Tag Archives: Mainstream Media

The Mainstream Media Displays Their Bigotry in Arizona

Posted on by
1

This weekend’s shooting in Arizona was a tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

From what is know about the shooter, Jared Loughner, it is safe to conclude that he is mentally unstable.

Seemingly minutes after the shooting was first reported, the media  jumped on the ‘Tea Party militia’ explanation. It was automatically assumed that Loughner was a registered Republican, and probably a Plain supporter. In reality, a case can be made that Loughner is a Leftist. Loughner listed the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books, was described as “left-wing” in 2007, and was a critic of President Bush.

Never letting the facts get in the way of a story, The New York Times, led by Paul Krugman, laid blame for the shooting at the feet of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and other conservatives. Members of Congress, and their amen corner in the media, have determined that Sarah Palin is to blame for the shooting. Arizona Sheriff, and well documented political hack, Clarence Dupnik, targeted rhetoric from talk radio and cable news:

The Left has developed a cottage industry decrying the evils of ‘profiling.’ Every security measure implemented at, say, the airport, is applied equally to all travelers, from young Muslim men, to old Norwegian grandmothers, all because we are so averse to profiling.

The Left has demonstrated their aversion to profiling in the past. When Nidal Malik Hasan shot up Ft. Hood, yelling “Allah Akbar!” we were told to wait for the facts and not jump to any conclusions.

However, when there is a chance that the suspect may be a conservative, it is safe to run wall to wall coverage of pure speculation, and assert conclusions based on that speculation as fact.

When a terrorist tried to bomb Time Square last year Mayor Michael Bloomberg immediately asserted that the terrorist was a “homegrown maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something.” Turns out the Time Square bomber was… a Muslim terrorist.

But this weekend in Arizona a Democratic Congresswoman was shot and the media immediately assumed the shooter was a Tea Party member, inspired by Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. How did the media reach such a conclusion before the facts came in? They profiled.

The Left sees every conservative as a Timothy McVeigh waiting to happen. Isn’t that the very type of profiling the Left professes to abhor? If the shooting in Arizona had been politically motivated, would it not seem pertinent to the case that the judge who was shot and killed was a Bush appointee? And lets not forget that if anything, Jared Loughner is a man of the Left, not the Right.

The Left has created yet another double standard. When it comes to terrorists flying planes into buildings, it is ‘wrong’ to profile Muslims. We are almost asked to believe that the fact that all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Muslim was incidental. However, when a lone nut, who happens to be white, opens fire on crowd, it must be the Tea Party. What is on display is the Left and the media’s bigotry, their bigotry against all those ideologically at odds with them.

By the way, when President Obama said “if they [Republicans] bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” that was okay, right? Only ‘right-wing extremists’ can incite violence, right?

Time to Counteract “One-Sided” View of North Korea

Posted on by
2

Two men, an American and a Russian were arguing. One said, in my country I can go to the White House walk to the president’s office and pound the desk and say “Mr. President! I don’t like how you’re running things in this country!”
The Russian said “I can do that too!”
“Really?”
“Yes! I can go to the Kremlin, walk into the General Secretary’s office and pound the desk and say, Mr. Secretary, I don’t like how Reagan is running his country!”

-Ronald Reagan

In 1921 Lincoln Steffens, a revered lion of the liberal media establishment, visited the Soviet Union. Following his visit, Steffens commented “I have seen the future, and it works.” Steffens was taken on a Potmekin Village tour, and he saw the future in totalitarian communism.

The Pyongyang Project, an ‘educational program,’ launched by American university students, which seeks to “counteract the ‘one-sided’ coverage of North Korea in the international media,” is a worthy heir to Steffens’ unprecedented level of naiveté.

Organizers of the venture claim that “the US and North Korea don’t have established relations, and talks are indirect at best. And what we believe is that there is a need for a grassroots level of engagement that we haven’t seen yet between citizens.”Furthermore, people brought to North Korea will “experience the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for themselves and try to see a different side of a country that’s a lot more dynamic than they may have anticipated.”

On tours of the worker’s paradise, visitors had the opportunity to visit the beautiful beaches of Wonsan. There, Pyongyang Project participants interacted with denizens of North Korea who just happened to be at the beach at the same time. One fellow traveler noted that although the people seemed malnourished, they were happy.

Of course, no trip to North Korea would be complete without attending the Airing Festival, where 100,000 North Koreans preform dances and gymnastics dedicated to Supreme Leader, Kim Il-sung.

The Pyongyang Project even visited the renowned Kim Il-sung University, which will now be offering a two month study abroad program, through the Pyongyang Project. At the university one American visitor did notice a few minor red flags:

At one point during a tour through a computer lab at Kim Il-sung University, students stared blank-faced into machines that were turned off, she said, adding that some rooms in the university even felt unused and smelled of fresh wood and paint.

But don’t look behind the curtain.

Of recent attacks on South Korea, the Pyongyang Project says:

There is a heightened level of political tension that exists, and one cannot rule out the possibility of additional actions that could lead to further tensions – but I don’t see it, honestly. It was an event that occurred that has proven to be isolated.

Besides, members of the Pyongyang Project were to busy last month, preparing a protest outside President Bush’s home because he’s a warmonger!

A hint to the Pyongyang Project organizers: the people on the beach just might have not have been there by chance. North Korea is a police state. The people were there because they were told to be there. They were happy because they were told to be happy. If they were not at the designated place at the designated time, or if they were unhappy, they would not have returned home.

North Korea’s GDP per capita is $1,800. $1,800 ranks North Korea 193rd in the world, just ahead of Chad, and right behind Gambia. Sudan is 6 spots ahead of North Korea.

North Koreans are taught that Kim Jong Il had a supernatural birth, invented the hamburger and is a fashion trendsetter. Additionally, in 1994 Dear Leader played his first and only round of golf and shot 38 under par on a regulation 18 hole course, replete with 5 hole in ones. His lone round of golf is 25 strokes better than any round in history.

O, and there is this picture:

which shows the thriving South’s electrical usage, compared to the desolate North’s. At least the NorKs are doing there part in the fight against anthropogenic global warming!

It is telling that liberals constantly lavish praise on totalitarian states. Liberals look to basket cases  like the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea and California and see the future.

The reason most people have a “one-sided” view of North Korea is because the place is hell on earth. People live in abject destitution and die of starvation. Meanwhile, the certifiably insane rulers of the country live like Pharaohs. Promotion of the ‘successes’ of the totalitarian ruling claque is an asinine concept, even for university students.

2011 GOP Battle Cry: Undo Obama

Posted on by
3

The media is atwitter over the fact that incoming GOP Congressmen have selected Carrie Underwood’s hit “Undo It” as their anthem.

Liberals in Congress and the media are worried that the GOP actually plans on fighting the Democrat socialist agenda.

Jennifer Steinhauer and Robert Pear lamented in the New York Times:

The health care law, entitlement programs, new limits on emissions of greenhouse gases from oil refineries and power plants, and other legislation that Republicans say cannot be justified by a strict interpretation of the Constitution — a document the new leaders plan to read on the House floor on Thursday — are all in the cross hairs.

While President Obama and Republicans were able to work together during last month’s lame-duck session — to the vocal consternation of the most partisan ends of each party’s base — to pass a tax package and a variety of last-minute legislation, including the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and the ratification of the anti-nuclear proliferation treaty with Russia, such bipartisan consensus seems unlikely at the outset of the new House session.

Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, who is in line to succeed Ms. Pelosi, has said that this time around he would lead efforts to revive the private sector by reducing the size of government — cutting federal regulation, taxes and spending, including the budget of Congress itself.

Mr. Boehner also said Republicans would alter House rules to make it easier to curb government spending and to require more public disclosure about the work of the House.

House Republicans plan on passing a full repeal of Obamacare as a symbolic act, acknowledging that it will be stopped in the Senate, or vetoed by the President. However, after setting the tone, the GOP plans on defunding and dismantling Obamacare piece by piece. Additionally, with Paul Ryan’s Road Map the GOP is finally starting to talk about realistic entitlement reforms.

Fueled by a reverence for the Constitution and an acknowledgment of reality, Republicans won in 2010 by representing the alternative to Obamunism. If the Grand Old Party wishes to remain in power surrender is not an option.

Mitch McConnell stated that his foremost political priority is ensuring that Barack Obama is a one-term president. Republicans are openly stating that they plan on using Obamacare as an albatross to hang around Democrats in 2012. The only way to fix the economy, and the country, is to get government out of the way. The only way to get government out of the way is to defeat Democrats. The GOP, at long last, is ready to play hardball.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats believe that a renewed debate over Obamacare will actually help them. The Left believes that the only problem with Obama’s government takeover of healthcare is the branding. If only the American people really understood how great Obamacare is, they’d support the monstrosity.The fights over Obamacare, and liberty, are fights the GOP should welcome, and decisively win.

The legislative plan for the GOP is quite simple; Barry Goldwater spelled it out in 1960:

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is `needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.

For a modern interpretation “Undo It” works:

“Most Productive” Congresses are the Worst Kind of Congresses

Posted on by
1

With the 111th Congress finally out of Washington, the Left’s toadies in the media are all pushing the same talking point: that the ousted Congress was the “most productive Congress since the Great Society”:

Is a productive Congress supposed to be a good thing? The 111th Congress was very busy, passing horrendous legislation that the vast majority of people opposed – that is why Nancy Pelosi is no longer the Speaker of the House.

‘Productive’ Congresses have been the greatest bludgeon used against liberty. The Hundred Days of the 73rd Congress, often cited as the most ‘productive’ Congress in history, was quite possibly the most harmful 100 days in American history. In just 100 days, Congress rammed through much of President Roosevelt’s New Deal, among the worst and most damaging legislation ever passed.

Likewise, the 89th Congress, which passed the bulk of President Johnson’s Great Society, is often praised for their ‘productivity.’ Is the government ever going to read us the score from the Great Society? Instead of ending poverty, the government scheme fostered dependence degradation. In fact, the Great Society played a seminal role in the destruction of minority families.

In contrast, the 52nd United States Congress, which sat for 13 months in their two year term, passed little of note. They weren’t concerned with “spreading the wealth around,” there was no imposition of “fairness,” and there was no debate over “tax cuts for the rich” because there was no income tax (and the sky didn’t even fall).

In the 1920s the government controlled 2 per cent of Gross Domestic Product. A law was passed limiting the height of buildings in Washington D.C. because government officials were worried that tall buildings would emphasize the irrelevancy of the government. If only we still had that ‘problem.’

With Obamacare passed, the government is poised to takeover 6 per cent of the economy in one fell swoop. ‘Productive’ should not be a compliment when applied to Congress. In fact, ‘productive’ is probably the worst thing a Congress can be. The last thing a Congress should do is hurry through masses of legislation, especially bills that no one has read.

Rather than ‘productive,’ Congress should be prudent. Every bill should be carefully considered, with arguments from all sides given voice. Elected officials should only vote on a bill when all alternatives have been considered. If that means less legislation is passed, all the better. Bring on a ‘do nothing’ Congress – for about the next hundred years.

Was Scrooge a Liberal or a Conservative?

Posted on by
1

Was Scrooge a liberal or a conservative? Last week Ann Coulter and Paul Krugman both wrote articles assigning the notorious skinflint to the opposite’s ideology.

Krugman wrote:

Hey, has anyone noticed that “A Christmas Carol” is a dangerous leftist tract?

I mean, consider the scene, early in the book, where Ebenezer Scrooge rightly refuses to contribute to a poverty relief fund. “I’m opposed to giving people money for doing nothing,” he declares. Oh, wait. That wasn’t Scrooge. That was Newt Gingrich — last week. What Scrooge actually says is, “Are there no prisons?” But it’s pretty much the same thing.

Anyway, instead of praising Scrooge for his principled stand against the welfare state, Charles Dickens makes him out to be some kind of bad guy. How leftist is that?

As you can see, the fundamental issues of public policy haven’t changed since Victorian times. Still, some things are different.

…So in this holiday season, let’s remember the wisdom of Ebenezer Scrooge. Not the bit about denying food and medical care to those who need them: America’s failure to take care of its own less-fortunate citizens is a national disgrace.

How original. Not exactly the first time Newt Gingrich has been called Scrooge:

On the other hand, Ann Coulter titled her weekly column “Scrooge Was a Liberal.”  Coulter’s argument is that while liberals have a monopoly on “caring” it is religious conservatives who put their money where their mouths are:

Religious conservatives, the largest group at about 20 percent of the population, gave the most to charity — $2,367 per year, compared with $1,347 for the country at large.

Conversely, secular liberals are particularly stingy:

secular liberals give to charity at a rate of 9 percent less than all Americans and 19 percent less than religious conservatives. They were also “significantly less likely than the population average to return excess change mistakenly given to them by a cashier.”

However, Newt did say “I’m opposed to giving people money for doing nothing,” and that settles who the real Scrooge is, right?

What Newt was saying in the 90s and a week ago is that government funding of bad behavior only reinforces bad behavior. If you pay able bodied people not to work, they will remain wards of the state.

But this isn’t about good policy, it’s about which ideological camp Scrooge really falls into; an easily answered question.

Near the beginning of A Christmas Carol Scrooge is solicited for a donation to provide food and shelter for the poor over Christmas. Scrooge refuses to part with so much as one sent. His explanation? Scrooge claims that he pays enough for the poor in taxes, and that they should seek food and shelter in local prisons, poorhouses and workhouses.

Ebenezer Scrooge’s position and justification are a doctrinaire liberalism. Scrooge’s belief that government programs are there to care for the downtrodden in lieu of charities is a fundamental tenet of modern liberalism.

By the end of A Christmas Carol Scrooge becomes a conservative. Reversing his miserly attitude, Scrooge discovers that the best way to help the indigent, and everyone else, is with private charity. Instead of sending people to government-run poorhouses, Scrooge decides that he knows how to help his neighbors better than anonymous government bureaucrats. Could there be a more conservative message?

MSNBC: Who’s This C.S. Lewis Fellow?

Posted on by
7

The trouble with MSNBC panelists isn’t that they’re ignorant, it’s that they know so much that isn’t so. Well, except for Richard Wolffe – he’s just ignorant.

In an interview with Barbara Walters, Governor Palin said that she reads C.S. Lewis for divine inspiration. Lewis was a prolific writer. He is best known for his Christian faith, and his faith’s influence on his work. Among his more famous works are: The Screwtape Letters, The Space Trilogy, and yes, The Chronicles of Narnia. Even his children’s books had a strong Christian message.

With the above in mind, take a look at enlightened and well read member of the media, Richard Wolffe’s analysis of what Governor Palin reads:

To deride C.S. Lewis as merely an author of “a series of kids’ books” would be like remembering Winston Churchill as a hobby bricklayer. Another one of Palin’s critics, in this case one of her most vindictive and vociferous ones, has egg all over his face.

The dirty secret about the ‘enlightened’ Left is that they don’t read. Sure, in college they cracked open Barbara Ehrenreich and Naomi Naomi Klein, but that’s about the extent of it. Most Marxists probably haven’t ever read Marx.

Even Chris Matthews looked embarrassed in that clip. It is entirely possible that Richard Wolffe’s first exposure to C.S. Lewis came with the movie adaptations of Narnia series. But don’t look behind the curtain, remember, Palin is the dumb one and only the brilliant Left can stop hayseed America from supporting her.

(H/T The Blaze)

The Left Throws a Hissy Fit

Posted on by
6

Last week on TLC’s Sarah Palin’s Alaska Governor Palin went caribou hunting. The hunt was successful. The left is throwing a collective histrionic fit. They are up in arms that someone would dare kill an animal. Doesn’t that rube Palin know that grocery stores grow meat!?

First, there is the always reasonable Aaron Sorkin (who has at least one thing in common with President Obama):

Like 95% of the people I know, I don’t have a visceral (look it up) problem eating meat or wearing a belt. But like absolutely everybody I know, I don’t relish the idea of torturing animals. I don’t enjoy the fact that they’re dead and I certainly don’t want to volunteer to be the one to kill them and if I were picked to be the one to kill them in some kind of Lottery-from-Hell, I wouldn’t do a little dance of joy while I was slicing the animal apart.

I’m able to make a distinction between you and me without feeling the least bit hypocritical. I don’t watch snuff films and you make them. You weren’t killing that animal for food or shelter or even fashion, you were killing it for fun. You enjoy killing animals. I can make the distinction between the two of us but I’ve tried and tried and for the life of me, I can’t make a distinction between what you get paid to do and what Michael Vick went to prison for doing. I’m able to make the distinction with no pangs of hypocrisy even though I get happy every time one of you faux-macho s***heads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face.

So I don’t think I will save my condemnation, you phony pioneer girl.

Aaron Sorkin – always a cool and logical analyst. Where else can you go for “I get happy every time one of you faux-macho s***heads accidentally shoots another one of you in the face”? Can you imagine William F. Buckley Jr. writing “visceral (look it up)”?

Next, the always even tempered tempest in a teapot from the New York Times, Maureen Dowd, penned her weekly masterpiece on the topic of Palin’s hunting:

“My dad has taught me that if you want to have wild, organic, healthy food,” she pontificated, “you’re gonna go out there and hunt yourself and fish yourself and you’re gonna fill up your freezer.”

Does Palin really think the average housewife in Ohio who can’t pay her bills is going to load up on ammo, board two different planes, camp out for two nights with a film crew and shoot a caribou so she can feed her family organic food?

It’s amazing that Palin patronized Neiman Marcus during the campaign. Couldn’t she have spun cloth to sew her own clothes?

…The poor caribou in the Arctic Circle, a cousin to Santa’s reindeer, had to die so Palin could show off her toughness to voters and try to boost ratings on her show that have slipped since its premiere. (Next Sunday, she’s dragging up nine Gosselins to go shooting and camping.)

Sarah’s view of America is primitive. You’re either a pointy-headed graduate of Harvard Law School or you’re eviscerating animals for fun, which she presents as somehow more authentic.

In movies with animals, they often have a line in the credits assuring that no animals were harmed. In “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” they should have a line at the end assuring that “almost every living creature involved in this show was harmed.”

If only liberals cared as much about human beings getting killed! Are Dowd’s questions even supposed to be serious? Palin is not recommending that Dowd open up her window and hunt down caribou in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. The program is called Sarah Palin’s Alaska. It is a travelogue. Caribou hunting is something that can be done in Alaska. It’s really that simple. Does Dowd come off as just a bit over the top in her shrill review?

Maureen Dowd, Aaron Sorkin and their claque have a rather primitive view of America:  you’re either a dumb hillbilly from ‘flyover country’ or an enlightened  scion with an Ivy League degree.

You have to love Sarah Palin’s ability to irk all the right people.

PDS Sufferers Latest Scandal: Tea Party Manipulating Dancing with the Stars

Posted on by
2

In what is potentially the dumbest Palin controversy ever ginned up by PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) sufferers (sorry Andrew Sullivan), the media is investigating claims that Tea Party members are flooding the lines on ‘Dancing With the Stars’ to advance Bristol Palin, the eldest daughter of Governor Palin. What the controversy is is beyond me. Isn’t the point of the show for the audience to vote for their favorite dancers?

In this video, one of many that could have been used, ‘respected’ newsman George Stephanopoulos actually dedicated an entire segment of a news program to investigating this ‘controversy’:

You could not make this stuff up. It is beyond absurd that the alleged news media is weaving up a conspiracy about Tea Party voting on a reality(?) TV show. When did Robert Welch start writing the news?

(H/t Hot Air)

Update: This story keeps on getting better. From the Smoking Gun:

Man Shoots TV Over Bristol Palin Dancing

Steven Cowan, 66, allegedly became so enraged by Palin’s success that he actually fired a shotgun round into his television, triggering a 15-hour standoff with Wisconsin cops.

According to a criminal complaint, Cowan’s wife called police Monday evening to report that her husband had blasted the TV and was threatening to kill himself. Cowan, who had been drinking, became angry while watching Palin, 20, perform on the ABC program.

As Palin was dancing, Cowan “jumped up and swore, saying something to the effect of, ‘The fucking politics.’ Steven was upset that a political figure’s daughter was dancing on this particular show when Steven did not think that she was a good dancer,” the complaint notes.

Newsflash: MSNBC Regularly Funds Democrats

Posted on by
10

The self-styled Edward R. Murrow of cable news, Keith Olbermann, of the witness relocation news network (MSNBC) was suspended last week for making financial contributions to Democrats. Much has been made over the justness of Olbermann’s suspension. Andrew, being the ardent Olbermann fan that he is, believes that poor ol’ Keith got a raw deal. The bottom line is that MSNBC has a rule, Olbermann broke it, and he was punished. However, the more important point is that the rule Olbermann broke is patently absurd.

Hiding under the false pretense of objectivity, NBC News has a rule that forbids alleged journalists from donating to political parties. This rule holds up the façade of impartiality for a media network that is entirely in the tank for the Democratic Party. In place of this ridiculous rule, NBC and MSNBC hosts and analysts should be permitted to make political contributions and be forced to disclose where their money was spent.

Not allowing political contributions allows MSNBC to make outrageous claims. A perfect example of the disingenuous self-righteous attitude at MSNBC came from Rachel Maddow last Friday:

In the video, Maddow documents political endorsements and contributions made by FOX hosts, specifically Sean Hannity. Is it a surprise to viewers that Sean Hannity supports Republicans? No. FOX is honest. On the other hand, MSNBC is still a Potemkin village, with the only Lincoln Steffenss left residing in GE headquarters.

Phil Griffin, the President of MSNBC, still thinks/claims that his network is impartial. In a recent interview, Griffin challenged “Show me an example of us fund-raising.” Griffin’s claim was echoed by Ms. Maddow in the above video. You see, although the entire cast at MSNBC may be  dedicated liberals, they still adhere to strict journalistic standards. Political fund-raising is where the line is drawn between the dastardly FOX News, and the respected home of journalism, MSNBC.

Funny thing about that. Media critic Johhny Dollar took up Griffin’s challenge. His findings may have shocked Pauline Kael, but not too many other people.  Using the very same standards that Griffin and Maddow used to pillory FOX, it turns out MSNBC has made a cottage industry out of fundraising for Democrats. Democrats like Alan Grayson, Michael Dorf, Justin Coussoule, Jack Conway and other regularly took to MSNBC’s airwaves to seek funds. In addition, leftwing groups, like MoveOn.org and others were given free ‘infomercial’ time on MSNBC.

None of this information should surprise you. If you haven’t ever watched MSNBC I highly recommend it. It’s like Comedy Central, only funny. For anyone at MSNBC, or any of the other networks for that matter, to claim to be objective is an insult to their viewers’ intelligence. Politico says that MSNBC is having an “identity crisis.” No, it’s not. MSNBC decided long ago to be the home of the deranged Left. The rule Olbermann broke is nonsensical. The rule is applied subjectively and sparingly. As examined above, MSNBC breaks their own rule quite regularly. The only people Maddow and Griffin may be fooling with their preening and posturing are themselves.

Strictly Right Radio episode 67

Posted on by

On this Strictly Right Ari looks at the liberal media’s disdain for you, the conservative wave that is coming next Tuesday, encroachments on your liberty by the nanny state, the latest enviro-fraud and more.

You can listen to this episode online here or subscribe to the podcast in iTunes.