NRO's Stanley Kurtz: New documents prove Barack Obama joined New Party in 1996. In '08, Obama campaign denied story as 'crackpot smear.'— Byron York (@ByronYork) June 7, 2012
Today, the New York Times continued the lapdog media’s effort to portray Mitt Romney as a homophobic bully. Like all wealthy 1 percenter bigots, he’s apparently using his home renovations to terrorize the six gay households living near his La Jolla residence.
Meanwhile, Stanley Kurtz is doing real candidate vetting at National Review.
This morning Kurtz dropped a bombshell that incinerates Obama’s claim that he was never a member of the ACORN-affiliated socialist New Party and had little involvement with ACORN. Will the New York Times be too busy swabbing Romney’s trash can for homophobe cooties to report this?
Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.
Remember when the Obama campaign called Kurtz’s New Party allegations a “crackpot smear”? That was a brazen lie brought to you by the Better Than You Dumb-Dumb Heads squad. Records show Obama joined the New Party on January 11, 1996, the same day he requested its endorsement.
But Obama’s “Fight the Smears” website insisted, “Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party.” And his obedient media lapdogs growled and bared their teeth at anyone who questioned Obama’s socialist ties.
Ben Smith of Politico wrote a classic “nothing to see here” story, taking LaBolt and New Party founder Joel Rogers at their word. The rest of the mainstream media, eagerly covering up for–and campaigning for–Obama, took Smith’s report as the definitive “debunking” of the New Party “smear” and failed to look further. The mocking tone of Smith’s article (“The dread New Party”) put the topic beyond the pale of polite debate.
Still nothing to see here, Ben?
Say it with us, lapdogs: Sarah Palin was right. C’mon, you can do it. Sarah. Palin. Was. Right.
It won’t hurt nearly as much as your biased reporting hurts your readers.