What Media Bias? Part 192

Though this might be “What Attacks on Mormonism?, Part 1”, depending on how you look at it – from Warner Todd Huston over at Breitbart:

As the race for the White House heats up, Reuters suddenly realized that the massive Mormon Church has a lot of money in its bank accounts. The news service went on to needle the Church, saying if it were a business “wealthy adherents like Mitt Romney would count as its dominant revenue stream.”

Reuters took the if-it-were-a-business theme even farther in its opening paragraphs.

“It would also likely attract corporate gadflies protesting a lack of transparency. They would call for less spending on real estate and more on charitable causes to improve membership growth — the Mormons’ return on investment.”

Of course, a religion is not a “business” proposition. A religion does not operate like a company does, it has far different goals. But assessing a religion wasn’t Reuters’ goal here. Making Mormons out to be “rich” elitists that act suspiciously and are pushing a snobbish presidential candidate on the nation was Reuters’ goal…

This from the same MSM which essentially went all “Reverend Wright, who?” in 2008.  I don’t recall any stories about how Wright’s organization was financed – and that leaves aside anything more than a glance at the fact that Obama attended a racist, anti-American church for 20 years.

One might want to think that there would be only one trip in to the gutter for our Democrats and their lapdog MSM in 2012 – forget it; they’ll troll in every gutter there is.  They will attack Romney because he’s rich.  They’ll attack him because he’s white.  They’ll attack him because he’s Mormon.  They’ll attack him as a war monger and they’ll attack him because he had college and missionary deferments during the Vietnam War.  They will lie.  They will launch whispering campaigns claiming all sorts of horrors about Romney’s past.  They will attack his wife.  They will attack his children.  They will attack his friends.  They will try to intimidate people in the right blogosphere who are favorable to Romney.  This will be the dirtiest political campaign in human history and the MSM will be right there in the trenches with the DNC, doing what they can to help Obama.

So, just get ready for it – it will get nauseating but the payoff will be the crestfallen looks on MSM faces on November 6th.



Newt Did NOT Agree With Mitt on Health Care

As far as misleading headlines go in this primary campaign season, this one from ABC News certainly ranks up there as one the most egregious:

Gingrich ’06 Memo: “Agree Entirely With Gov. Romney” on Health Care

Newsbusters’ Noel Sheppard links to the actual memo, which reveals, quite clearly, that Newt did not “agree entirely” with Mitt on health care, and certainly did not “love” the Massachusetts health care plan, as was suggested in the story.

It’s unfortunate that the Drudge Report linked to the ABC News story, as if the headline and the claim were legitimate. The only question I have is this, who in the GOP field is ABC News trying to help? Ron Paul?

Shocking News: The MSM Didn’t Do its Job!

Just a bit flabbergasted by this from Rex Murphy at the National Post:

As the bad economic news continues to emanate from the United States — with a double-dip recession now all but certain — a reckoning is overdue. American journalism will have to look back at the period starting with Barrack Obama’s rise, his assumption of the presidency and his conduct in it to the present, and ask itself how it came to cast aside so many of its vital functions. In the main, the establishment American media abandoned its critical faculties during the Obama campaign — and it hasn’t reclaimed them since…

…The media trashed Hillary. They burned Republicans. They ransacked Sarah Palin and her family. But Obama, the cool, the detached, the oracular Obama — he strolled to the presidency…

This is, I guess, all a bit of a surprise for Murphy – but, for me, the surprise is that in 2011 anyone could still be shocked by the MSM liberal bias.  I mean, come on:  let’s review:

1.  The MSM covered up relentlessly for the Clinton’s when Bill was in office.  No real questions about the massive, illegal fundraising (it is actually illegal for Al Gore to have collected a bag of foreign cash from a Buddhist monastery).  No real attempt to investigate just why the Congressional GOP decided to impeach (honestly, it really is illegal for a President to lie under oath and suborn perjury…even if it is “just about sex”).

2.  Hillary was allowed to coast to the Senate in New York without the MSM ever asking just why a first lady of no discernible gifts or experience should be allowed to carpetbag her way in to the Senate.

3.  Al Gore was puffed up like no tomorrow in spite  of his part in illegal fund raising and his definite lack of intellectual heft, executive experience or leadership ability.

4.  John Kerry got a complete pass on how badly he lied about American soldiers in Vietnam and was allowed to present himself in the MSM as a war hero, rather than being correct portrayed as a back-stabber who threw his war comrades under the bus in order to ride anti-war, liberal sentiment in to high office.

5.  And then comes Barry – the fifth in the series.  And someone is surprised that the MSM carried his water?  Covered up for him?  Slandered his opponents?  This isn’t about a love affair with Obama; it is the MSM determination that whomever opposes a Republican will get good press.  Sure, there was probably an added zest to MSM lies and cover-ups as they were thrilled that they got to do it for a black man (convinced, as they are, that we’re all racists, this was just another way for them to stick it to us, in their minds)…but had Hillary got the nomination, they would have been just as sycophantic to her, just as slanderous against McCain (and Palin) and just as determined to re-elect her as they are, today, to re-elect Obama (stories of the MSM turning on Obama are false…one or two MSMers with a shred of honor might, but most of them will never stray from the party line).

This is what the MSM does – and I was delighted the other day to hear Rush refer to an AP reporter as the “stenographer” of the report…that is pretty much it:  whatever comes out of the DNC and the Obama campaign will be slavishly retailed to the American people.  A few oddities will creep in – the MSM does like to be able to refer to those few instances where they spoke the truth (usually on page 3 or later and always outweighed many times by the lies and cover-ups)…but the basic thrust of MSM reporting will be the burnish Obama and his Democrats and slander the Republicans.  And if the GOP wins next year, the MSM won’t learn their lesson, at all…they’ll just keep slandering the Republicans and wait for the next liberal messiah (which will be fun for us, because it will probably be governor Cuomo of New York).

It doesn’t matter how stupid a Democrat is:  the MSM will say they’re smart.  It doesn’t matter how corrupt a Democrat is:  the MSM will always say that the GOP is more corrupt.  It doesn’t matter how incompetent a Democrat is:  the MSM will just say he has an unusual leadership style.  Short of murdering someone on live television, there is nothing a Democrat can do to break MSM support…they will always find some justification for him; some excuse for failure; some slander to hit back at the GOP with.  In a real sense it has gone beyond bias and turned in to slavish devotion…that the MSMers feel any dissent from the Democrats is treason to all that is good and beautiful in the world.

And, so, don’t anyone act surprised…but, also, don’t anyone act concerned.  The people have tuned out the MSM – automatically discounting any bit of nonsense they put up and learning to read between the lines, just as citizens of totalitarian nations are required to do.  By filling in the gaps with what is not reported, but is obvious, the truth is made clear…and made doubly so by the increasing number of people relying on the New Media for the full story.