Amazon leaves their book review process door wide open to anyone who wants in.  That's their right, Amazon is a privately owned company.  It enables hundreds upon hundreds of phony reviewers who probably can't even read let alone be qualified to review a book to freep the Amazon site and hold her review ratings down to a 1-Star joke.

But that's not the problem.

I don't like to write a short hit and run diary but this one will have to do. I am fed up with diaries citing the National Enquirer (story about Edwards).

Enough is enough. Here's what the FAQ has to say about sources:

Diaries that rely entirely on unreliable sources such as Wayne Madsen, Capitol Hill Blue, Jason Leopold, or Lyndon LaRouche are generally not considered acceptable. Recommending poorly sourced conspiracy theory diaries may result in banning without warning for all recommenders.

Obviously, the National Enquirer is in that category.

Okay, hold on a moment. I admit, this is a "made you look" diary title. But only somewhat. I'm impugning neither Obama, gays, or anyone else outside the mighty conservative scream machine. And I deliberately chose the insulting, character-smear term "fag" (without even the comforting asterisk: f*g, like that makes it more palatable) because that is the term Obama is being smeared with, whether directly (been on the Free Republic lately?) or more indirectly (every MSM news outlet whose anchor's name doesn't start with the letters "Olbermann"). Actually, this diary is all Glenn Greenwald's fault.

Edit: Okay, already, I added the asterisk.

Edit 2: Boy, I thought people would be a little ill, but damn! Let's just get it out and talk about the thrust of the diary.

Cliff Kincaid is an editor at the rabidly conservative Accuracy in Media and the president of America’s Survival, an anti-United Nations group. He is also the author of one of the most dementedly hilarious articles I've read all year.

Brought to you by...
News Corpse
The Internet's Chronicle Of Media Decay.

Markos (or one of the other lead posters on this site) wrote a comment a few weeks ago saying the Democrats "don't have an answer for Drudge".  I hope I got my name and quote exactly right, and I apologize if I missed.

But I am writing this because I found a really interesting news article suggesting that maybe Drudge prefers Obama to McCain.  Here is the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/...

Imagine karl Rove's panic upon learning that Scotty's New Book "What Happened" was going to hit the headlines early, through Politico?  Big time panic - "What do I do?", "How do I get this off the Headlines?"  Presto!  Get a Fear healine out to Drudge: "Al Qaeda tape to call for WMD" That was the BIG RED headline this morning!  

But guess what, it didn't work!!  The media, lead by MSNBC, drove the media world right down the road to McClellan's Book and it has consummed all of the oxygen in the room.

So now the chastened Drudgie, had to back down and grudgingly put up the right headline:  Scotty's Book and its potential damage to McCain/Bush is in its rightful place.

Great job MSNBC!!!  Kudos!!!

There is no need to cite any sources for this.  Let's face it, Hillary coddled up to the right.  Mellon-Scaife?  Come on.  Rupert Murdoch?  Fox News?  Ick.  Some of her supporters will pay at some point for going on that outlet of propaganda and claiming it to be fair and balanced because, oh golly, they realized Obama was the presumptive-nominee back in February and Clinton could become their best friend.   Now, they know that Clinton is useless.  She's no longer necessary.

All right, we all know that the Republican slime machine is going to be spinning countless pictures of a darkened and/or Muslim garbed Senator Obama so in response some unimportant--as in not even in the media's periphery & with no intentions to run for office--Democrats who don't mind getting their reputations dirty could reverse the situation by flooding all media avenues with pics of McCain jaundiced a sickly yellow & dark circles under his dull, lifeless eyes. Those pics should always exploit his cancer surgery--don't call it melanoma in the clips/fliers as that doesn't sound nearly as dangerous as cancer--by making sure they always display his puffed up cheek, caused by the surgery. Yes, it is sleazy and Obama will denounce it as disgusting just like McCain will denounce the disgusting ads his Republican Neanderthals create but it's got to be done. Follow the jump to read the potential captions for the pics!

Anyone who's ever read my diaries from a few years ago knows that I consider Matt Drudge to be a giant festering herpes sore on the ass of our national media.

He is the reason our entire traditional media has turned into one giant bullshit and gossip-fest.  

He was the chief enabler of the disgraceful conduct of Ken Starr's continuing witch hunts and the main "media" force responsible for the nonsense of the Clinton impeachment.

So this diary doesn't come easy for me.

Given that Mark Halperin famously said "Matt Drudge rules our world," it's not surprising that his web site, The Page, is a knockoff.  Several headline stories stretch across the screen, other stories lie in columns below the "fold," and breaking news is tagged "DEVELOPING...."

In the last few months, it has surprised me that a "mainstream" media web site operated by Time has been much more anti-Obama and pro-Hillary/pro-Republican than has Drudge.  During Wright, The Page headlined the (non)story's developments with bated breath every day, while Drudge often put the story below the fold, if at all.  

Drudge headlined the full text of Obama's race speech for a full day, while Halperin continued to push the negative.  Even after the rest of the media dropped the story, Halperin kept trying to push it.  This week when Dick Cheney condemned Wright's remarks on Fox, Mark Halperin headlined the story - but few others cared.  When Gary Hart said this week that he thought the story could hurt Obama, Halperin found that newsworthy.

I have been looking at this coverage and scratching my head.  Is it possible that Time Magazine and Mark Halperin have become worse than Drudge?

As Drudge first reported and as Ben Smith is now confirming over at Politico.com, Hillary is calling Bush to boycott the opening ceremony at the Beijing Olympics.

I know what you're thinking.  "The opening ceremonies?  Why doesn't she just go further out on a limb and propose a boycott of the javeline event?  Or curling, maybe?"

Trust Hillary.  She knows what she's doing when it comes to the Olympics.

She's given them her all.

In my routine of checking all my favorite blogs and news websites, I noticed what appeared to be a misquote on Matt Drudge's site. I sent an email to him to correct it, but he may have not received it since the error remained for a few days.

Today was the final straw that made me realize this fact...

In the upper left... All by itself the following link:

OBAMA: DON'T LABEL ME LIBERAL...

(Added Later)

Also:

NYT: MCCAIN RARELY MENTIONS TALK OF LEAVING REPUBLICAN PARTY...

In the center of the page the following 4 stories:

NM Gov. Bill Richardson Endorses Obama...

DETAILS: Obama Has Financial Edge For Primary Endgame...

And on the right:

OBAMA AIDE: BILL CLINTON LIKE MCCARTHY...

GALLUP: Obama back on top...

[Click here for larger image]

Howard Kurtz is the ultimate Regurgilist - Glenn Greenwald has the story.

The irresponsibility of journalistic wannabe Matt Drudge has finally crossed the line from the merely politically obnoxious into the realm of criminally dangerous. Drudge's violation of the news blackout on the in-country service of 2nd Lt. Harry Windsor (aka Prince Harry) unnecessarily placed the lives of his squad, company, platoon, regiment and brigade in imminent danger in Afghanistan with no real journalistic need for doing so.

This is one of those cases where people in glass houses shouldn't throw the first stone.

The British defense ministry quickly announced Prince Harry would be withdrawn from Afghanistan now that his deployment had been publicized, putting him and his fellow soldiers at risk.

Matt Drudge, who loves to depict liberals as threatening national security in their criticism of the war, really did threaten national security just to get in an exclusive report on Prince Harry's deployment.  And in one feel swoop, he did not just threaten the integrity of our operation in Afghanistan, he threatened the security of a member of the royal family and divulged sensitive information about the current operations of one of our few remaining allies in the fight against Al Qaeda.

Contrary to popular conservative belief, I have never seen anyone on the left being this careless with respect to our troops.

On Thursday, American newsman Matt Drudge provided material support to al Qaeda and Taliban forces--the perpetrators of 9/11--by divulging highly secret information to them about NATO forces currently fighting in Afghanistan.  Specifically, Drudge revealed that Britain’s Prince Harry was serving in combat there.

With Prince Harry, his fellow troops, and the mission itself endangered on account of Drudge’s revelation, the British government immediately whisked Harry out of the country.  The effect on his unit--its cohesion, morale, and ability to sustain its mission against al Qaeda--after such an abrupt change in leadership is uncertain.  

It is not yet known how long Drudge has been providing support for al Qaeda, or whether he intends to do it again.  Similarly, it remains to be seen what, if any, other forms of aid and comfort Drudge has provided to the enemy.  However, we do know that Drudge is unrepentant.

It is widely being reported that Prince Harry is being pulled from Afghanistan amid concerns about security after Drudge posted news stories about his whereabouts in Afghanistan.

We all know that he would be a likely target of attacks, if his whereabouts were known, so many in the British and foreign press had voluntarily engaged in a press blackout. In addition, the Ministry of Defense knew that identifiying Prince Harry's whereabouts would not only expose the Prince himself to attacks, but also endanger the soldiers he was stationed with. Did the safety of British troops in Afghanistan matter to Matt Drudge? Of course not. Once again a Right-wing journalists is exposed for his disdain for the safety of the troops.  This time, the safety of our allies.