heartland has been at the forefront of supporting skepticism of hyperbolic climate claims [2], and has accordingly been put in the crosshairs by defenders of Big Science for years.

Names of confidential donors were publicly released, as were board-meeting notes and supposed strategy documents that critics claim indicated Heartland’s intent to subvert the teaching of science in the classroom. Amusingly, even the Koch brothers, the Left’s latest Goldsteins [3], were dragged into it [4]:

The documents, leaked by an anonymous donor and released on DeSmogBlog, include the organization’s 2012 fundraising plan. It lists Heartland Institute donors, from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation (established by Koch Industries billionaire Charles G. Koch), to Philip Morris parent company Altria, to software giant Microsoft and pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly.


Here’s more, via the antipodean J-Wire service, about the UNESCO scandal by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, originator of this petition. This latest article is entitled ‘UNESCO Must Choose – “Palestine” or the World’

Writes David Singer:

‘The Obama administration formally announced its intention this week to ask Congress to waive a ban on American funding of 22% of UNESCO’s budget following UNESCO’s decision to admit “Palestine“ as its 195th member state on 31 October 2011.

The announcement did not come in a White House press release from President Obama. Rather it was surreptitiously tucked away in an innocuous footnote to the budget that the White House presented to Congress – which contained the following statement:

“The Department of State intends to work with Congress to seek legislation that would provide authority to waive restrictions on paying the U.S. assessed contributions to UNESCO”

The State Department has squirreled away nearly $79 million into its 2013 budget in the hope that Congress will grant a legal waiver allowing such American funding to UNESCO to be restored.

Obama Fundraiser, Only The One Percenters He Demonizes Can Afford To Attend

Lloyd Marcus

Pulling into Walmart, I heard on the radio that Obama will be at a $30,000 a plate fundraiser here in Orlando. Wait a minute. The only people who can fork-out 30 grand a plate are the one percenters Obama claims are hogging all the wealth and have made their money on the backs of the poor.

And now, Obama is having an exclusive dinner to hob-nob with these, according to him, selfish rich S-O-Bs. Shouldn’t Obama’s dinner include free meals for welfare recipients, the homeless and his OWS voting bloc?

Thirty thousand dollars a plate; and the media accuses rich Republicans of being out of touch with most Americans. Obama’s dinner is exclusively for rich democrats. Obama’s sycophant media would have us believe only Republicans are rich.

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American. Chairman of The Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama. Lloyd is singer/songwriter of the American Tea Party Anthem and author of Confessions of a Black Conservative, foreword by Michele Malkin. Spokesperson for Tea Party Express. Please help me spread my message by joining my Liberty Network.


“In other words, Islam seems to be finding it a lot easier than Catholicism to get a “religious exemption.” Here’s a caption from the Toronto Star accompanying a picture of the cafeteria at a local public school: “At Valley Park Middle School, Muslim students participate in the Friday prayer service. Menstruating girls, at the very back, do not take part.”

So the Health Commissar, Kathleen Sebelius, has decided that, under Obamacare, religious institutions, like any other employer, will be required to offer their workers free contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients. Well, there’s a surprise.

This entirely predictable news was received with stunned bewilderment by Obamaphile rubes such as the Reverend John Jenkins of Notre Dame, who in 2009 gave the president both an honorary degree and his imprimatur in exchange for the promise of a “sensible” approach to conflicts between church and state. Now that they’re on the receiving end of Obama’s good sense, many of America’s Catholic bishops have issued protests, characteristically anguished and hand-wringing but betraying little understanding of the stakes.


Last week the media was flush with stories on the 50th Anniversary of the U.S. “embargo” of Cuba. From the New York Times to USA Today, most are running AP and Reuters stories (from Havana) which begin and end with quotes from “academic experts” deploring the “embargo” as “failed,” “archaic,” “cruel,” “political pandering to Republican Cuban-Americans,” blah, blah…

First off, a totalitarian regime bestowed both Reuters and the AP with press bureaus. There was a day when Americans understood what this implied. For those who’ve forgotten, here’s a quote from Vicente Botin, who reported for Madrid’s El Pais from Cuba for years. “The Castro regime assigns 20 security agents to follow and monitor every foreign journalist. You practice self–censorship or you’re gone.”

And that’s lucky for those foreign journalists, because local Cuban journalists don’t get off so easily. They don’t get a discreet little note saying, “Dear foreign journalist, we need to talk. It appears that you have forgotten the code of conduct we so clearly stipulated upon your arrival in Cuba and the agreed-upon subject matters for your reporting. So let us remind you of these two: 1.) The diabolical Yankee blockade of our innocent little nation which makes us the world’s poster child for victims of wanton bullying. 2.) Our munificent and magnificent Health Care and Education, which makes us the world’s beacon of social-consciousness and charity.”

MICHELLE MALKIN: THE HIGH PRIESTS OF ECO DESTRUCTION Rick Santorum is right. Pushing back against Democrats’ attempts to frame him as a religious menace, the GOP presidential candidate forcefully turned the tables on the White House: “When it comes to the management of the Earth, they are the anti-science ones.” Scrutiny of the White House anti-science brigade couldn’t come at a better […]


Suicide bombers poised to strike U.S., Iran warns [DAILY CALLER]
FBI removes hundreds of training documents after probe on treatment of Islam [FOX]
Greek Rescue Leaves Europe Default Risk Alive [BLOOMBERG]
U.S. Supreme Court Grants Longest Hearing in Recent History for Obamacare [WT]
‘Act of Valor’ Attention Surprises Filmmakers…Worries Some in the Military [THE BLAZE]
Supreme Court to hear challenge to college affirmative action [WT]
Documents show Obama’s FCC used regulatory muscle to destroy LightSquared’s competition [DAILY CALLER]
Mother visits Marine veteran sentenced to death in Iran [AP]
Iran to Announce Progress at Fordow Nuclear Site [PJ MEDIA]

American Majority Dependent on Government: How Dangerous is it? Herbert London,css.print/pub_detail.asp

American Majority Dependent on Government: How Dangerous is it? Herbert London
In an effort to bolster the political fortunes of President Obama, the media panjandrums have been cheerleading about the improvements in the American economy. Recovery appears to be building, notes the New York Times. The GDP growth is now projected at 3.5 percent, a tonic for the sleepy start of the fiscal year. The unemployment rate has declined, notwithstanding those who no longer seek employment

The lights are synchronized in green for Obama’s reelection, or that is the growing sentiment. But there is an argument, far more telling than present statistical improvement, which must be made. The policies of Obama’s last four years have moved the nation down the road of serfdom. Give away programs have tied free individuals to the shackles of the state.

As of 2011, almost 45 million Americans are on foodstamps, approximately one in seven people. In New York City 1.8 million citizens collect foodstamps, one in four. Forty-seven percent of Americans do not pay a personal income tax and most of these people receive subventions from the government. Thirty-six percent of Americans who file tax forms do not a pay personal income tax. The number of those in a condition of poverty increased 9.5 percent since 2009, with a total of 43.6 million.Again, almost all of these individuals receive government assistance of one kind or another.

My contention isn’t merely that we spend more than we can afford—an obvious and well treated concern. I would assert that despite positive signs in the economic picture, we are nearing the “tipping point,” a transformative moment when a majority of Americans are dependent on government largess. This is the path Americans have been on for some time, but it has been accelerated by the policies of the Obama administration.


The birth control battle is another reminder that entitlements and freedoms do not coexist well, even if we set aside the economic issues, because entitlements end up intruding into the spaces of freedoms. As the United States undergoes the process that replaces the negative right to be left alone with the positive right to be taken care of in every way possible, these conflicts will only worsen.

Americans are getting a taste of life in Europe where social benefits trump individual freedoms, where artificial rights to various government administered benefits and subsidies, along with the protection of national values and social harmony, serve to eliminate most of what Americans have traditionally considered freedom.