Posts with the tag 'media bias'
The fact that the rumors of Edwards’ infidelity have been around for a long time and the MSM only started covering it when Edwards confessed.
If this has been a GOPer, it would have been ’round the clock coverage until the miscreant was forced to admit it…
UPDATE: Advice Goddess points out that the LA Times, Tribune of The People, Defender of All That is Good and Scourge of The Powerful put an intern on the case.
The L.A. Times And Rielle Hunter: Way Too Little, Way Too Late
Finally, finally, after suffering nationwide media blog ridicule, the L.A. Times squeeezes out a story about how they didn’t tell the story, plus a “timeline,” bylined Kate Linthicum, of l’affaire Edwards and Hunter…
…I hadn’t seen the byline Kate Linthicum before, so I looked her up. Yes, while they’re throwing all the experienced reporters out of the place, we’ve now got the apparently undersupervised intern (Barnard Class of 2008) writing the paper…
Tags: John Edwards, media bias
August 9th, 2008
President Bush was welcomed in South Korea with a large crowd of well-wishers and a pathetic band of kook lefty protestors, as Amy Proctor notes.
So, the headline? Well from al-Reuters it was:
Bush arrives in Seoul, faces large anti-US protest
But then reality broke in and the large anti-US protests failed to materialise, and large pro-US demonstrations happened. So, what did al-Reuters do? Keep lying as best you can, of course:
Bush arrives in Seoul, anti-U.S. protest fizzles
The headline should have read, “Bush arrives in Seoul to warm welcome”, but that would be to defy the MSM’s meme about President Bush - supposedly the whole world hates us, now, and only Obamessiah can retrieve our national honor from the Bush gutter. The facts, once again, appear to be in defiance of what the MSM wants to report - and my bet is that the entire meme of “Bush hated” is overblown. Sure, there are plenty of anti-Americans out there (and, heck, in America, too) and you’ll not lack for people who can be quoted at length being disgusted with America under Bush and gushing hopeful about how wonderful America will be under Obama…but does this mean the world hates us and that we need to rebuild our reputation?
Well, we certainly don’t need to in Afghanistan, Iraq, Djibouti, Georgia, Israel, India, Phillipines, Japan, South Korea, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Eithiopia, Tanzania….heck, even our relations with China are pretty good (all things considered) and getting on good with Japan and China should be next to impossible. Who really hates us? Well, the Islamists do…and so do those global leftists who will hate us even if Obama is President because they don’t really hate President Bush so much as hate the United States, period…and not for what we do, but for what we are (free, Judeo-Christian, that sort of thing).
As I’ve said before, we live in the Age of Lies, and the main thing which has caused President Bush trouble has been his inability to join in with the lies…a few lies here and there stroking the egos of the left and President Bush would be in a lot better shape as far as elite opinion is concerned, but President Bush couldn’t do it…and God bless him for it; for being, that is, one of those rare people in politics who really doesn’t give a darn what people think of him and who is thus able to do the right thing no matter what.
Tags: media bias, President Bush
August 6th, 2008
While the lamestream press and rock-concert goers were salivating and tripping over themselves to touch their messiah’s garments on Obama’s recent European tour, others were not so impressed
And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.
The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.
When he was twelve years old, they found him in the temple in the City of Chicago, arguing the finer points of community organisation with the Prophet Jeremiah and the Elders. And the Elders were astonished at what they heard and said among themselves: “Verily, who is this Child that he opens our hearts and minds to the audacity of hope?”
In the great Battles of Caucus and Primary he smote the conniving Hillary, wife of the deposed King Bill the Priapic and their barbarian hordes of Working Class Whites.
And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth - for the first time - to bring the light unto all the world.
He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media. He ventured first to the land of the Hindu Kush, where the Taleban had harboured the viper of al-Qaeda in their bosom, raining terror on all the world.
And the Child spake and the tribes of Nato immediately loosed the Caveats that had previously bound them. And in the great battle that ensued the forces of the light were triumphant. For as long as the Child stood with his arms raised aloft, the enemy suffered great blows and the threat of terror was no more.
Read, as they say, the whole thing.
Tags: media bias, Obama
July 26th, 2008
The MSM sycophants follow Obama overseas, proving they are the most miserable of lap dogs:
Senator John McCain’s trip to Iraq last spring was a low-key affair: With his ordinary retinue of reporters following him abroad, the NBC News anchor Brian Williams reported on his arrival in Baghdad from New York, with just two sentences tacked onto the “in other political news” portion of his newscast.
But when Obama heads for Iraq and other locations overseas this summer, Williams is planning to catch up with him in person, as are the other two evening news anchors, Charles Gibson of ABC and Katie Couric of CBS, who, like Williams, are far along in discussions to interview Obama on successive nights.
And while the anchors are jockeying for interviews with Obama at stops along his route, the regulars on the Obama campaign plane will have new seat mates: star political reporters from the major newspapers and magazines who are flocking to catch Obama’s first overseas trip since becoming the presumptive nominee of his party.
The extraordinary coverage of Obama’s trip reflects how the candidate remains an object of (slavish deovotion) in the news media…(report edited for clarity)
This may backfire - its clear that we’re going to get an “all Obama, all the time” fest in the MSM while he globtrots to places he doesn’t know about to look into issues he’s ignorant of…and that opens up the prospect of both people noticing that Obama was resoundingly wrong about Iraq and, additionally, people getting turned off by fawning media coverage. On the other hand, these MSM heavyweights migth be going so that they can carefully edit Obama on-scene to prevent the gaffe machine from really blowing it overseas…
Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, media bias
July 17th, 2008
Not that our readers are the ones to trust Newsweek, but really, don’t worry about that new Newsweek poll that claim Obama has a 15-point lead over McCain… which Newsweek reports under the headline “Barack’s Bounce.”
The only “bounce” in that poll is the number of Democrats sampled.
…and then there’s this point.
Tags: Barack Obama, media bias, Newsweek, Polls
June 20th, 2008
In this case, on the war:
You will hear from my opponent’s campaign in every speech, every interview, every press release that I’m running for President Bush’s third term. You will hear every policy of the President described as the Bush-McCain policy. Why does Senator Obama believe it’s so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he knows it’s very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false. So he tries to drum it into your minds by constantly repeating it rather than debate honestly the very different directions he and I would take the country. But the American people didn’t get to know me yesterday, as they are just getting to know Senator Obama. They know I have a long record of bipartisan problem solving. They’ve seen me put our country before any President — before any party — before any special interest — before my own interest. They might think me an imperfect servant of our country, which I surely am. But I am her servant first, last and always.
I have worked with the President to keep our nation safe. But he and I have not seen eye to eye on many issues. We’ve disagreed over the conduct of the war in Iraq and the treatment of detainees; over out of control government spending and budget gimmicks; over energy policy and climate change; over defense spending that favored defense contractors over the public good.
I disagreed strongly with the Bush administration’s mismanagement of the war in Iraq. I called for the change in strategy that is now, at last, succeeding where the previous strategy had failed miserably. I was criticized for doing so by Republicans. I was criticized by Democrats. I was criticized by the press. But I don’t answer to them. I answer to you. And I would be ashamed to admit I knew what had to be done in Iraq to spare us from a defeat that would endanger us for years, but I kept quiet because it was too politically hard for me to do. No ambition is more important to me than the security of the country I have defended all my adult life.
Senator Obama opposed the new strategy, and, after promising not to, voted to deny funds to the soldiers who have done a brilliant and brave job of carrying it out. Yet in the last year we have seen the success of that plan as violence has fallen to a four year low; Sunni insurgents have joined us in the fight against al Qaeda; the Iraqi Army has taken the lead in places once lost to Sunni and Shia extremists; and the Iraqi Government has begun to make progress toward political reconciliation.
None of this progress would have happened had we not changed course over a year ago. And all of this progress would be lost if Senator Obama had his way and began to withdraw our forces from Iraq without concern for conditions on the ground and the advice of commanders in the field. Americans ought to be concerned about the judgment of a presidential candidate who says he’s ready to talk, in person and without conditions, with tyrants from Havana to Pyongyang, but hasn’t traveled to Iraq to meet with General Petraeus, and see for himself the progress he threatens to reverse.
I know Americans are tired of this war. I don’t oppose a reckless withdrawal from Iraq because I’m indifferent to the suffering war inflicts on too many American families. I hate war. And I know very personally how terrible its costs are. But I know, too, that the course Senator Obama advocates could draw us into a wider war with even greater sacrifices; put peace further out of reach, and Americans back in harm’s way.
The argument made here by Senator McCain is unanswerable - so, expect the Democrats to not answer it and seek, instead, to change the subject as swiftly as possible. But McCain - and we who support him - must not let the subject be changed. This is the vital issue of our times, and it is also the prime reason to oppose Obama: he’s not fit to be President because he has no understanding of war, military policy, foreign policy or America’s place in the world. Obama’s views seem straight out of sophomore’s notebook from a government class…the sort of pie-in-the-sky talk we get from ivory-tower academics who don’t allow reality to interfere with grand theory.
The world is a hard place, at times, and Obama is a babe in the woods - it might be that he’d be a quick study and swiftly learn to discard what he thinks he knows, but we can’t gamble America - and the lives of Americans - on a hope that Obama will change fast enough from fool to sage. McCain, on the other hand, knows from hard experience (some of it excruciatingly personal) just how rough the world can be, and how cruel our enemies are - especially when they think they have us down. In the choice this November, nothing is more stark than this difference between Obama and McCain.
As McCain points out, Obama and his Democrats will use the Big Lie to try and win - not by out arguing McCain, but by making people feel worse about McCain than they do about Obama and his Democrats. This is the tried and true Democratic tactic - they’ve used it with success in the past, and they hope to do so in 2008. Winning is the only thing Democrats care about - and Obama is a blindingly ambitious man who has proven himself capable of getting right down into the political swamp in order to win. Counter-acting this Big Lie campaign will be difficult - especially as the MSM will largely serve as Obama’s megaphone for the next 6 months, but counter it we must. America is too valuable to the whole world - not just to Americans - for it to be placed at risk to gratify the ambition and greed of leftwingers slavering at the prospect of having the levers of power in their hands.
Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, liberal lies, media bias
June 4th, 2008
From the New York Times corrections page:
An article on May 4 about black liberation theology and the debate surrounding the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr, Senator Barack Obama’s former minister, erroneously confirmed a statement by Mr. Wright that the United States has used biological weapons against other countries. There is no evidence that the United States ever did so.
First off - for the NY Times to even think that the US would have done such a thing reveals a strong bias against the United States. Secondly - for the NY Times to merely state there is no evidence, with the implication that there might be a credible accusation we did, reveals a vile hatred of all things American. In other words, just another day in the liberal media…
HAT TIP: NRO’s The Corner
Tags: Jeremiah Wright, liberal lies, media bias
June 2nd, 2008
The AP has a story out that basically portrays oil execs as cowering under the thundering bloviations coming from the Senate yesterday:
“Where is the corporate conscience?” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asked the top executives of the five largest U.S. oil companies.
It’s all about economics, came the reply. Supply and demand. The company leaders tried to shift attention from motorists’ anger over $4-a-gallon gasoline to a debate over new areas for drilling.
But senators at the Judiciary Committee hearing weren’t having any of that. They wanted to press the executives about public anguish over paying $60 or more to fill up a car’s gas tank.
“People we represent are hurting, the companies you represent are profiting,” Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told the executives. He said there’s a “disconnect” between legitimate supply issues and the oil and gasoline prices motorists are seeing.
The executives, sitting shoulder to shoulder in the hearing room, said they understood people were hurting, but they tried to blunt the emotion with economic analysis.
Profits have been huge “in absolute terms,” conceded J. Stephen Simon, executive vice president of Exxon Mobil Corp., but they “must be viewed in the context of the massive scale of our industry.” And high earnings “in the current up cycle” are needed for investments in the long term, including when profits will be down.
“‘Current up cycle,’ that’s a nice term when people can’t afford to go to work” because gasoline is costing so much, replied Leahy with sarcasm.
“The fundamental laws of supply and demand are at work,” said John Hofmeister, chairman of Shell Oil Co., acknowledging it is something the oil industry has been saying for some time and that the explanation may sound “repetitive and uninteresting.”
Hofmeister was joined by executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., BP America Inc. and ConocoPhilips Co. Together the five companies earned $36 billion during the first three months of this year.
As the executives sought to explain their profits and why prices are so high, the global oil markets were moving into new, uncharted highs, touching $133 a barrel for the first time. The national average price of a gallon of gasoline hit $3.80, with $4 showing up in more places. Crude prices increased even more in late electronic trading Wednesday hitting $134 for the first time.
What writer Josef Hebert conveniently failed to add to the reporting was this reply by John Hofmeister, CEO of Shell Oil:
HOFMEISTER: In the United States, access to our own oil and gas resources has been limited for the last 30 years, prohibiting companies such as Shell from exploring and developing resources for the benefit of the American people. It is not a free market. According to the Department of the Interior, 62% of all on-shore federal lands are off limits to oil and gas developments, with restrictions applying to 92% of all federal lands. The Argonne National Laboratory did a report in 2004 that identified 40 specific federal policy areas that halt, limit, delay, or restrict natural gas projects. The problem of access can be solved in this country by the same government that has prohibited it. Congress could have chose to lift some or all of the current restrictions on exploration and production of oil and gas. Congress could provide national policy to reverse the persistent decline of domestically secure natural resource development.
That, my dear readers, is the problem in a nutshell. Big Government is in the midst of bloviating, beating their chests and pointing their bony fingers of indignation at “Big Oil,” when all the while the cause of and answer to the problem is waiting to be answered the next time they look in the mirror. And “Big Media” who is in cahoots with “Big Government” lacks the cajones to report that fact.
Surprise? I think not.
Tags: energy policy, media bias
May 22nd, 2008
In a laudable effort to keep the debate to a high tone, Senator McCain and this staff have eschewed any attempts at negative campaigning against his presumptive opponent, Barack Obama. In fact, McCain has gone out of his way to condemn efforts by some in the GOP/conservative coalition to attack Obama. In return for this high minded good citizenship, McCain has received the customary treatment from the Democratic party and the larger political left - he’s been the brunt of a series of attack ads and slanderous whispering campaigns. It seems that McCain and Co might finally have had enough of this - as McCain advisor Mark Salter responds to a thinly disguised hit piece in Newsweek:
A useful way to read the piece would be to try to imagine you were a Republican reading it. The characterization of Republican presidential campaigns as nothing more than attack machines that use 527s and other means to smear opponents strikes us as pretty offensive. Is that how Ronald Reagan won two terms? Do they really think other Republican presidential candidates were elected because they ran dirtier campaigns than their opponents? Or could it be that they were better candidates or ran better campaigns or maybe more voters agreed with their position on important issues?
From the beginning of their article, Evan Thomas and Richard Wolffe offered a biased implication that Republicans have won elections and will try to win this one simply by tearing down through disreputable means their opponents. You can see why many Republicans and voters and our campaign might take issue with that.
Suggesting that that we can expect a whispering campaign from the McCain campaign or the Republican Party about Senator Obama’s race and the false charge that he is a Muslim is scurrilous. Has John McCain ever campaigned that way? On the contrary, he has on numerous occasions denounced tactics offensive tactics from campaigns, 527s and others, both Democratic and Republican. By the way, which party had more 527 and other independent expenditure ads made on its behalf in 2004? It wasn’t us.
By accepting the Obama campaign construct as if it were objective, Evan and Richard framed this race exactly as Senator Obama wants it to be framed – every issue that raises doubts about his policy views and judgment is part of a smear campaign intended to distract voters from the real issues at stake in the election, and, thus, illegitimate…
…Democratic Party allied third parties have announced negative ad campaigns, which distort McCain’s statements and positions, in the hundreds of millions of dollars. They are already running them. Senator Obama himself and Democrats generally have taken out of context and distorted Senator McCain’s statements on a post war military presence in Iraq and his views on the economy. Our townhalls are now routinely salted with Obama supporters who are there to raise embarrassing questions for the Senator (we don’t screen people at our events). An Obama supporter asked him in Iowa if he called his wife a very vulgar name.
When the North Carolina party prepared to run an ad raising the Reverend Wright issue, Senator McCain again denounced it in the strongest possible terms, and was sharply criticized by conservative radio and pundits for doing so. And when the North Carolina party refused to withdraw it, the Obama campaign, Howard Dean and others charged that he was either being disingenuous or ineffective. I understand why they might employ that tactic, but isn’t it the job of reporters to ponder its implications to see if it is fair?
Senator McCain is not going to referee ads run by groups outside our control. The other side has no intention of reciprocating and has shown every inclination to tolerate and even encourage such attacks against us. Of course, he will denounce any use of race or calumnies against his opponent by anyone. But he won’t play traffic cop anymore…
…The McCain campaign will keep to the high standards of political debate Senator McCain demands of us. The Senator will not tolerate unfair attacks by anyone on our campaign. We won’t, however, abide by rules imposed on us by our opponents, and which pertain only to our campaign and not theirs, even if they manage to get reporters to call the deal fair.
That is showing a bit of the brass McCain is going to need against both his political and his MSM opponents going into the fall campaign. Between Obama, the DNC, the left and the MSM, we can expect one of the most savagely dishonest smear campaigns ever launched in American politics - and John McCain is the bull’s eye. I had been worrying that McCain - a true gentleman - simply wasn’t willing to mix it up with the cretinous behaviour all too common on the left, but now it appears that McCain - old fighter pilot that he is - has some teeth and is willing to bare them at need.
We will have to fight and fight and fight to win this year, fellow GOPers - the week-kneed sisters in the GOP and the “I don’ wanna play” conservatives had just better get out of the way, real conservative Republicans are going to have to take charge and get the job done. America is what is important, and we’re battling for her - and for those sons and daughters of America who have and are giving their all on the front lines of liberty. No Obamaesque slickness, no MSM bias, no billionaire leftists will deter those who fight for what is right - and in John McCain, we seem to have found a man willing to lead us into the battle.
Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, liberal lies, media bias
May 14th, 2008
Older Posts
