Sibby Online

Todd Epp and diversity

Todd Epp is bragging about being part of the Keloland blog:

More importantly, here’s how you get to the "Big 7" (Todd, Pat, Joel, David, Bob, Ken, Anna) (Sorry, Sibby!) as KELOLAND continues to take the project from beta to full bells and whistles.

Note Epp is enjoying the fact that I am not included. And for the record, I was never asked to be a part of the CBS affiliate’s new blog project. Again, we have more evidence of bias in the South Dakota media. And with Todd Epp celebrating the intolerance of Keloland toward my worldview, we also see the truth about his position on diversity. Here is an excerpt from a Tristan Emmanuel column that explains Epp’s elitism:

Consider our postmodern setting.

For years, liberal academics everywhere have been telling us that there is no absolute truth, no real meaning and no ultimate value. We are told that all of these things are "relative." This idea is so ingrained in our culture that it has become the basic philosophical paradigm influencing everything from the economy to politics and the judiciary. There are no constants. Everything is in a state of flux. Even former absolute liberties such as property rights and institutions like marriage are now up for grabs.

People even fail to see the irony when someone such as Madonna can sing "Like a Virgin," while having apparently done "the nasty" more times than most prostitutes. And that is because academics tell us: "definitions are what you make them."

Which brings us to the real point: liberals want control – even if it means destroying the foundations of Western democracy.

Liberals, who have traditionally argued for free speech when they tried to promote cantankerous causes such as pornography and flag-burning are now making an about-face by arguing for the restraint of "free speech" when it doesn’t favor their political ideology.

Epp also said this:

I know who the other bloggers are but I’m not going to steal their thunder and I’ll let them unveil themselves as they see fit. (But sorry, Sibby. Like I said yesterday… )

Epp said earlier that:

Sibby, We’ve God Big Plans…… but they don’t include you.

Steve, just a heads up, but be prepared to be very, very mad at the SDMSM in a couple days.

Well, madder than you already are, which seems to be pretty mad.

Actually I am not mad. This provides me another opportunity to show how the SDMSM promotes the far-left agenda as they only allow the GOP bloggers who refuse to hold both the far-left and the mainstream media accountable for ignoring the truth. As they do, they call the tamed GOP members, who have agreed to play by the far-left’s rules of political correctness, "moderates". This is so those of us who agressively express the principles that were used during America’s founding can be portrayed as "radicals" and "extremists" (ie; conservatives, fundamentalists, right wing-nuts, the Christian right, etc.). The last thing the SDMSM would want is someone like me using truth to expose that agenda (of using labels to indoctrinate) to their Kool-Aid drinkers and useful idiots.

This is what the SDMSM considers "free speech". This is what Todd Epp considers "diverse". This is the kind of "openness" that Todd Epp wants for South Dakota’s political environment. As Emmanuel pointed, free speech…and as I have just pointed out, diversity and openness, is only for those who adhere to the far-left’s humanist worldview. Sounds like tyranny to me, not the freedoms that America’s Founding Fathers sacrificed to create.

And I am not alone when I call those you want to destroy America’s founding principles that include the Biblical Christian worldview and change our principles to the secular humanist worldview…anti-American. Todd Epp wants to portray that as "hate speech" so that again, I can be classified as a radical and/or an extremist. This is done so that they do not have to conduct a Biblical Christian versus secular humanist discussion, and deal with the substance of our positions. That would put at risk the possibility that the uninformed would learn that it is Todd Epp and his friends in the media who are the radicals. So, no Sibby at Keloland, and that makes Todd Epp happy. And I don’t see Bob Ellis of Dakota Voice there neither. I wonder if he, like me, was never asked. Perhaps, we are just too Christian for Keloland. And that is what the Todd Epp and his far-left comrades want…hatred directed toward out spoken Christians. Diversity…Ha. Hypocrisy...Yes.

Pro-Democrat media’s attack on Christians

Frank Pastore has a great column that tells it like it is in regard to the idea that the leadership of the Democrat Party has got religion. Here is the opening:

Liberals are predictably doing everything they can to win in 2008. Everyone knows a key part of their strategy is to "get religion" and trick as many Christians as possible to care less about the Bible, abortion and gay marriage and more about liberal policy positions: secularism, socialism, bigger government and higher taxes.

This includes spinning conservative Christians with the yarn that their brand of Christianity is now obsolete and that "everyone important" is buying the "new and improved" progressive, emergent, sensitive, conscientious brand of Christianity that these new liberal Christians are selling. And, in order to become "cool, popular and relevant" once again, old Christian dogs will have to learn new liberal tricks.

And "tricks" is the operative word here. And they can get away with being false prophets because they have the mainstream media repeating their lies often enough that far too many believe the propaganda:

It’s only because liberals still dominate the majority of print and broadcast outlets that you’re hearing so loud and so often about the "new and improved" evangelicals. But don’t believe the marketing/PR hype that conservative Christianity is somehow being overtaken by a kinder, gentler, more liberal and more tolerant expression of the faith.

And Doug Giles goes after the media for comparing traditional American Christians to the Jihadists:

Man, don’t cha love how mainstream media and their soft-brain disciples make Christians out to be fish-stickered, bug-eyed equals to incensed Islam? If you were to accept as true what some atheists, secularists and prattling gay activists say about Christians, you’d think the church is chomping at the bit to chop off some heads of unbelievers, glory to Gawd!

Yep, if you were to believe the barf belched out by the BS brokers on the Left, you’d stagger away Kool Aid drunk with the belief that there is little disparity between conservative Christians and militant Muslims.

Giles ends with a dose of reality:

Radical Muslims, on the other hand, are the ones you need to sweat—because their book has zero tolerance for the likes of Sully and Jay—or anyone for that matter, who doesn’t lock step. You can bet your backside that if uncut Islam were in charge, Christopher Hitchens would be history, Drew Barrymore would be nevermore and Andrew Sullivan would never be seen again.

The Judeo-Christian worldview (and subsequently, the great western traditions it under girds) is the only powerful cudgel in existence to ward off militant Islam. That’s what makes the Left’s lies about Christ’s Church and the Left’s desires to diminish it so diabolical. If the church’s presence and power gets marginalized via these secularists’s anti-Christian propaganda, then all I’ve got to say is, "I hope everyone is cool with wearing burkhas."

The contest for the top spot in regard to intolerance has to be between the secularists and the Islamic Jihadists.

The mindset of the media elite

Cal Thomas has a column on Robert Murdock that help’s explain the Randell Becks of the media elite:

Most of the elite media were of one mind (surprise!) when it came to Murdoch's acquisition of the Journal. NBC's Andrea Mitchell called him "a controversial press lord" and declared Murdoch "deeply conservative," which liberals intend as a slur only slightly less insulting than the label "deeply religious."

The New Yorker's Ken Auletta claimed Murdoch "often" uses "his publications and his media to advance his business or his political interests." Imagine that! The views of New York Times publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., can be read in his newspaper, which consistently promotes policies and people he favors. When you're a liberal, this is regarded by the elites as "good journalism." When you have a different point of view, you are engaging in propaganda and serving only yourself and your interests.

Thomas explains exactly how I felt in 2002 and why I started to blog in 2003:

Before Fox News Channel was born, I met with several network news presidents, telling them that someone was going to go after a demographic that felt shutout by the mainstream media. These people, I said, go to church, fly the flag, respect the nation's traditions and institutions and hate the liberal media. They feel censored, or stereotyped, by the media elites. I told them the person who recognizes that demographic and gives them a voice would reap a huge reward.

The difference is I have not made a penny on this web site.

Todd Epp, speak for yourself

Todd Epp says this about bloggers versus the Drive-by media:

Having been part of five actual news organizations and having freelanced for many more, I well know the difference between journalism and what goes on here and on most blogs. Journalism is based on facts, fairness, and editorial oversight.

What Epp doesn’t understand is that bloggers have editorial oversight…other bloggers. So as Todd Epp’s editor, I am saying he is full of far-left BS. What he refuses to understand is that bias is about what isn’t being reported. In the blogosphere all is being reported, and the truth is sorted out from the lies by other bloggers. There is not at all "fairness" in regard to the Argus Leader and the Rapid City Journal. They print what makes Democrats look good, and are too happy to print what makes Republicans (unless they agree with Democrats and are deemed moderates) look bad. Nobody find sout what is left on the editor's cutting room floor (Such as the name of the employee who was fired at Hildebrand Tewes). Epp, you have now been corrected.

Regards,

Todd Epp's editor

Anti-American Drive-by media

From Melanie Morgan:

Did you hear that high-pitched screeching noise Wednesday morning?

That was the sound of thousands of liberal journalists shrieking in agony as Democrats on Capitol Hill failed to force surrender terms upon our troops serving in Iraq.

The media were the biggest losers in Wednesday's vote on Iraq. The rest of the country was treated to their true feelings. You saw it on TV, read it in the newspapers, heard it on liberal radio. They were quite simply devastated that their allies in Congress couldn't make their call for "retreat" a reality.

Things are about to get even worse for the defeat-retreat-surrender ranks in the press corps. A plan is afoot that will mobilize a major backlash of American patriots who have had enough of the media's defeatism; the battle will reach a crescendo this September, when Gen. David Petraeus issues his report on the progress of "the surge" in Iraq.

For the past two years, liberal journalists opposed to Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war against terrorism have done everything they could to beat down the resolve of the American people in an attempt to convince the public that defeat in Iraq was our only hope.

The relentlessly negative and biased reporting has certainly taken its toll. I get e-mail from a number of readers who believe in the mission, but admit that they fear our nation has lost the resolve to win.

Creating a depressed and defeatist attitude among the ranks of pro-troop supporters is exactly what these liberal journalists were aiming to do.

I should know – I've seen these tactics used over and over again by my liberal colleagues in the journalism field during my career in the news industry.

The tactics of journalists haven't changed one iota since they engaged in similar behavior during the Cold War (Reagan was a stupid cowboy who was going to get us all killed, we should just let the Communists do as they please) and the Vietnam War (why should our troops die for someone else's war, we can't win, it's not like the Communists will ever be a direct threat to American security anyway).

Fair and balanced

When it comes to fair and balanced, a Rasmussen poll puts Fox News above CNN and the major networks:

When it comes to delivering news without bias, 37% believe NPR accomplishes that goal. Thirty-six percent (36%) say the same for Fox and 32% believe it’s true of CNN. As noted earlier, just 25% believe the major broadcast networks deliver news in an unbiased manner. Results for other media outlets will be released over the next week.

Limbaugh: regulate Drive-by media

Now this is an example of how to deal with the far-left. Instead of playing defense, turn the table on them and go on the offense:

With recent suggestions by some in Congress to bring back the Fairness Doctrine to the radio industry, talk-show host Rush Limbaugh suggests the only way to have true fairness is to regulate what he calls the "Drive-By Media."

"Liberals in the Senate have it half right when they talk about the lack of balance and the lack of honest reporting. They're dead right when they talk about that. It's just they're wrong about where all these things are happening," Limbaugh said today on his national program. "Let's regulate the Drive-By Media. Let's have a Truth Doctrine for them."

Limbaugh uses the term "Drive-By Media" to describe most news outlets besides talk radio, including major newspapers such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today, as well as magazines and national television networks.

Previously, he used this description for them: "They are exactly like drive-by shooters, they pull up to a congested area, they spray a hail of bullets into the crowd. It causes mass hysteria, confusion, mistakes, and misinterpretation, sometimes people and their careers actually die, and then the Drive-By Media smirks and they ride away, unnoticed in the excitement. They're never blamed, they're never held accountable."

Limbaugh says Americans are being manipulated by propaganda they see and hear from non-talk-radio sources, claiming "hard numbers that prove the point."

"By any objective measure, ladies and gentlemen, our economy is one of the best in history. By any objective measure: low unemployment, record low unemployment, low inflation – at the same time! ... We have a booming investment climate that's benefiting everybody who is in the stock market. ...

"Tax revenues are flooding the federal government! The federal deficit is going to be $205 billion. The "Deficit Monster" is in the process of being slain. There's more money rolling into Washington, and at the same time affluence in the country is going through the roof like never before. These are all facts."

Limbaugh then cited a recent poll from the American Research Group, which stated a total of 16 percent of Americans say that the national economy is getting better, 28 percent say it's staying the same, and 55 percent believe it's getting worse.

"This is not a measure of reality," he said. "This is a measure of liberal Drive-By Media propaganda. ...

"What these figures show is the impact of unregulated, left-wing propaganda repeated hour after hour, day after day, week after week by the unregulated Drive-By Media, the unregulated liberal newspapers, the unfettered liberal newspapers. Free speech is the lifeblood of our nation, my good friends, and if we're going to do anything to modify it, let's look at where the problem really is. It ain't here on talk radio!"

RCJ continues to ban dissent

Kevin Woster has continues his personal vendetta against me my not allowing one comment I have yesterday. As I reported yesterday, the Rapid City Journal run Mount Blogmore has allowed anti-Christian bigoted statements on their web site, but has deleted my attempts to respond. But they have deleted my attempts to provide dissent to the far-left dominated web site. Remarkably, comments about eating puppies are allowed. Here is a comment I sent in response to that issue:

Hey Wiken, thanks for the anti-puppy comment. I posted it on my web site along with explaining the anti-Christian bigotry of this web site. And speaking on anti-Christian bigotry, here is an excerpt from yesterday’s Rush Limbaugh where he talks about people like Frankenfeld:

Well, now, wait a minute, the Republican Party is doing everything it can to diminish the role of Christian conservatives in it's structure." Well, not every Republican is, but face it, there are many moderate blue-blood Republicans out there just embarrassed all to hell that there are 24 million conservative Christians in the Republican Party. They're known primarily as pro-lifers and of course these moderate country club blue-blooders, it's embarrassing to be in the same party with them.

That comment was not allowed. In case you don’t know, Don Frankenfeld was one of the Republicans for Daschle in 2004. Later another comment about eating puppies was allowed:

i ate dog once in korea. i’m pretty sure it was fully grown, and not a puppy though, because it was very tough to chew.

i would expect puppies to be more tender.

while in korea, i also ate chicken feet, silk worm larvae and living, squirming squid tentacles.

…..and all without complaining (in fact i quite enjoyed it).

This response was not allowed:

17: Wow, you really ate all that stuff? I wonder if those anti-Christian bigots who say a fetus is not a person would complain about the idea of eating aborted pre-borns?

South Dakota Democrat activist Bill Fleming (who adores Frankenfeld) referred to me as a whiner, and this response was also not allowed:

15: "Maybe they should just ad "no whining" to the bullet list of rules at the top of the blog and leave it at that."

It is because of your "whining" that I am being Chavezed.

The last comment of mine allowed by Woster was on his thread regarding the Federal game warden. I responded to a response Woster made on that comment:

6: "Sib: I think you made a joke! Excellent. K.W. "

Yes Kevin, I know you like Fleming because he is funny. And Fleming wants this web site to be a fun loving neighborhood. This ties in to a post I found on the Dakota Voice Blog. Excerpt:

Thomas Sowell examines "Adolescent Intellectuals" today at TownHall.com.

The piece carries a theme I explored a few years ago when I wrote for Toogood Reports. I said that liberals were like children because all they know is their want, their "need," without regard for the wisdom of restraint. In their single-minded pursuit of pleasure and fulfillment, they sound and act very much like petulant, spoiled children.

So Fleming’s neighborhood is actually an elementary school playground. And the reason why I am so hated is that I am just too adult for you kids.

That was deleted too. As the Drive-by media insists on "open government" in order to be able to report on what is going on with our government, they refuse "open journalism" in order for us to better understand what they do and don’t report. The biggest part of media bias is in what they do not report, and in this case, it is my comment to their web site. Their excuses for banning me are void of substance because they allow the far-left to violate those same rules.

Rapid City Journal promotes anti-Christian bigotry

Earlier I posted on some behind the scenes activities from Mount Blogmore, the Rapid City Journal blog run by Bill Harlan and Kevin Woster. I brought forward some anti-Christian bigotry in the post. Here is one for example:

The Gnostic Gospels would also draw some interesting comments from Sibson. Jesus married to Mary M.? Too mcuh for Sibby to handle. This is the part where Sibson vapor locks and disappears. He’s had his rhetorical hit and run fix for this page. But, he’ll be back when he can figure out a way to thread a drive by extremist spin into abortion on another topic!!

I sent this response:

Like I promised in comment 134, here is a link to my web site (only go there if you think you can handle the truth) where I explain why it appears that "I disappeared", and I even posted your anti-Christian bigotry as an example of why Fleming’s comments in 126 should be directed at people like you, instead of me.

It did not appear on Mount Blogmore, and neither did this comment that was in response to Bill Fleming’s anti-free speech BS about how I should be happy that Mount Blogmore is censoring me:

140: "You really should be thankful to them for that instead of critical"

As usual you should be taking your own advice. What you said in 126 should have been directed at those, including yourself, who issue anti-Christian bigotry. You folks are giving me plenty of evidence as to the true nature of those who have taken over the South Dakota Democrat Party.

In 126 you said "fun loving neighborhoods like this" in reference to this web site. Clearly that sounds more like a "public" venue and not a "private" place where free speech can be restricted by the owner. Based on the comments of mine that have been deleted, and your recent comments, it is obvious that you have succeeded in convincing your friends to shut me down. Looks like you have been successful in turning this "neighborhood" into the same type that Chavez has changed Venezuela to.

Bill Harlan just started a new thread with this post:

My colleague K. Woster has alerted me to a number of complaints about our decision to reject certain comments offered to Mount Blogmore. This topic is to explain that — having explained thoroughly and ad nauseum why we reject some comments — we are now rejecting comments that complain about our decisions to reject earlier comments. We also stipulate we will no longer accept comments complaining about our decision to reject rejection complaints, nor will we accept complaints about rejecting rejection complaints about rejection complaints, to the Nth power, where "N" is a whole number and "power" is what we have.

PS: The above rule makes it mathematically, logically, ontologically, epistemologically and hermeneutically impossible to hit the "comment" button on this topic and lodge a complaint about this policy. But hey, that never stopped Blogmorites before. Give it a whack. Alternatively, tell us why you like puppies.

PPS: Complaints still accepted — nay, welcomed — at [email protected].

Note Harlan’s elitist reference to his "power". While these elitists demand open government, they reject "open journalism". So I was not surprised when this comment that I sent to Mount Blogmore was not posted:

Mr. Harlan:

You said this:

Enough. Being permissive, Baby Boomer blog parents, we won’t kick Steve out of the house — even for misstatements like the ones in this comment. But anything that emits even the faintest hint of a personal insult is gone, along with the boilerplate "I know you are but what am I" remarks. And the rest of Blogmore is banned from personal comments about Sibson. BH

Comment by Steve Sibson — 5/23/2007 @6:21 am

This is not a complaint about my comments being deleted. This is a complaint on the failure of this web site to executive your rule in an "equal" way. I have taken on personal and many anti-Christian bigoted comments, and my responses are deleted. I even provided a favorable response regarding Frankenfeld’s position, and the personal insults and Christian bigotry followed. Just because I bring a point of view that is not acceptable to your pal, Bill Fleming, doesn’t mean he can promote, and then you guys implement, Chavez styled restrictions. He called this a "neighborhood". If you agree, then an American Neighbor is one that allows free speech. If this is still a privately owned web site, and your interest is an open, challenging, vibrant, and enlightened discussion of the issues, then I suggest you get serious with the above noted rule and get the angry far-left anti-Christian secular bigots off my back. Not doing so as you tie both of my arms behind my back by deleting my retorts is something cowards would do.

Clearly we the Rapid City Journal has gone over to the same far-left pro-Democrat bias as the embattled Argus Leader. Bill Harlan left an email address, so send him an email about why they would allow South Dakota Democrat activists to issue anti-Christian bigoted attacks, and then not allow responses to them.

In the meantime check out some of the comments Mount Blogmore does allow, like this one form South Dakota Democrat Doug Wiken:

Are puppies edible? I suppose if you like that kind of food, ketchup and hot sauce or Heinz 57 Sauce. Yah, that’s it. Heinz 57 Sauce.

Where is the South Dakota media

[Editor's correction: The Rapid City Journal did run this on page 1C on today's issue. So let's see if the AP and the Argus Leader picks it up and make this into the same todo they made out of the far-left environmental's MPEACHW license plate issue.]

When the attack on free speech was in regard to a far-left environmentalist and her MPEACHW license plate, the South Dakota media was all over the story and the Rapid City Journal was celebrated for the decision for her to keep. And I agree with that decision.

Now when the free speech attack is in regard to a pro-life activists, only Dakota Voice reports the charges were dropped:

A pro-life advocate arrested for expressing his beliefs is no longer facing criminal charges. On May 16, a South Dakota state attorney Sarah E. Seljeskog dismissed the charges filed against 18-year-old Joey Cox, represented by an Alliance Defense Fund-allied attorney. Cox had attempted to communicate a pro-life message on the campus of South Dakota School of Mines & Technology in Rapid City.

"The Constitution does not require individuals to obtain permission before they exercise their First Amendment rights," said ADF-allied attorney Stephen Wesolick, of the Wesolick Law Firm in Rapid City. "Furthermore, the school’s administration misapplied their policy when they chose to silence Mr. Cox."

On May 7, approximately one hour before arriving on campus, Cox, a member of the California-based Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust group, called SDSMT to inform them of the team’s planned visit to the campus as part of the Spring 2007 Campus Life Tours project. He also requested information on the school’s free speech policy.

In response, Julie Smoragiewicz, vice president for university and public relations, said that the team would not be granted permission to access the campus. She later provided a campus policy which stated that previous permission must be attained two weeks in advance.

Almost immediately upon arriving at the campus, Cox was arrested and charged with failure to vacate, a class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,000 fine.

On May 16, a state attorney dismissed the criminal charges against Cox, noting that the reason for the action was "in the best interest of justice." A copy of the dismissal filed May 16 in the Magistrate Division of the 7th Judicial Circuit Court is available here.

"Free speech is a protected right under the Constitution and does not require adherence to this type of school policy," Wesolick said. "Mr. Cox acted entirely within his rights when he chose to engage in pro-life speech on the school’s campus."

So where is the South Dakota media on this? A court ruled that an agent for the State of South Dakota violated the free speech of a pro-life activists, and the Rapid City Journal has done nothing so far. They have not even put this up on Mount Blogmore. In fact they have been deleting many of my comments on Mount Blogmore because they do not fit their worldview.