Filed under: Humor, News, Politics | Tags: BDS, Culture War, Democrat Lies/Dirty Tricks, Harry Reid, Iraq, Mainstream Media, Nancy Pelosi, New Media
An aphorism is a saying, a maxim, an adage; something so old and well-worn that it has become a cliché. Such is “caught between a rock and a hard place” which is where we find the Democrats in Congress. The angry left has made it clear that they want the military out of Iraq right now! They want Bush and Cheney impeached right now! No Blood for oil!
The American people have made it clear that they don’t care to have the American military lose a war. They want the military to come home when the job is done. In fact, the American military ranks pretty high with the American people, higher than the media, academe, or Congress. Oops!
You have, perhaps, noticed Harry Reid announcing that the War on Terror is lost, just as the ‘surge’ is shown to be working. Nancy Pelosi has announced that al Qaeda is only in Afghanistan just as Osama bin Laden admits that the “darkness has become pitch-black”, and the situation for al Qaeda in Iraq has become dire. Well, it’s hard to be right all the time. But if you can’t get it right occasionally, the rock and the hard place begin to squeeze uncomfortably. For more on this story, go here.
This is, however, exactly what is meant by being caught between a rock and a hard place.
And, naturally, it all comes from the media that keeps on about the animosity and disarray to be found in the Republican Party. I seem to remember another aphorism–something about pots and kettles. There’s a reason why your grandmother taught you all those old sayings. They form the guardrails of life.
Filed under: Blogging, Media Bias, News, Politics | Tags: Debunking Liberal Lies, Mainstream Media, Media Bias, New Media
I was reading the president’s speech to the VFW today, when I was reminded of an alarming display of the dangerous state the “mainstream” news media is in…
In 2005, CSPAN aired a panel on journalism and blogging hosted by the National Press Club entitled, “What is a Journalist?”
The panel consisted of several young mainstream journalists and several bloggers—gossip columnist, Wonkette, and blogger, Jeff Gannon, are the only two I remember by name. In the exchange, Wonkette and the rest of the panel were attacking Gannon regarding the questions he asked during White House press conferences.
Gannon’s simple assertion was that the president’s policies, positions and his rationale for supporting them are news and should be heard, and the media weren’t reporting them. The rest of the panel was nearly apoplectic. The basic gist of Wonkette’s argument was that the president is pushing his agenda and therefore must be “filtered.” The rest of the panel agreed whole-heartedly with her.
Of course Gannon was right and the panel was decidedly, unanimously wrong. The president is the most powerful man in the world, not to mention the elected leader of the nation—it’s news if he sneezes—let alone if he lays out his policies and reasons for them. Precisely why major newspapers used to, not long ago, publish every major speech by the President of the United States in their entirety.
It is rare that you get such unwitting candor from the “press”. But the fact they unwittingly divulged is that they do indeed see their job as “filtering” the news—cherry picking what they want you to see, and what they don’t want you to see. If balance is their concern, surely the response from his political opponents is newsworthy as well, but that’s not what they were advocating. They were advocating deciding for the consumer which of the presidents statements they felt were true and which they felt were not, and refusing to publish those they did not approve of.
Now, how do you think that works out in a press that study after study confirms is 85-90% Liberal/Democrat? A press that polls show is more interested in “making a difference,” than in reporting the facts?
“We report, you decide,” not, “we decide, then report” is the proper function of the media. “Filtering” is propaganda—”who, what, when, where and why” is journalism.
“Filtering” is what China, Cuba, and Venezuela do. “Filtering” is what Stalin did—and now, self-admittedly, the liberal mainstream news media.
Filed under: Domestic Policy, Economy, Education, Environment, Foreign Policy, Iraq, Media Bias, News, Politics, Pop Culture | Tags: Mainstream Media, New Media
“More than half of Americans say US news organizations are politically biased, inaccurate, and don’t care about the people they report on, a poll published Thursday showed” ~Breitbart
Well, duh! Tell us something we don’t know. We’ve been telling you this for decades. Nor should it be a surprise to anyone. This isn’t just a matter of public opinion either—there is a great deal of fact to substantiate the claims. Just a cursory look at who these people are should immediately dispense with any notion of objectivity:
Dan Rather, erstwhile CBS anchorman, has a history so replete with deep and blatant partisanship, it’s almost impossible to limit myself. Suffice it to say, he will forever be known for lying about President Bush’s military service and using forged documents to back-up his partisan attack. What is not as well known is that Rather has close, personal ties not only to former Governor Ben Barnes, the partisan Democrat that Rather interviewed in his discredited story—but also to the highly partisan Democrat district attorney, Ronnie Earle, the hack responsible for bringing phony charges against Tom Delay.¹
George Stephanopoloulos was Bill Clinton’s Senior Political Adviser, and later, his White House Communications Director.² Now we are expected to swallow that he is completely objective and fair in his role as Chief Washington Correspondent for ABC News and host of ABC’s primary political news show, This Week with George Stephanopoulos. All one has to do is watch his show for a few minutes to dispel that myth.
Chris Matthews was a top aide to former Democrat Speaker of the House, Tip O’Neill, and served as one of Jimmy Carter’s top speech writers for four years. Matthews also worked for Democrat Senators Frank Moss and Edmund Muskie before he became host of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews and NBC’s The Chris Matthews Show. Media watchdog group, Media Matters, named Matthews “Misinformer of the Year” for 2005.³
Tim Russert, Washington Bureau Chief for NBC News and host of NBC’s top rated Meet the Press, also got his start as a Democrat political operative. Russert also hosts Tim Russert, a weekly interview show on CNBC and makes frequent appearances on the Today show, Hardball with Chris Matthews, and Dateline. Before his successful media career, Russert worked Legal Counsel for hyper-partisan Governor Mario Cuomo and was Chief of Staff to Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.4
Jeff Greenfield was a speech-writer for Democrat Senator Robert Kennedy before his career in journalism where he worked as a political and media commentator for CBS News, Political and Media Analyst for ABC News, and Senior Political Correspondent for CNN where he has covered elections and campaigns and even moderated debates.5 Based on this year’s primary campaign debates, CNN’s idea of fairness is to ask Democrats to bash Republicans and, in order to present balance, ask Republicans to bash Republicans as well.
Bill Moyers, poisonously partisan PBS host, served first in the Kennedy administration, and later became Special Assistant to Lyndon Johnson, where he played a key role in organizing and pushing Johnson’s “Great Society” legislative agenda—the second largest expansion of the federal government in American history. He was the chief architect of Johnson’s re-election campaign before being promoted to Johnson’s informal Chief of Staff when the previous Chief resigned amidst a sex scandal involving a YMCA men’s bathroom. Moyers now decries the “right-wing” media bias while simultaneously badmouthing republicans and having been recently urged to run for president by the venomous Molly Ivins and the socialist/communist, the Nation magazine.6
Mark Halperin, erstwhile ABC News Political Director, and Political Correspondent for both ABC News and Time Magazine is perhaps most famous for a leaked memo he wrote directing the journalists and producers at ABC News to favor John Kerry in their coverage of the 2004 presidential election.7 In a 2006 book tour, Halperin admitted the overwhelming liberal bias of the media on many talk radio interviews. But when asked by a caller to the Michael Medved show if the way to correct the liberal bias would perhaps be to hire an equal amount of conservative journalists, Halperin quickly assured him, “No, no, that’s not the solution”.
Tom Johnson, former president of CNN, was Special Assistant to President Johnson; CBS’ Lesley Stahl worked for Democrat Mayor of NY, John Lindsay; CBS News opinion columnist Dotty Lynch was the Democratic National Committee’s Polling Director; David Burke, Ted Kennedy’s Chief of Staff for six years, in 1988 became president of CBS for two years and later returned to the visciously partisan Kennedy as a Strategy Adviser; Former NPR President Delano Lewis was Chief Campaign Fund-raiser for Washington Mayor, and convicted felon, Marion Barry. Katie Couric, Walter Cronkite, and others have admitted their liberal bias. (As if it weren’t obvious.) And I could go on and on…
Numerous Studies Prove Liberal Media Bias
Numerous studies and surveys have further documented not just that the overwhelming majority of journalists vote Democrat:
“The Media Elite,” a book written in 1986 by Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman and Linda Lichter, surveyed 240 journalists at ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report. It found that in the presidential elections of 1964, 1968, 1972 and 1976, on average, 86% of responding journalists in America’s top media voted Democratic.
In 2001, Rothman and Amy Black updated the “Media Elite” survey of national journalists and established that 76% voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988 and 91% for Bill Clinton in 1992. A Freedom Forum Poll reinforced the “Media Elite” survey when it documented that 89% — nine out of 10 — Washington reporters and bureau chiefs voted for Clinton in 1992 and 7% voted for George Bush.”8
and that they are decidedly out of the American mainstream:
A 2003 survey by the Pew Research Center…showed that 34% of national journalists admitted to being liberal and only 7% admitted to being conservative. Also, by a ratio of 7-to-1, journalists felt they weren’t critical enough of President Bush. By contrast, the poll showed that the public, by a 3-to-2 ratio, thought the press was too critical. Curiously, in 1995 when Clinton was president, Pew found that journalists felt they were too critical of the Democrat in the White House and didn’t focus enough on his accomplishments.
The minuscule 7% of admitted conservatives correlates with a 1996 poll by the independent Freedom Forum. It found that only 7% of Washington correspondents voted for the first President Bush in 1992 and that 89% voted for Clinton — a 12-to-1 ratio of Democratic voters over Republican.9
And that they flatly deny their bias, despite all the evidence to the contrary:
Most liberals deny the media are loaded with liberals or that liberal bias enters into their selection and presentation of national news. But 20 years of surveys and a more aware public clearly prove otherwise. As a result, some media liberals now try to hide in a safer category, claiming to be “moderates.” The data, however, show that 85% to 90% consistently align with the Democratic Party’s agenda, policies and positions.10
But most importantly, that despite all their claims to the contrary, the stories they choose and the content therein is overwhelmingly biased to the left:
According to Public Opinion magazine, Reagan got 7,230 seconds of bad press and 730 seconds of good, while Mondale enjoyed 1,330 seconds of good press and 1,050 seconds of bad. Reagan’s vice president, George Bush Sr., got a goose egg — zero seconds of good press vs. 1,500 seconds of bad.11
Maura Clancy and Michael Robinson recorded and rated positive and negative spin comments before the 1984 election (10-to-1 against Ronald Reagan).
A 1983 survey by the Institute For Applied Economics showed nearly 95% of economic statistics were positive, yet 86% were reported negatively…
…And the brilliant 2003 study “A Measure of Media Bias” by Tim Groseclose and Jeff Milyo scientifically documented that the national media slants your news left, with CBS and the New York Times leading the parade.12
Fox News scientifically proven most fair and balanced!
By all means, use this study by a team of 23 UCLA political scientists to drive your liberal friends and family absolutely apoplectic! They used a standard measure of congressional political ideology and applied it to the mainstream media. The results are thought to be the first successful objective measure of media bias.
The study confirms everything that conservatives have been saying for ages, and turns liberals accusations on their heads. For example, yes, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages are conservative, but their news pages lean even further left than the NYT (which the study finds overwhelmingly liberal.) And the results that will drive liberals the most hysterical are that Fox News’ Special Report with Brit Hume is more centrist than any of the three major networks news, and that not only is The Drudge Report not conservative, but the content of his site has a decidedly liberal slant! (They attribute this not to Drudge’s personal ideology, but the general liberal bias of the media he links to.)
Our results show a strong liberal bias. All of the news outlets except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times received a score to the left of the average member of Congress. Consistent with many conservative critics, CBS Evening News and the New York Times received a score far left of center. Outlets such as the Washington Post, USA Today, NPR’s Morning Edition, NBC’s Nightly News and ABC’s World News Tonight were moderately left. …Fox News’ Special Report, while right of center, was closer to the center than any of the three major networks’ evening news broadcasts. 14
If the liberals at the broadcast networks were smart, or if they were truly conservative as liberals claim, one of them would hire Brit Hume away from FOX so they could dominate the network news ratings the way he has helped FOX dominate the cable news networks. Alas, they are neither smart nor conservative.
And Americans know it!
The new Pew poll also shows that people who use the internet for their main source of news, who tend to be better educated according to Pew, are even more critical of the mainstream news.
More than two-thirds of the Internet users said they felt that news organizations don’t care about the people they report on; 59 percent said their reporting was inaccurate; and 64 percent they were politically biased. 15
And 53 percent of internet users resented news organizations for, “failing to stand up for America.” I couldn’t agree more.
So the only question that remains is will the liberal media change their wicked partisan ways now that the jig is up? I doubt it. They are hemmoraging viewers and readers and have been for some time. They’re having to fire staff left and right to stay in business, and if that hasn’t caused them to try being more balanced, I doubt any poll will. No, the entire reason they are “journalists” is to indoctrinate not inform. They have power and they intend to use it. And, as they have shown, they would rather destroy their respective institutions than give that power up!