Barbara Walters "Retires" Today

Good bye Barbara, now go die, biased, bigoted bitch.

Media Bias: Neil Cavuto Reveals Bias in Bridgegate & Benghazi Reporting

Here, nakedly, is the bias of the mainstream media on news that can injure a Conservative or soft pedal a Liberal Democrats.  Neil Cavuto has put together a video that shows the difference between how the media covers a Conservative and Liberals.  It's ugly...and plainly shows that the media has now become a propaganda arm of the Democratic party.



You decide.  Please spread this video far and wide.

HT: GatewayPundit.

Lynching: The Media & George Zimmerman

Bill Whittle's Afterburner:

NYTimes Has Begun the Character Assasination of Ted Cruz

Gail Collins of the NYTimes has begun the character assassination of Ted Cruz.  She's doing this to start, even now, preparing the 2016 presidential election battlefield.  Ann Althouse has posted a great take down of Ms. Collins article.  She lists 5 problems with the Times piece.

1. Somebody get Gail Collins a thesaurus. For "stupendous," try "astonishing." It's got that huffy, aghast tone you seem to be looking for. I know, "stupendous" is tempting because it gives the feeling that you're calling your target stupid, but when you find something "stupendous," you're actually confessing to stupor on your own part, and literally, if you are in a stupor, you are stupid.

2. This woman-defending-woman column ends with a recipe metaphor. Is that good gender politics? It resonates with what I think is Collins's effort to make us see this interplay between 2 U.S. Senators in terms of a man patronizing a woman.

3. Cruz's questions were about the security of our constitutional rights: Why did humor belong in that recipe?

4. Where was this "self-righteousness"? Collins's evidence is that Cruz used the phrases “My... point is," "in my opinion," “I would point out," and "In my view." This phobia about first-person-singular pronouns is silly. It's used against Obama all the time. What does Collins think of all those right-wing bloggers who will inform you about how many times Obama says "I" in a given speech? I'll bet she thinks it's... stupid. I certainly do.

5. Cruz also referred to his role as counsel in Heller (the Supreme Court's biggest 2d Amendment case) — another thing Collins considered self-referential and self-righteous. But Collins began her column building up Dianne Feinstein's stature because of her encounter with the fatally wounded Harvey Milk and George Moscone many years ago. Does personal experience lend weight to political opinion or not? Feinstein said: "I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode." That's at least as self-referential and self-righteous as Cruz's statement that he was not "unfamiliar" with Heller given that he worked on the case.

Ms. Collins in particular and the MSM in general are preparing the battlefield for the tactics of personal destruction to use on Mr. Cruz.  If they can marginalize him now, since as a Hispanic Conservative, he (like Sarah Palin before him) is a threat to the whole Liberal meme (they support minorities and women).

If the MSM can successfully marginalize Cruz NOW, he won't be a threat to either Biden, Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama (yes, she's already being touted as presidential material on the left) in 2016.

We, in the grass roots blogging community need to begin our pushback NOW, BEFORE the narrative is set in concrete.  I would urge everyone who has a blog to start publishing pushback against articles on Cruz, so that even Google searches won't be able to hide positive mentions of any minority of conservative.

We have to keep in mind that Mr. Cruz wasn't annointed by the GOP "elite" leadership inside the DC Beltway.  He's the choice of the Tea Party movement of Texas.  He wiped out the RSCC's choice in the GOP primary and easily won the general election last November.  He along with Rand Paul and Marco Rubio are NOT part of the "elite" GOP leadeship.  They're outsiders as their support comes from the base of  the party and the Tea Party movement. 

If the MSM can successfully destroy the credibility of these men by manufacturing a false narrative of wackiness or extremism, they they will be finished in national politics.  We in the grass roots base, have the job of trying to push back against the official Democratic Propaganda sources (aka, the MSM).  If we can flood the interwebs with good stories, we can overwhelm even GOOGLE's biased, dollars supported searches.

Mr. Cruz, Paul and Rubio are the future of the GOP.  If we allow them to be marginalized by the MSM we, the grass roots conservative movement will have failed America.

Dog Yawning is More Important Than Benghazi?

my wife found this on face book...and it's turned up on Instapundit as well. But, Dianne Sawyer reporting on a damn dog yawning is more important than reporting of the fiasco that occurred in Benghazi on 9-11-2012...

 

 

This is what is wrong with the MSM...they are working so hard to cover Obama's ass, that they've lost credibility with the 53% of the country that doesn't support The One...

Benghazi: Is the Media Conspiring to Cover Up?

Entertainment Industry All In On Obama

Today, I turned on the TV show Mythbusters.  It was a rerun of a show from Season 9, Episode 9...guess who the special guest was?  Who else, the chosen one of the entrainment industry, Barack Obama.  He's become ubiquitous on TV shows (Jon Stewarts "Daily Show", Tonight Show, Late Night, MTV, etc.) just about around the clock.  Toss in the gratuitous movies (the Bin Laden mission) and you have several million dollars worth of unreported campaign donations.  When you combine that with the MSM's "Democratic Operatives" with bylines, you get a near propaganda-like quality to TV these days. 

Obama Interview...

It's really something when a local TV reporter actually asks those questions the national media absolutely refuses to ask Mr. Obama.  This just goes to show just how shamefully in the tank the MSM is for the Obama campaign.  Glenn Reynolds calls them Democratic Operatives with a byeline.

Here's a real interview with real, pointed questions.  Those sorts of questions the national media will not ask.



If you read the partial transcript below, and look closely at Mr. Obama's answers (or non-answers) you'll see that he's going a long way to not actually answer any of this guys questions.

KYLE CLARK: Were the Americans under attack at the consulate in Benghazi Libya denied requests for help during that attack? And is it fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation and we'll all find out after the election?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, the election has nothing to do with four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened. These are folks who served under me who I had sent to some very dangerous places. Nobody wants to find out more what happened than I do. But we want to make sure we get it right, particularly because I have made a commitment to the families impacted as well as to the American people, we're going to bring those folks to justice. So, we're going to gather all the facts, find out exactly what happened, and make sure that it doesn't happen again but we're also going to make sure that we bring to justice those who carried out these attacks.
KYLE CLARK: Were they denied requests for help during the attack?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we are finding out exactly what happened. I can tell you, as I've said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we're going to investigate exactly what happened so that it doesn't happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. And I guarantee you that everyone in the state department, our military, the CIA, you name it, had number one priority making sure that people were safe. These were our folks and we're going to find out exactly what happened, but what we're also going to do it make sure that we are identifying those who carried out these terrible attacks.
KYLE CLARK: In a national address, you touted the stimulus money going to Abound Solar - a Colorado company connected to one of your billionaire fundraisers. Now, as you may know, Abound Solar is out of business and under criminal investigation. The jobs are gone and taxpayers are out about 60 million dollars. How do you answer critics who see Abound Solar as Colorado's Solyndra - a politically connected clean energy company that went under and took our money with it?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Laughs) Well, Kyle, I think that if you look at our record that these loans that are given out by the Department of Energy for clean energy have created jobs all across the country and only about four percent of these loans were going to some very cutting-edge industries that are going to allow us to figure out how to produce energy in a clean, renewable way in the future and create jobs in Colorado and all around the country. And some of them have failed but the vast majority of them are pushing us forward into a clean energy direction. And that's good for Colorado and good for the country. And these are decisions, by the way, that are made by the Department of Energy, they have nothing to do with politics.
-
-
-
KYLE CLARK: Mr. President, you've called for more civility in our nation's political conversation - and much has obviously been made about the tone of this race. In a recent interview with Rolling Stone, you called Governor Romney a "bullshitter." What did you mean and why did you choose that word?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, this was a conversation after an interview, a casual conversation with a reporter. The basic point that I've been talking about throughout this campaign, is people know what I mean and they know that I mean what I say and what I care about, who I'm fighting for and you know a major issue in any election is can you count on the person you're putting into the Oval Office fighting for you having a clear set of convictions that they believe in.

Kyle, you've put your "betters" to shame.  Thanks for putting the president on the spot....the MSM has too long not asked any substantive questions of this president...

Anna Wintour Fobids Designers To Clothe Ann Romney?

I've been hearing rumours swirl over the past several days that Anna Wintour is forbidding designers from giving clothing to Ann Romney.  IF this is true, there is a simple way to punish this shallow woman for her short-sightedness.  We can easily do to her what happened to Newsweek, Time, NY Times, etc...if conservatives simply stop purchasing/subscribing to Vogue...her magazine sales SHOULD drop in the neighborhood of 50%...which would hit her bottom line in a very direect fashion...

Using the power of our pocket books, we can, and should show this vapid woman, the stupidity of her posturing.  If you desire to be "powerful" and not permit designers from clothing conservative women, then we, as a group won't patronize your magazine, or it's advertisers.  Liberal newspapers have been hit very hard by the precipitous drop in subscription rates by conservatives.  NYTimes, WaPo, LATimes are great  examples of this. 

This is what happens when you piss off half of your readers.

In The Can For Obama...

...and a CNN reporter actually admitted that someone said that to her...

Obama Lied Because Media Is In His Pocket

Charles Krauthammer says that Obama admin lied because the MSM is in his court...and will spin anything says or does.

He's right.  In the past 5 years, the liberally biased MSM has done it's very best to either spin positively, or ignore completely, any story that is inimical to the Obama administration.  This has hurt the country badly because we have a leader that doesn't have to face any difficult questions.  But moreover, because the media has refused to ask Mr. Obama any substantive policy questions, he has been able to ignore the nation's best interests...

“They had two reasons to lie,” Krauthammer said. “The first reason was the fact that the Sept. 11 attack occurred a week after they just spent four days in Charlotte dancing on the grave of bin Laden. Remember, this is their single foreign policy achievement. There is none other. Look at Iran Look at Russia. Look at Israel. Look at Syria. Look at the Arab spring. It’s all in collapse. They got one thing to argue, and they sure argued it, where they made the point again and again and again with that ridiculous slogan from Vice President [Biden], ‘bin laden dead, GM alive,’ because what Libya said, what it was proclaiming to the world and the reason the attack was launched in the first place was to say, ‘bin Laden dead, al-Qaida alive.’ That is what has happened as a result of leading from behind in Libya.”

Krauthammer said the problems stemming from the president’s foreign policy extend beyond Libya. “You’ve got, you know, al-Qaida has — essentially one of the jihadist factions taken over northern Mali,” Krauthammer said. “There are training camps throughout North Africa. And we now know about the rise of the strength of the jihadist in Syria, where Obama has again has been leading from behind.”

Currently, the only thing that he has been able to crow about it the elimination of Osama bin Laden...which would have been better served taking him alive.  Because of Obama's missteps in foriegn policy, Al Quieda is resurgent, not just in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya as well as making inroads into Mali.  That's a huge foriegn policy failure. 

When you tie that foreign policy failure to the disasterous domestic policies...this president is on road to unseat James Earl Carter as the 2nd worst president in our history.  Currently, in my opinion, James Buchanan holds that title as his policies directly led to the Civil  War.  The most distructive war in our history.

via Instapundit

Who Lost The Debate?

Today, people are asking who lost the debate. I'd say JournoLism did. Candy Crowley by injecting herself into the debate and constantly handing Obama soft questions and interrupting Romney showed that JournoLists can no longer be trusted. She gave Obama more than 9 minutes of time to answer questions. This shows that an anti-conservative bias is alive and well in the Jurasic media. Any conservative who runs for president and agrees to having "moderators" that are from the heavily biased media is a fool.

Crowly Admits Working for Obama Campaign

Here job title includes the word  "journolist", ergo sum, she's a [Socialist] Democratic operative with a byline,

This Is The Debate Moderator?

Candy Crowly of CNN has already being question for her interviews on the debate. She's publicly said that she views her role as being an interrogator... that if she feels that a question wasn't quite answered, the she could,

As Crowley put it last week, “Once the table is kind of set by the town-hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, ‘Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?’”

That brings into sharp focus, this video she's calling the Romney-Ryan ticket a "death wish." 




How can this woman possibly be considered "unbiased" when she's going to choose which questions to ask which candidate.  In guarantee, that she will give Obama soft-balls, and biased "gotcha" questions to Romney.  Nothing good can come from choosing this Democratic Operative w/a Byline as a moderator.

Surprisingly enough, both campaigns have protested her view points of the moderator's role. 

According to the town-hall format language in the agreement, after each audience question and both two-minute responses from the candidates, Obama and Romney are expected to have an additional discussion facilitated by Crowley. Yet her participation is meant to be otherwise limited. As stated in the document: “In managing the two-minute comment periods, the moderator will not rephrase the question or open a new topic … The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.” The memorandum, which has been obtained by TIME, was signed by lawyers for the two campaigns on Oct. 3, the day of the first presidential debate in Denver.

I expect her to ambush Romney while giving Obama any possible benefit of doubt.  She's widely known to support his campaign, both in word and deed.  This debate may well strip away any further doubt of the media's becoming the unofficial propaganda arm of the Obama Campaign.

Why Doesn't America Trust Our "Non-Partisan" Media?

Here's why:

Neil King is a political reporter for the Wall Street Journal. He is married to Shailagh Murray who left a reporting job at the Washington Post to take the job of Joe Biden’s communications director. She replaced Jay Carney who moved to the White House and who himself left Time to take the communications director role for Biden.

John Harris of the Politico is married to an abortion rights activist who used to run NARAL Virginia.

The Politico’s Chief Washington Correspondent, Jonathan Allen, left the Politico to work for Debbie Wasserman Schultz, then returned to the Politico.

Andy Barr of the Politico left the Politico to work for the Democratic National Committee and now works for Richard Carmona, the Democrats’ candidate for Senate in Arizona against Jeff Flake.

George Stephanopolous of ABC News used to be a strategist for Bill Clinton and even after becoming Chief Washington Correspondent still engaged in regular conversations with Rahm Emanuel, James Carville, and Paul Begala from the Clinton days. (Ironic, isn’t it, that John Harris wrote that story)

Michael Scherer of Time, where Jay Carney left to go to Joe Biden’s office, got his start in left wing publications, as did Ezra Klein of the Washington Post who famously created the left wing Journolist filled with Washington journalists and pundits to bounce around themes in the left wing echo chamber.

Linda Douglass of ABC News left ABC to serve as Chief Propaganda Officer for the Obama White House in charge of getting Obamacare through.

Andrew Rosenthal of the New York Times made up the story about President George H. W. Bush being surprised and taken aback by a common supermarket check out scanner. The story was made up by Rosenthal who was not even present. Andrew Rosenthal is now the Editor of the New York Times Editorial Page.

The incestuous relationship between the democratic Party and the media has become naked and quite obvious.  The revolving door between prominent Democratic Politicians and "JournoList(ers)" has become far too open to conceal.  Follow the link and read the whole thing.

What The Press Ignored...

...and continues to ignore,

A presidential candidate calls for bankrupting entire industry? Let’s ignore it in plain sight.

• A presidential candidate call for higher energy prices for all Americans, especially the poor? Capital idea, we agree! But on the whole, let’s ignore it in plain sight.

• A presidential candidate has spent years marinating in a radical chic background? Let’s ignore it in plain sight.

• The Middle East is in tatters as a result of an administration asleep at the wheel? Let’s ignore it in plain sight.

• A border agent killed and guns in the hands of Mexican criminals? Let’s ignore it in plain sight.

• An incendiary racially-charged speech involving the man who is now the president of the United States emerges that 99 percent of the general public hasn’t seen? Old news. Let’s ignore it in plain sight.

Via Instapundit.com

Bumps...

Lisa Benson via RCP

Proving Media Bias

Tim Groseclose of Prager University has developed a formula to statistically, how mainstream media outlets are biased.  Here's the video.




Furthermore, he has a test that will give you your "Political Quotient", or where you stand on a scale of 1-100, 0 being far right conservative, most America's stand right in the centre at 50...where do you stand?   I'm fairly moderate, politically, since I'm far more libertarian than conservative but my PQ in this test is far right conservative,

Here’s my PQ: 0.6
Politicians with similar PQs are:
Michele Bachmann (R-Minn, 2007-09) PQ=-4.1
James DeMint (R-S.C. 1999-2009) PQ=5.1
This is because fiscally, I would like to see the size and scope of the federal government rolled back by a 50-70%.  Reduce the federal departments to Defense, Treasurey, Commerce, Justice and Transportation (because of the NTSB, and a couple of other effective agencies).  Terminate all those sucking off Uncle Sam's hind tit, and forcing them out into the work force...to do something productive.  Essentiall, I firmly believe most of the functions that the federal goverment has usurped, more properly, belong to the responsibility of the various states.

This stems from the wording of the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution:

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

That's pretty straight forward wording.  If it's not specifically permitted to the federal government by the Constitution, those powers are reserved to the states and the people...That's my main opposition to National Health Care...if a state (like Massachusetts) desires to build a state health care system, they have every right to do so, and they can require their citizens to participate in that system...much like buying auto insurance if you own a car. 

But, I strenuously object to the federal government usurping that power to itself...as current law stands, under legal precedent, the federal government require everyon to purchase a GM car...that's a fair reading of the US Supreme Court's recent ruling on ObamaCare being legal under the "commerce clause" of the Bill of Rights...

Think about that for a moment...but I digress.  This is about media bias.  You can't read a newspaper, or watch TV news without being bombarded by the bias of JournoList members. POLITICO.com is unashamedly a propaganda arm of the Obama administration...with the NY Times/LA Times and WaPo not far away...

Via The BlogFather...

On The MSM...

The credibility of the Jurasic Media (aka MSM) has eroded a great deal over the last decade.   Until now, most JournoListers, held grimly onto the facade of impartiality.  But starting with the 2004 election in which the internet played  a huge role in disseminating John Kerry's  anti-American activities, alternative sources of news and information began to spread. 

Today, with nearly all JournoListers carrying water for the Obama administration to the extent that only one major television outlet (FoxNews) will dare to carry any coverage that is critical of either the Democratic Party's agenda or that of the Obama administration.  Here's how one woman in Virginia put it:




This view is very wide spread, even in my very heavily Democratic/Jewish neighborhood.  The media has dropped it's curtain, and is now openly biased  against anything remotely conservative.  This week, we have reporters, on an open mic, freely coordinating between themselves, trying to make sure that they get certain questions asked of Mitt Romney,

Newsbusters says the the CBS News reporter is Jan Crawford and she was discussing this with the NPR reporter Ari Shapiro

This has become common over the past 10 years, yet after 3 1/2 years of a Democrat in the White House, NOT one JournoList is asking Obama anything remotely difficult.  Gas prices are soaring, yet nary a word  from the media about it....but in 2008, during an GOP administration, it was all over the news...




It doesn't fit the carefully contrived media narrative...that's why I don't buy newspapers.  If I want to read propaganda, I'll go to DNC/Obama websites, not a damn news outlet.

More Fuel For the "Birther" Fire?

Obama's literary agent published a booklet that clearly states that he was born in Kenya...



This is going to be a huge issue.  After all, I did post these photographs of Kenyan documents.

 Then there's this:

and,

and another,

and of course this,

At the time, these were written off as not being  important.  But, if you take the revelation from his literary agent...then Mr. Obama doesn't meet the constitutional requirements to be president.

I'm not a birther, but I think that the MSM has cast a blind eye on Mr. Obama's background.  They utterly failed to vet him, and are still ignoring many of the glaring issues of his past.  These are certainly questions that must be looked into...